|
Don Kiyoti
Lives in
Tucson, United States
Works as a
Photo Researcher
Joined on
Apr 24, 2005
|
Comments
 |  |  |
| Hot Air Balloons Over Bagan by User9320321874 from balloons | Yellow Warbler by LeeS from A Big Year - birds | Waiting for the Parade by tcoker1103 from - La Vida Loca - (Black and White Street Photography+ A Border) |
Beginner's GuidesGetting Started
In-depth testingLatest Camera Reviews
Beyond the studio testsFeature Articles and Videos
real world performanceField Test Videos
see how we seeSample Galleries
In-depth ReviewFujifilm X100F
Show CoverageHits and Misses from CP+ 2017
Throwback ThursdayClassic Cameras from Days Past
What's that Noise?Shedding some light on the sources of noise
2457FeatureWhat is equivalence?
Androole: Well that's not good news...
It's not news at all. It's a rumor. Wait & see if anything comes of it.
We'll see. Last time Nikkei put out such a story, that Ricoh was pulling out of the camera business, nothing came of it. Nor did anybody else report it, beyond sites like DPreview just copying/pasting from some other site like Petapixel. Lars - have you done any independent investigation on this? So far, a search of Google News turns up nothing except regurgitations of the Nikkei rumor.
Nikita66: Nice footage.
Regarding air travel, the lack of progress is disappointing. Basically, flight times between cities haven't changed since 1960. That's 57 years of no progress.
Sure, the SST for awhile, but the airlines basically shelved it because they didn't want to invest in it. Now that fuel costs are down, and in my opinion, down to stay, someone should reincarnate supersonic commercial flight.
@Nikita66
Fuel costs are relatively low now, that's true. But that's only a part of the cost involved. Supersonic capable aircraft are EXPENSIVE to build, to maintain, to fly. During the 60s the airlines learned quickly that faster airplanes weren't what kept the seats full. Sure, there are some people who want to go fast, but not enough to make it profitable. Supersonic flight for domestic travel is out because of the sonic boom issue.
Efficiency is the name of the game, not speed.
De Fotoman: Cool video, but.... C G I
Why do you think it's fake?
Rick Knepper: Is it a coincidence that Boeing commercial airliners are built in or near Seattle?
Yes. Yes it is.
GarysInSoCal: RIDICULOUS battery life... come onnnnn Pentax! I'd have to buy THREE of your overpriced batteries to get me thru 1 day of shooting... not to mention having to change batteries at what I'm sure will be very inconvenient times. And your 27 point AF system SUCKS ... far behind the competition's better AF systems... and this camera is freakin HEAVY! Back to the drawing board... :P
The problem here isn't the camera, it's you. Thinking you have to pay top dollar for a Pentax branded battery that's widely available for less than ten bucks, and not understanding how CIPA measures battery life tells me that you haven't the slightest idea of what you're talking about.
As for changing the battery at what you're "sure will be very inconvenient times," well, that will only happen if you're too dim to pay attention to the battery indicator. I've never, ever had a battery just die on me in the middle of something, because I change it before then.
brycesteiner: I would certainly bet the original sailor picture was staged. Perhaps the photographer paid the sailor and knew exactly where to stand. This way they could get just the right picture. Specially in the days of manual focus and manual cameras.
You'd lose that bet. It just shows the difference between a skilled, observant photographer and you.
spontaneousservices: "The K-70 is a very compelling option, especially for cash-strapped enthusiasts that are looking for a camera that they want to take complete control of and customize to their personal taste. For them, the Pentax is the obvious choice, as there's no penalty for buying a body on a budget in terms of features and controls, which isn't the case with other manufacturers."
- aren't you forgetting the point about buying into one brand's lens line-up? Possibly that IS quite some penalty!
Fast is relative, but they do offer a very nice 21mm Limited prime (31mm equiv.).
Biological_Viewfinder: This is a very weird set.
CONGRATULATIONS!!! You just depicted human misery and suffering! Your photo is therefore great!
You need to think about what "influenital" means, and it might help if you read the About the Project section.
odpisan: Just asking if anybody knows the explanation ...
__________________
In review is AF of K 70 - it seems - is one of big problems.
I wonder how is that possible?
A month ago I made 400 pictures with twin brother of Pentax K20 - my 8 years old (!!) Samsung GX20. Also action. Only 12 photos were out of focus.
12 of 400 ???
BTW: 8 years old battery was not even beginig to loose some power .. indicated as full at the end of photo-day. So it had moore than enough power to save everything on pc & after that savig, indicator still showed that batery is full.
Question:
What is happening with new cameras?
Samples:
https://goo.gl/photos/32KZFQNfeTmpbc449
No, I agree that Pentax needs to up it's AF game. No doubt about that. My point is: buyers need to evaluate their needs and decide if the AF is a dealbreaker. I'd argue that for the majority of users, it should not be.
PrakticaB: A very decent and clean review. I will add as a "Pro" the big and bright viewfinder. The weight could be at first sight a "Con" but don't forget the metal chasis, SR mechanism and the pentaprism. Quality comes with (some) weight!
Calling this camera heavy is a bit of an exaggeration. It's lighter than my K-5, which has never seemed burdensome to carry around.
spontaneousservices: "The K-70 is a very compelling option, especially for cash-strapped enthusiasts that are looking for a camera that they want to take complete control of and customize to their personal taste. For them, the Pentax is the obvious choice, as there's no penalty for buying a body on a budget in terms of features and controls, which isn't the case with other manufacturers."
- aren't you forgetting the point about buying into one brand's lens line-up? Possibly that IS quite some penalty!
Not really. There are plenty of very good and versatile lenses for Pentax.
odpisan: Just asking if anybody knows the explanation ...
__________________
In review is AF of K 70 - it seems - is one of big problems.
I wonder how is that possible?
A month ago I made 400 pictures with twin brother of Pentax K20 - my 8 years old (!!) Samsung GX20. Also action. Only 12 photos were out of focus.
12 of 400 ???
BTW: 8 years old battery was not even beginig to loose some power .. indicated as full at the end of photo-day. So it had moore than enough power to save everything on pc & after that savig, indicator still showed that batery is full.
Question:
What is happening with new cameras?
Samples:
https://goo.gl/photos/32KZFQNfeTmpbc449
The wording of the review makes Pentax AF seem worse than it really is. I've also used Pentax SLRs from the istDS, K10D, K20D, to the K-5. The only time I've been frustrated with the AF performance is shooting airshows using a big, slow Sigma 50-500mm. I don't doubt DPreview's conclusion that Pentax AF lags behind Canon and Nikon for action, but the reality is that in most situations Pentax AF is just fine.
I've always found the battery life to be excellent as well, and carrying one or two spares is a non-issue.
So, nothing is happening with the new cameras, if by that you mean are they getting worse? No.
22codfish: And in the meantime, Pentax probably suffered severe marketing damage.
Yeah - week old bread. That must be why the K-1 is sold out and back ordered at B&H, Adorama, and Amazon.
helltormentor: Can SR counteract the mirror slap and shutter vibration?
You and your made-up problems.
That's a nice piece. Thanks Barney.
Like you, my first real camera was an ME Super, which I still have and which I had refurbished. (It's great fun to use with the 31mm.) Before that, my dad used Pentax professionally and personally. So naturally, my first DSLR was an istDS which I liked. And so on. Now I'm happy with my K-5. I may not buy a K-1 any time soon, but I'm glad to see it and I'm glad to see Pentax doing some serious camera design. I hope they sell a bunch of them
Don Kiyoti: This is clearly about the growing problem of some unethical photographers altering the content of their images by adding or deleting elements. There have been some well-publicized cases of this happening. Sometimes it's to "improve" the image by removing something distracting but otherwise unimportant. In other cases it's been to make the image tell a different story, and that's what Reuters can't tolerate.
Despite the wording of the announcement, this has nothing to do with speed. It's all about the integrity of the scene.
You can, but they are very easily detected, and it's easy to differentiate an unmodified file from the camera from one that has been altered.
DStudio: In the PetaPixel article Reuters cites the extra time photographers take on editing RAW images. And they're correct - it is often a waste of time when news-gathering - even when the photographer has an efficient RAW workflow.
However, that's the *photographer's* problem to solve, not theirs. I guess their liberal mindset (the bad side of it) is showing through here. They want to solve someone else's problems. And they will do so by mandating "the correct solution" for them.
It's good for Reuters to manage their workflows. But it's dubious to dictate the freelance photographer's workflow for him. I don't mind them specifying the types of edits allowed, but it's dubious when they get their fingers into the photographer's pie, dictating the original image format.
You're kidding yourself if you think this is really about workflow. It's about the integrity of the image, and that is all. And injecting" liberal mindset" into your argument is just inane.
Great Bustard: You know, if you have that little trust in your photographers, then...
As is often the case, a few bad apples spoil the whole barrel. Some photographers have proven themselves untrustworthy, and so the rest deal with the negative consequence.
Raist3d: Love it. Clear present evidence that JPEG is also used in professional workflows. The RAW snobs think only RAW is valid when it's hardly the most important part of the photo- particularly documentary stuff (Note: and I am shooting mostly raw at the moment)
Don't kid yourself. This has nothing to do with image quality. No doubt that Reuters knows full well they'll be taking a hit in terms of image quality.