Lives in United States United States
Joined on Apr 12, 2007


Total: 56, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Axel Vercauteren: Nikon lenses are the best. I like this UWA if only of its light weight. With Nikon DL 18-50 out of the way, this lens is the next best option to me.

Karroly--the 18-55mm AF-P is much better, though not compatible with every camera body.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2017 at 12:33 UTC
In reply to:

alcaher: nikon didnt put much more effort in the construction quality on this lens. Im not sure how sharp this lens is going to be at this suggested price. There have been few lowquality construction/price DX lenses such as the latest 18-55 wich turn out to be sharp, so we have to wait and see.... but if you really want a top High quality/stellar ultrawide angle APS-C lens its hard to find.

This is a chance for Tokina or Sigma, to come with an 10-20mm ART lens, as good as the 18-35mm and 50-100mm 1.8 ART.

If it's as sharp as the other AF-P lenses, it'll make a great lightweight landscape lens. Faster/heavier/pricier alternatives are already out there.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2017 at 12:30 UTC
In reply to:

Vitaly Pinchuk: Nikon missed the time and consumers. Canon has 10-18 three years ago...

Perhaps, but I'm happy to buy one now.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2017 at 12:28 UTC

Together with the other AF-P lenses on the D55xx, this makes a great lightweight package that has clear portability advantages over FX, while providing good competition to mirrorless alternatives. Smart move, IMO.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 14:56 UTC as 16th comment
In reply to:

noflashplease: This looks like a a very late answer to the Canon 11-18mm, with similar shortcomings (plastic lens mount), and all of the reverse compatibility issues of Nikon's unfortunate AF-P line. With the features missing from badly decontented D7250, I really don't see much of a future to DX anyway. Sorry Nikon, too little and too late.

Given that a D5600/10-20 combo weighs 2.75 pounds less than my Pentax K-1/15-30 combo, I'm very happy, and see this and the "unfortunate AF-P line" as a great step to make their DX line more competitive to mirrorless alternatives.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 14:45 UTC
In reply to:

Turbguy1: Interested to compare to the Sigma 8-16mm

Much lighter, but yes, it will be interesting to compare IQ.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 21:42 UTC
In reply to:

beavertown: Note: Because an AF-P lens incorporates a stepping motor, the number of compatible cameras is limited. Even for compatible cameras, firmware update may be required.

What is the point to release a new lens for only few camera bodies to be used?

Great for cameras like the D5600, but yes, they'd increase the market if there was compatibility firmware for older bodies.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 21:22 UTC
In reply to:

antonio petrone: Only 12 years after the Sigma 10-20.

Half the weight, and hopefully much sharper.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 21:20 UTC
In reply to:

Linerider: Nice lens!
But wish it had a metal mount.
Anyway, the new Tamron 10-24mm seems like a far better choice.
Longer range, faster aperture, weather resistant, built-in stabilisation, fluorine coating, sharp and not very expensive.

75% heavier, which may or may not matter to most customers, but does to me. For best quality landscape shots, I use my K-1 with pixel-shift. For convenient hiking, I want the D5600 with lenses like this.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 21:19 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Petersen: For 200 dollars more the Tokina F2.8 would be a lot more useful, especially for milkyway landscape shots at night.

But for landscape shooting, the extra weight is literally a drag.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 21:13 UTC

If the IQ is comparable to their other AF-P lenses, that's terrific news. What functionality I've given up with my D5600 is well worth the weight savings to me.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 21:11 UTC as 27th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS 77D Review (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

Daspletosaurus: 24 megapixels and no AF microadjustment?

Dual system user here. Though they have their own disadvantages, it does bug me that Pentax includes things like WR, pentaprisms and lens adjustments on their whole line, whereas Canikon reserve them for their "pro" models. Unnecessary crippling for marketing reasons, IMO.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 13:28 UTC
On article Canon EOS 77D Review (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

FilmORbitz: My Pentax K-3II, purchased new for less than $800, has all of the missing features that folks are bitching about here, except fancy video modes (which Pentax believes is the job of Video Cameras). Plus physical build quality second to none.
If you want to take pictures, with excellent color reproduction, there are choices beyond Canikon. And it has all of the buttons anyone could ask for, and the easy-of-use that goes with that.

Let the but..but...but..stone-hurling begin!!!

I have Pentax K-3, K-1 and recently picked up a Nikon D5600. Features and build-wise, I would agree with you. However, the Nikon (and probably Canons like this) is hugely better at AF-C tracking things like birds in flight (AF-S seems comparable to me). Whether that's a Pentax deal-breaker depends on what kind of shooting you mainly do.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 13:20 UTC
On article Fast and light: Nikkor 24mm F1.8G ED lens review (159 comments in total)

I like the sound of everything about it except for it not being stabilized. I don't want to drag around heavy zooms in order to get great IQ and VR at the same time.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2016 at 23:59 UTC as 25th comment | 5 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2673 comments in total)
In reply to:

08amczb: I'am reading dpreview for a while now, messured in years, but it's my first post.
Rishi, your post (after approx 2200 posts in this thread) now made the test clear for me:
"You're missing the point. There's no predictive algorithm in the X-Y direction in single point. Only in the Z-axis. At which point it doesn't matter what object falls under the AF point as long as it's still in relatively a similar plane to what you want focused."
So the K-1 has a usable predictive focus in AF-C mode if you can keep one focus point on the target, but it doesen't recognize if the object moves to somewhere else in the frame and it defults to infinity, which is obviously the fault of the camera.
According to the review the AF-S mode is capable, but slow especially in low light, and AF-C is also working, but you should do the (easier) half of the work insted of the camera. This explains why is it behind the competition.

The AF-S lag is addressed by changing the camera setting to release-priority. They mention this in their discussion, but not in their conclusion. Whether the setting change makes AF-S lock at -3EV as fast as the D750 I don't know. The D610 only goes to -1EV, so no comparison there.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 15:32 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2673 comments in total)

To DPR staff--your review mentions AF-S hesitation under some conditions, but that changing settings to release-priority helps address it. Would you please clarify these points? This could be very important to folks considering the camera who aren't otherwise worried about how AF-C tracking compares to the D810 or D500. My K-1 AF-S seems nearly immediate and accurate in low light when set to release priority, but I'd value your more objective opinion.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 23:55 UTC as 154th comment
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2673 comments in total)
In reply to:

thezapp: Nice review guys. Most of us will read additional review and can add their own two cents. Instead of bashing Pentax for not knowing where the focus point is, one could just state that LCD overlay from Canon and Nikon apperas more useful. This was stated in previous Pentax reviews and is one of the things I expected from the K1. AF speed and comparison may be not the most objective testing procedure, but honestly Pentax K5 AF was sub-par, K3 is usable and K1 will be OK for regular work. Pentax is working on many fronts here and excelled in some unique areas like sensor shake reduction, pixel shift, image resolution, weather sealing and availability of a not at all redundant FF camera. This should be compared in future reviews of pear systems. D8x0 comparison will be obsolete in the near future...
What really shakes me about the K1 is that Pentax shifted away from small footprint camera and lenses to FF camera system with large lenses. More compact high quality FF lenses is needed.

Rishi--The review notes that a setting change to release-priority helps avoid the focus-lock delay. Would that help avoid this issue as well?

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 23:42 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2673 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dave C 150: There isn't a camera out there that will meet everyone's requirements. Look at each camera's strengths and your budget and see if it is what you want. They will all do the rest at least adequately. So in this case if you want a camera that is say robust, a low price for the specs and excellent for landscapes to mention one as an example then this may be for you. If you specialise in wildlife, especially birds, you will probably have to pay more but will likely look at other makes. Conversely if you are into astro photography, especially on a budget, you would leap at a K1 in front of the others. Horses for courses, so don't shoot the messenger!

dansclic--You are greatly exaggerating what the reviewers actually said about the cons. They said that AF-C tracking was below average. They said that AF-S hesitates in low light, but that a setting change to release-priority addresses that. If I shot a lot of action-tracking shots, I'd get a D500. For all-around use, the K-1 is a great package at a great price. Their review agrees.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2016 at 15:00 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2673 comments in total)
In reply to:

GoremanX: I alluded to this in a previous comment, but I'll state it more plainly. The reviewer's assessment of the AF capabilities is downright wrong. I'm not arguing with the final score or anything, but the entire AF section of the review reeks of bad reviewing.

Claiming the AF is unimproved over previous Pentax models is ludicrous. Even the basic AF interface has been overhauled. And AF accuracy isn't just improved, it's fantastic. Implying that anyone picking up the camera would be lucky to get an in-focus shot is disingenuous and ridiculous. 50% keeper rate? Really?!?

Having said that, I'm the first to admit that AF-C tracking of subjects with Pentax cameras is still far behind what's being offered by Nikon and Canon. A fast action camera, this is not. I've been able to get good results at sports photos with the K-1, but only with very careful management of the AF. A sports photographer would be very frustrated by these limitations.

Rishi--your review mentions what others have noted, that changing to release-priority helps eliminate that AF-S hesitation. If it's that easily addressed, why not cite it as a recommended settings adjustment rather than an inherent AF weakness? For many prospective buyers, your conclusion sounds like a blanket condemnation of its AF usability in any mode, which doesn't really seem to be your intention.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 23:47 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2673 comments in total)
In reply to:

Polacofede: Hi,
I know that this might add lot of work for reviewers, but i wonder if there could be other kinds of AF-C done when reviewing a camera. I mean, for instance when you shoot BIF or wild animals they usually move ( fly / walk / run ) in a more perpendicular or diagonal way to the camera lens and not towards the camera, and they are not at 1-2 meter away. So maybe you can arrange something to test this kind of focus tracking in a predictive way, you could also add obstacles like branches so the object goes beyond them and then re-appear and see how camera-lens responds. So IMHO the review could distinguish among those instead of AFC review conclusion been almost a binary conclusion. You could end up having a AFC testing ground :) .

Richard and Rishi--thanks for the review and for monitoring the discussion. What I think would be a useful inclusion for comparison shopping in a review like this would be to control variables by running the same AF tests with a couple of similarly-priced models with same (ie-3rd party) lenses, focal length, f-stop, lighting, etc. Besides stifling charges of favoritism, it would be helpful for shoppers to see how, say, the K-1 did compared to the D610. If it's terrible, that's good to know. But otherwise, it's hard to compare an f/4 D610 test with one lens to an f/2.8 test with another lens under different lighting conditions, etc., and there's no way to compare the K-1 low-light AF or the weaving-bike test to the D610 review, which didn't include them. And you do have to admit that the Kindle wisecrack was a little provocative, especially when you said (as I found) that switching to release-priority greatly improves AF-S performance.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 23:35 UTC
Total: 56, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »