Lives in France France
Joined on May 19, 2003


Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20
In reply to:

Real Canonist: Would love to see a Pentax full frame 28mm or 35mm camera, even with the dated 36mp sensor. Doesn’t need the best AF-C. Come in at $1500-$2000 will be ideal.

I use the inexpensive DA 35/2.4 with the K-1. There is also the "new" HD FA 35/2.
What is missing is a WR lens.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2020 at 07:41 UTC
In reply to:

Dima_467: Even Samyang now can create more modern design lenses than Tokina.
The only sense that i can see in this lens, is that the older tokina 100 2.8 can be even cheaper on used market now.

I have the Pentax DFA lens, which seems better than this new Tokina: same optical formula, but much lighter (345g) shorter (81mm) and resistant to rain.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2019 at 07:45 UTC
On article Best DSLR cameras in 2020 (467 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mortal Lion: Pentax must have its own category then :p

Pentax still makes fine DSLRs, but...
- in the $600 category, K-70 is probably a better choice than Rebel SL2 to take pictures, but in this category customers usually like to be able to use their camera like a smartphone (with a touchscreen and taking videos)
- in the $1000 category, KP has a better viewfinder and overall ergonomy than 77D, but worse autofocus.
- in the $1500 category, no competitor from Pentax
- the "over $2000" category is much too large. If there were a "$2000" category and a "over $3000" category, I would probably put the K-1 II in the cheapest and the D850 in the expensive one; but they chose to recommend a $3300 camera in the "over $2000" category; they could have recommended the $6600 H6X.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2019 at 07:13 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1549 comments in total)

Could you mention in the review all the AF settings that you have used?
For example, the AF-hold setting has a big impact on how the depth tracking performs.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2018 at 14:17 UTC as 176th comment
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: Bokeh in a normal lens can be made to resemble bokeh from a short mid-telephoto lens, by shortening the minimum focusing distance. It allows photographer to come closer and shorten the DoF, and compress the OoF even further. Olympus understands this completely, and that is where this lens shines and surpasses many premium 35mm FF lenses. Now the numbers:
Leica 35 / 2 – min focusing distance is ~0.7m
Leica 35 /1.4 – min focusing distance is ~0.7m
Zeiss 35/1.4 Distagon – min focusing distance is ~0.3m
Nikon 35/1.4 G – min focusing distance is ~0.3m
Olympus 17/1.2 PRO – min focusing distance is ~0.2m (!)
The look in DPR galleries, wonderful separation and OoF, is not accidental: working distance is shortened to unprecedented levels, almost macro. With tailored design, bokeh is sumptuous, better than in a good 35mm FF lens that has longer minimum focusing distance. 17/1.2 Pro lens seems to be more professional and versatile than many premium 35mm FF lenses that cost arm and leg.

That's surprising. I am with Pentax hardware, and I have never read that the 35/2.8 macro (with min focus distance of 0.135m) has better bokeh that the other 35mm in K-mount (which all have 0.3m as min focus distance : the 35/2.4 that I have, the 35/2 that has the same optical formula as the 35/2.4, the 31/1.8 whose bokeh is said to be fabulous, the Samyang 35/1.4, the Sigma 35/1.4 or the Kerlee 35/1.2).

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 07:27 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

eugene1979: In terms of angle of view and DoF it is equal to 35mm F/1.4 on 35mm full-frame cameras. Most of such lenses cost about 899-1499 USD.
And here we have a lens that covers only m43 and costs 1199 USD.
No, thank you.

Same for me, my 35/2.4 works very well on the K-1.
But it is a light and plastic lens, with no weather sealing and no hood, therefore it is equivalent to this Olympus lens only in terms of image quality, not in terms of object quality.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2017 at 21:05 UTC
In reply to:

Tim Zhou: Didn't Pentax K-1 has such features already?

Not really. The buttons on the Pentax K-1 are not backlit.
There is a dedicated button, not far from the shutter, that can switch on a few LED. Some of these LED are on the backside of the tilting screen, and therefore they illuminate the backside buttons. Another LED is near the lens mount, and I use it quite often when changing the lens at night. The last one is for the SD card slot, I never use it but I understand why it exists.
The configuration menu of the camera can select which of these LED are lit when the dedicated button is pressed.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 22:10 UTC
On article Pentax KP Review (672 comments in total)
In reply to:

DPPMetro: People on the Pentax board are complaining and citing "image quality", but autofocus has just a slight bit to do with image quality. Just slightly.

And yes, Pentax's AF is completely frustrating. Even the firmware in the K-1 is incredibly frustrating because it's broken in numerous places, including not being able to select which memory card is being used in photo mode. Every mode allows selection of the memory card except photo mode, thus making the user use a method of removal, reinsertion, powering on and off and so on to force the camera to select the desired card, then starting over to reinsert the secondary card. And yes, even the K-1 is clumsy, at best. Standard settings that need to be made on the fly, like AF points and mode, require numerous button presses and combinations.

The new selection dial really needs to be made assignable on the K-1 to help allieviate many of these problems. Plus the LV button is way too sensitive and poorly placed. It needs a 0.5 sec delay.

If you want to switch quickly between pre-defined AF modes, without numerous button presses, I'd recommend to use the U1...U5 settings to memorize them. You don't need the new selection dial.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 08:08 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (890 comments in total)

I would be interested in knowing if Allison Johnson has used a recent Pentax camera.
They not only provide a level gauche in their optical viewfinder, but also they can be used in a mode where the sensor moves to compensate a slight lateral tilt (named "horizon correction" in the camera's manual).
She says she prefers looking through an OVF, and needs to have a level horizon. This could be the solution for her needs.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 18:25 UTC as 274th comment
On article Hands-on with Ricoh's compact Pentax KP (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

Matt1645f4: The more i see and read about the KP the more i think it's the perfect camera for me. I love my Fuji XT1 but hate the lack of IBIS but to now have 5 axis and smaller size than current K3ii model makes this a very tempting offering.

If you want large aperture to achieve small DOF, then indeed the Pentax APS line is not the way to go. They aim at compact lenses for compact bodies.

For small DOF, it is more efficient to have a large sensor, and in that case you can find some large aperture primes in K-mount: Samyang 20/1.8, Samyang 24/1.4, Sigma 30/1.4 Art, Samyang or Sigma Art 35/1.4, Pentax or Sigma 50/1.4, Samyang, Sigma or Pentax 85/1.4, Venus 105/2, Samyang 135/2, Pentax 200/2.8.
But you have more choice with Canon or Nikon.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2017 at 09:42 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2512 comments in total)

Hello Richard,
you may want to look at
I did not try to explain what equivalence means, but to see what are the differences between equivalent lenses for different sensor sizes.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 23:23 UTC as 93rd comment
In reply to:

miles green: Sounds very interesting! This could be more of a Ricoh digital copier global vision initiative. As I shoot Pentax cameras, i suspect some kind of integration and wifi automatic synching in the future, maybe?

I can save the images from my K-1 to the iPhone's photo rolls.
And I can even use the K-1 to transfer photos taken with another camera (e.g. my k-5 II).
I don't know what prevents you to do the same.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 21:39 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (380 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adam Sharp: Pentax great value for money

K-S1 has a pentaprism and weights 130g less than K-70.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 08:08 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (380 comments in total)
In reply to:

piratejabez: I think it would be helpful if the m&m pixel-shift example widget had the images better-aligned. Perhaps you have taken the exact same crop in order to show that the image shifts significantly in this mode (?), but I think it would be much more useful to crop the images in such a way that the subject matter is closely aligned. This way, the pixel-level differences would be more readily apparent.
In any case, thanks for the review!

It would even have been more simple to have taken a single pixleshifted RAW, and to compare the JPEG made from processing the first shot (available from the RAW) and the JPEG processed using the four shots (e.g. by in-camera RAW->JPEG conversion).

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 07:58 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (380 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vsbastosx: Does pixel shift work in RAW? It's not in the studio scene....

Pixel shift works in RAW, but the RAW file stores the four images, and the conversion to a single image has to be made in software. makes a comparison of three such software (for K-1) but does not compare with the JPEG made by the in-body software. My own experiments (with K-1) showed that SilkyPix does a better job than the body.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 07:53 UTC

After a quick look at your results for the Pentax K-1, it seems that they are almost the same as for the "market leader" Nikon D810. This camera could be mentioned in your comparison as a cheaper choice if exposure latitude and ISO invariance are the only criteria.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2016 at 19:37 UTC as 108th comment | 6 replies
On article Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

WesVDell: So, just to be clear, if I can shoot a moving subject on my K3ii, then I should have no problem doing so on the K1? That makes my mind up, since the k3ii does just fine for me.

I agree that the 70-200 can fulfill most of what can be done with the 60-250, but I have started to like the swirling bokeh that the 60-250 has when used on the K-1.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 21:33 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

WesVDell: So, just to be clear, if I can shoot a moving subject on my K3ii, then I should have no problem doing so on the K1? That makes my mind up, since the k3ii does just fine for me.

Hello Barry.
Did you use your unmodified 60-250 on your K-1?
I find this combination very nice for portraits, but I did not use it for flying things yet.
One odd thing is that, because of the moving sensor, the position and size of the dark corners varies a lot, and is not visible in the viewfinder...

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 07:01 UTC
On article Benchmark performance: Nikon D810 in-depth review (245 comments in total)
In reply to:

R. Scott Sherman: And then came along the Pentax K-1....

Indeed, but is comparable in many other respects.
I would be really interested if you can apply your method for evaluating the Mirror and Shutter-Induced Shock and Low-light AF Performance for the K-1.
You could also use your technique to deduce if the AF tracking capabilities of the K-1 is depth-based, image-based, or else.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2016 at 18:39 UTC
In reply to:

mosc: Pentax 150-450 4.5-5.6 - $1,758.29
Pentax K3 - $729
Equvalent 225-675mm f6.75-f8.4
Maximum physical aperture: 80mm
TOTAL: $2,487.29

Olympus 300 f4
already owned M43 camera
Equivalent 600mm f8
Maximum physical aperture: 75mm
TOTAL: $2,499.99

Why exactly would a human prefer the second choice for their $2,500?

Instead of the (new) Pentax 150-450 4.5-5.6 you could have chosen an (old) Pentax 450/5.6 who weights only 1140g and therefore is more equivalent to the Olympus 300/4.
However, there is no announcement of a new (HD DC/SDM WR) version of the (old) Pentax lens and therefore there is no true equivalent in the Pentax line.

Canon has a 450/5.6 (slightly heavier than the Pentax) that you could pair with a 70D and make a better comparison with the Olympus gear.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 00:13 UTC
Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20