Petroglyph

Petroglyph

Joined on Jan 29, 2012

Comments

Total: 407, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

DPR, thank you for posting your Ricoh CP+ interview. That premium UWA zoom lens for crop sensors they have planned for this summer looks very interesting. The FA* 85mm f/1.4 is on my 'watch list'. & a new 70-200 f/4 appeared on the road-map. So they clearly want to start releasing more lenses.
I look forward to your comparison of K1II with K1.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2018 at 19:16 UTC as 37th comment

I look forward to reading DPR's review of K1 II (hand held Pix shift esp.) and both the new star lenses. That 50 could certainly be a winner on the K1 (II). The fast UWA zoom could also be quite nice.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2018 at 13:25 UTC as 86th comment
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (460 comments in total)
In reply to:

FodgeandDurn: Now if only the Pentax 15-30 didn't lost literally two and a half times as much as the Tamron it's based on.

True. If you meant FE 16-35 GM then the B&H price converts to £ 1575. So much worse.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2018 at 00:32 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (460 comments in total)
In reply to:

FodgeandDurn: Now if only the Pentax 15-30 didn't lost literally two and a half times as much as the Tamron it's based on.

Not a good deal, Okay. But you still didn't compare same to same with the HK dealer. I look at it Tamron rips off B&H buyers. Maybe why I don't have any Tamron lenses anymore.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2018 at 22:47 UTC
In reply to:

Petroglyph: They can do hand held pixel shift now? I look forward to seeing tests of that feature.

Plus it isn't just stacking images. They're sampling RGB at every photosite rather than a stacked bayer interpolation. That method of true color has the potential to be what foveon attempts but foveon injects a lot of noise into the pipeline.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2018 at 22:41 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (460 comments in total)
In reply to:

BobORama: For me the camera is a tool, not a religion. Those for which cameras are a religion, are often tools. For me, the K-1 is there to do a job and solve problems. Things like catch-in-focus and pixel shift are easily dismissed as Gimmicks - until you start using them. Pixel shift is great for any static subject, so landscapes, still life, or product photography - I use it all the time. IF the K-1 II can deliver a similar capability handheld, that would be wonderful. Catch in focus allows you to use your camera as an automated wildlife camera. The camera waits for a subject to be in focus, and it takes the shot. You can combine that with continuous shooting modes. When that shy squirrel FINALLY pokes his head out, click-click-click ... while you drink coffee. When that humming bird approaches the feeder, click-click-click. Plus, if you like manual lenses, it makes using them very easy. IBIS makes lens, even one you made at home, usable handheld.

"Those for which cameras are a religion, are often tools. " I already laughed too much today, so... Got to get back to frowning. :)

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2018 at 22:35 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (460 comments in total)
In reply to:

multisystem: I wonder if a firmware update can enable the handheld pixel shift in the KP. It seems to be a software solution not a change in the SR mechanism since a board change in the K1 will enable it. The KP already has the accelerator chip.

KP would be the only one. But possible since same hardware (we think).

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2018 at 22:29 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (460 comments in total)
In reply to:

Matthew Miller: A humble plea: *please* stop the nonsense of excess precision in ISO numbers. Saying "ISO 819,200" instead of ISO 820k is ridiculous. The difference is 0.01% of a stop!

In fact, it'd be better to go 3200, 6400, 12k, 25k, 50k, 100k, 200k, 400k, 800k. The difference between 800k and 812,200 is still only about 0.3%. This is completely washed out by the dozens of other sources of imprecision in photography — and even if it weren't, is completely imperceptible.

The difference between ridiculous, idiotic, ludicrous and absurd is completely imperceptible. When just simple silly would do. I might be within 0.3% of silly here, I'll admit. :9)

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2018 at 22:25 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (460 comments in total)
In reply to:

FodgeandDurn: Now if only the Pentax 15-30 didn't lost literally two and a half times as much as the Tamron it's based on.

I just looked at BandH web site. Pentax 15-30 f/2.8 is on sale for 1300$ and Tamron 15-30 costs 1200$. Check first next time maybe.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2018 at 02:26 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (460 comments in total)

I look forward to seeing the results from - hand held pixel shift, another usable stop of ISO to the raw file, and improved AF algorithms. Hand held pixel shift is a complex undertaking and could be very impressive. Another stop = clean ISO 25600? Nice. New AF algorithms will probably require new motors like the ring SDM motor that will be in the new DFA*50/1.4 or DFA*85/1.4 lenses. We'll see what lenses they announce at CP+. Maybe release dates on the 50 and the DA* 11-18. Could be an interesting year for Pentax users.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2018 at 14:39 UTC as 48th comment

They can do hand held pixel shift now? I look forward to seeing tests of that feature.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2018 at 01:55 UTC as 47th comment | 9 replies

That's different. I wonder how long I'd be without the K1 while it gets the upgrade?

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2018 at 01:52 UTC as 41st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

justmeMN: They are such adorable subjects that the White Wolf Test should be a standard part of every camera and lens review. :-)

Not Fashion...Unless you can get him into sheep's clothing. :^)

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2018 at 20:54 UTC
On article Film vs Digital: Fashion photography shootout (401 comments in total)

In the challenge did they say which Pentax 67 lens was used? For that matter what lens on all of them. Just curious.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2018 at 15:17 UTC as 24th comment | 1 reply
On article Film vs Digital: Fashion photography shootout (401 comments in total)
In reply to:

ByFrenchy: Please compare two same things.....means same format ! 24x36 vs « full frame or the 6x7 Pentax vs Hasselblad digit or Fuji GFX ....

Fuji GFX (44X33) is the same format as Pentax 6X7 ?

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2018 at 15:15 UTC
In reply to:

Kuzmabrik: How about Pentax?

Just check out some Camera Store videos where they dunk a Pentax camera underwater in a creek for a clue. But even Pentax has different grades of sealing. Most (*) star lenses are WR = weather resistant. Even kit lenses are often WR. But some top end are designated AW = all weather sealed.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2018 at 13:49 UTC

Great, I hope we'll see something for the 100-400 IS II. I look forward to reading the actual specs some day.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2017 at 19:23 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

3DSimmon: They should just re-badge the Samsung NX1, that would keep them in the aps-c game.

28MP, 15 fps, video in HEVC native 4K and super 35, (in 2014). Aren't you worried Canon users would get whiplash if the 7DIII had that spec? : ^ }

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2017 at 19:19 UTC
In reply to:

Kashim: I've been reading some of the comments here and I'm really annoyed by all the idiotic comments that either imply that he deserved to die for doing something they consider stupid or chalk up this poor guy's fate to natural selection. Making a mistake and dying as a result of that mistake has absolutely nothing to do with natural selection. Secondly, something you may consider stupid behavior others may find thrilling or even addicting. That doesn't mean they deserve to die for it. In my opinion this poor guy's biggest mistake was being unprepared. He underestimated his own strength, the difficulty of his position, and he had no backup plan.

Most EU countries do not put florine in water supply (it is in the salt) and China considers a water supply over 1 ppm to pose a skeletal florosis risk (some black teas have a higher concentration themselves). Who says I have any teeth anyway. :^} Just because sun tan lotion works topically would you put it in your water? Evidently indifferent Mother Nature is selecting against logical thought.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2017 at 16:17 UTC
In reply to:

Kashim: I've been reading some of the comments here and I'm really annoyed by all the idiotic comments that either imply that he deserved to die for doing something they consider stupid or chalk up this poor guy's fate to natural selection. Making a mistake and dying as a result of that mistake has absolutely nothing to do with natural selection. Secondly, something you may consider stupid behavior others may find thrilling or even addicting. That doesn't mean they deserve to die for it. In my opinion this poor guy's biggest mistake was being unprepared. He underestimated his own strength, the difficulty of his position, and he had no backup plan.

Drive: I find the concept of natural selection distasteful in general. By your definition, risk taking behavior would have been selected out of the population long ago. Yet it still exists, and there must be a better explanation or theory for that. If the population is becoming more sheepish it is because of unnatural elements that are introduced. Fluoride in the water that is proven, if the concentration from all sources becomes too high, lowers birth rates and IQs and makes bones brittle, for instance. And don't get me started on lawn chemicals. So the concept of natural selection is covering (poorly) some other things governments won't quit doing. So there is something out there that selects in favor of risk taking behavior and that makes natural selection an incorrect diagnosis (or outcome) for this event.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2017 at 13:45 UTC
Total: 407, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »