Re: Use at your own risk: how to disable SDM and enable screw driven AF on DA* lenses

If you have a shoot coming soon and the lens broke while you know for sure that you won't have time to have it fixed... On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 7:05 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote: > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013, Boris Liberman wrote: >> >> http://www.pentaxiste.org/pratique/depannage/article/how-to-deactivate-sdm

Re: Use at your own risk: how to disable SDM and enable screw driven AF on DA* lenses

I may for example! My 50-135mm had a failed SDM (not my fault) and I was unable to use it as an autofocus lens (even though it had the screw driven mechanism intact) because Pentax prevented me doing so. Now its SDM failed again (after repair and this time, my fault). I really want to try the menti

Re: Use at your own risk: how to disable SDM and enable screw driven AF on DA* lenses

On Thu, Feb 07, 2013, Boris Liberman wrote: > > http://www.pentaxiste.org/pratique/depannage/article/how-to-deactivate-sdm-and-allow?var_mode=calcul > > I would certainly suggest that you use it only as the very last > resort. But as a technical possibility - this is rather interesting. Why woul

Use at your own risk: how to disable SDM and enable screw driven AF on DA* lenses

Hi! Found this link on Russian Pentax forum: http://www.pentaxiste.org/pratique/depannage/article/how-to-deactivate-sdm-and-allow?var_mode=calcul I would certainly suggest that you use it only as the very last resort. But as a technical possibility - this is rather interesting. Standard disc

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

Thanks for the heads up on this, Nick! Cheers, Christine - Original Message - From: "Nick David Wright" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Monday, January 18, 2010 8:38 AM Subject: Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses You need

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 08:38:08AM -0600, Nick David Wright wrote: > You need a Shutter Hat! > > http://www.fmphotography.us/html/hat.html > > I had one of these in my camera bag all the time when I shot for > newspapers. Invaluable. Tenba do something similar too. I've got two of their rain ho

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

Well, that is pretty cool! Thanks for sharing that. -- Bruce Monday, January 18, 2010, 6:38:08 AM, you wrote: NDW> You need a Shutter Hat! NDW> http://www.fmphotography.us/html/hat.html NDW> I had one of these in my camera bag all the time when I shot for NDW> newspapers. Invaluable. NDW>

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

That's neat. Dave On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Nick David Wright wrote: > You need a Shutter Hat! > > http://www.fmphotography.us/html/hat.html > > I had one of these in my camera bag all the time when I shot for > newspapers. Invaluable. > > ~Nick Wright > > On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10:06 PM

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

arry Colen" > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 3:37 PM > Subject: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses > > >> On my drive home from the dojo I noticed how potentially photogenic  the >> railroad tracks through the

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

You need a Shutter Hat! http://www.fmphotography.us/html/hat.html I had one of these in my camera bag all the time when I shot for newspapers. Invaluable. ~Nick Wright On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > > On Jan 17, 2010, at 7:56 PM, Adam Maas wrote: > >> Ditto, I've shot i

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

On Jan 17, 2010, at 7:56 PM, Adam Maas wrote: Ditto, I've shot in quite nasty conditions with any number of unsealed cameras. It needs to get really nasty or involve standing water before the level of sealing on the DA* is really needed. What the sealing is for me is peace of mind, I know I won

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

Ditto, I've shot in quite nasty conditions with any number of unsealed cameras. It needs to get really nasty or involve standing water before the level of sealing on the DA* is really needed. What the sealing is for me is peace of mind, I know I won't have issues. -Adam On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

On 2010-01-17 20:50 , Rick Womer wrote: I have had two pouring rain, sopping wet, 2-hour shoots with my K10D and DA 16-45, without any mishap. i have also used the 16-45 without trouble in mist/light rain for extended periods, on a K200d; it wasnt nearly as wet as the above sounds, though

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

I have had two pouring rain, sopping wet, 2-hour shoots with my K10D and DA 16-45, without any mishap. I have a microfiber towel in my bag, and I just mopped the lens off occasionally. I didn't dare change lenses in the blowing rain, though! Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW --- On Sun, 1

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

Larry: Use the ole plastic bag technique: http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/camera-rain-gear.html cheers, Christine - Original Message - From: "Larry Colen" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 3:37 PM Subject: Wet weather ph

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > However, I don't have any DA* or WR lenses.  I've heard that with primes, > the weather isn't nearly the problem that it is with zooms, but that could > have just been wishful thinking. On New Years' day I went out for a walk in the rain with

Re: Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

get a hotshoe umbrella and use that if it isn't too windy, can't really say anything about the rest cheers ecke 2010/1/17 Larry Colen : > On my drive home from the dojo I noticed how potentially photogenic the > railroad tracks through the redwoods were in the rain.  I suspect that there > is a we

Wet weather photography without DA* lenses

On my drive home from the dojo I noticed how potentially photogenic the railroad tracks through the redwoods were in the rain. I suspect that there is a wealth of photographic opportunity in the state park that is nearly across the street from my house. However, I don't have any DA* or WR

Re: More DA lenses tried on film and new web site announcement

Thanks, Gasha, but it is Derby Chang you should thanking, not me. I take no credit for this, as I merely did the shuffling around of the files that Derby generously allowed me to have. Boris Gasha wrote: Thanks! Nice material :) I already had shoot with DA14 on film two years ago. Not useab

Re: More DA lenses tried on film and new web site announcement

Thanks, Brian. Well, I've LR 2.4 and there there is no standard way to put such a link on the generated page. Either I have to write a sentence or two of instructive nature or tweak the code after it is generated. Thanks for pointing this out. Boris Brian Walters wrote: Well done. A nice

Re: More DA lenses tried on film and new web site announcement

Thanks. Well, I don't have any computer at home that is constantly switched on and connected to the net. So indeed, I uploaded only some of the stuff and finished it later the same day. Thus, by now it should all be up and running. Boris Christine Aguila wrote: Congrats, Boris. Looks nice.

Re: More DA lenses tried on film and new web site announcement

Thanks! Nice material :) I already had shoot with DA14 on film two years ago. Not useable. But black frame was cool. Will try my DA16-45/4 on MZ-3 camera. I still have unfinished 35mm Velvia slide film in freezer, when i switched completely to medium format, back in year 2005 :P Gasha Bori

Re: More DA lenses tried on film and new web site announcement

Congrats, Boris. Looks nice. Some of the links don't work on the index photo page. Are they being uploaded or about to be uploaded? Cheers, Christine - Original Message - From: "Boris Liberman" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009

Re: More DA lenses tried on film and new web site announcement

On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 10:37 +0300, "Boris Liberman" wrote: > Hi! > > We've finally made it (almost, as it is being uploaded as I am writing > this message). My brother and I registered our own domain and hosting > space from GoDaddy.com. > > But more importantly, I've now uploaded several more D

More DA lenses tried on film and new web site announcement

Hi! We've finally made it (almost, as it is being uploaded as I am writing this message). My brother and I registered our own domain and hosting space from GoDaddy.com. But more importantly, I've now uploaded several more DA lens full (film) frame tests performed by Derby Chang. Last but n

Re: Yet more DA lenses on film

t yet, but I don't give up hope. Derby Chang wrote: I promised I'd send Boris a few more tests of DA lenses on film. That is one BORING way to spend a morning, but the results are interesting. The files are on their way to you via yousendit, Boris DA14: Pretty obvious this wasn

Re: Yet more DA lenses on film

Boris Liberman escreveu: Haven't got anything just yet, but I don't give up hope. Derby Chang wrote: I promised I'd send Boris a few more tests of DA lenses on film. That is one BORING way to spend a morning, but the results are interesting. The files are on their way to yo

Re: Yet more DA lenses on film

Haven't got anything just yet, but I don't give up hope. Derby Chang wrote: I promised I'd send Boris a few more tests of DA lenses on film. That is one BORING way to spend a morning, but the results are interesting. The files are on their way to you via yousendit, Boris

Yet more DA lenses on film

I promised I'd send Boris a few more tests of DA lenses on film. That is one BORING way to spend a morning, but the results are interesting. The files are on their way to you via yousendit, Boris DA14: Pretty obvious this wasn't going to be usable on film. What was interesting was

Re: FA* and DA* lenses (was Re: A70-210/4 assessment- If AF matters, how about the SMC FA80-200/2.8)

Thanks for the info. I hadn't heard of the 50-135 problem. I don't remember if mine was early, but it's been excellent. I did have focus field problems with my first DA* 16-50, but I spotted the condition immediately, and B&H replaced it. I will definitely test the 60-250 for autofocus and

Re: FA* and DA* lenses (was Re: A70-210/4 assessment- If AF matters, how about the SMC FA80-200/2.8)

"My 50-135 has been great from the start. I hadn't heard of any focus problems. But the DP folks whine about everything so I wouldn't put much stock in it." There was a rash of SDM failures with the DA* 50-135. My second sample, which was optically superb, simply refused one day to focus in a

Re: FA* and DA* lenses (was Re: A70-210/4 assessment- If AF matters, how about the SMC FA80-200/2.8)

worked ok, but didn't seem all that durably built. Some other folks on this list had terrible troubles with theirs. I sold it for what I paid for it, so no net loss there. What keeps me from buying the 60-250 (besides the $$$) at this point is my lack of trust in the Pentax DA* lense

RE: FA* and DA* lenses (was Re: A70-210/4 assessment- If AF matters, how about the SMC FA80-200/2.8)

n the book of wisdom" - Thomas Jefferson -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark Erickson Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2009 4:52 PM To: PDML Subject: FA* and DA* lenses (was Re: A70-210/4 assessment- If AF matters,how about the SMC FA

Re: FA* and DA* lenses (was Re: A70-210/4 assessment- If AF matters, how about the SMC FA80-200/2.8)

- Original Message - From: "Mark Erickson" Subject: FA* and DA* lenses (was Re: A70-210/4 assessment- If AF matters,how about the SMC FA80-200/2.8) > > What keeps me from buying the 60-250 (besides the $$$) at this point is my > lack of trust in the Pentax DA*

FA* and DA* lenses (was Re: A70-210/4 assessment- If AF matters, how about the SMC FA80-200/2.8)

m all that durably built. Some other folks on this list had terrible troubles with theirs. I sold it for what I paid for it, so no net loss there. What keeps me from buying the 60-250 (besides the $$$) at this point is my lack of trust in the Pentax DA* lenses. I have no interest whatsoever in drop

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

to the former 200mm full frame and so it possibly would cover said full frame. That got me wondering if one of the tech-oriented actually knows the image circle dimensions for the DA lenses, and how much is missing. I know the difference should be proportional to the difference from APS-C

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

imming of the empty lines and the original message down the page. JC OConnell escreveu: This is undesireable for DA lenses. Why? Because you really dont want your lenses to create image circles way larger than your format on a fixed format ( no swings, tilts, or shifts ) camera. The reason is b

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

with limits. Add this to the point some oldsters leave just an extra hairline of space by habit, and we may end using some DA lenses with 35mm film with acceptable results. Some possible uses. Of course light falloff and image coverage are just part of the issue, but the corners of those wide open

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

g if one of the tech-oriented actually knows the > image circle dimensions for the DA lenses, and how much is missing. I > know the difference should be proportional to the difference from APS-C > to 24x36mm, but would like ko know the size and borderline falloff > evolution on the DA

RE: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

the first chapter in the book of wisdom" - Thomas Jefferson -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Luiz Felipe Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 6:25 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much

RE: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

This is undesireable for DA lenses. Why? Because you really dont want your lenses to create image circles way larger than your format on a fixed format ( no swings, tilts, or shifts ) camera. The reason is bright objects outside the recorded field of view bounce around inside the camera and can

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

Hehehehe... Great! Really interesting, and a very, very loud THANKS!!! LF Derby Chang escreveu: Hi Luiz, Some time ago, I took these shots that Boris has been gracious enough to host. I probably should do an update with a few more DA lenses I have now. http://boris.isra-shop.com

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

Well, well, well... Great news, even if not a full scale scientific test. TKS!! LF Joseph McAllister escreveu: Slapping some of my DA lenses on an LX I have not found any that didn't cover the entire screen, with no apparent vignetting except at a zoom's widest angles. Not scien

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

sume greater lens availability from Pentax. Since the only DA* lenses available with long reach into the 135~200mm and 2.8 aperture are the 50~135 and the 200mm, I really should ask if any 35mm film users ever tried those lenses on anything but APS-C Pentaxes, and what results they got. It

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

Slapping some of my DA lenses on an LX I have not found any that didn't cover the entire screen, with no apparent vignetting except at a zoom's widest angles. Not scientific. Not all inclusive. Just an observation. If I had the time, and I cared, I'd shoot a few rolls

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

Hi Luiz, Some time ago, I took these shots that Boris has been gracious enough to host. I probably should do an update with a few more DA lenses I have now. http://boris.isra-shop.com/da_lim_on_film.html hope this helps Derby Luiz Felipe wrote: Guess they could sue me if I end up finding

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

that. Let's accept the truth, handed from wherever by any means, that Pentax offers no DA lens intended and guaranteed to work 35mm. My question still remains: is there any experience proving lousy 35mm coverage by said DA lenses? Since it's not the accepted use, I won't hold sacred

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 5:44 PM, William Robb wrote: > Was any of this supposed to make any sense? As opposed to anything else on this list? ;-) cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mail

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

spec reading at Boz' pages tonight. Anyway my question did assume greater lens availability from Pentax. Since the only DA* lenses available with long reach into the 135~200mm and 2.8 aperture are the 50~135 and the 200mm, I really should ask if any 35mm film users ever tried those lenses

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

- Original Message - From: "Thibouille" Subject: Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF? > You're easily insulted it seems. C'est what? > > But you're right, a better world if you work for Pentax and have a > personal blog you have

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

You're easily insulted it seems. But you're right, a better world if you work for Pentax and have a personal blog you have to : Praise Pentax and only Pentax, Not speak about anything not related to Pentax, Eat Pentax as well because it is Pentax, Never appear in public with anyting else than a Pe

RE: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

hn Francis Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 1:09 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF? On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 01:35:09PM -0300, Luiz Felipe wrote: > I was looking for data on the available 180~200mm 2.8 lenses for K and > EF mounts,

RE: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

The other thing to note is well designed lenses for a specific format (like APS format and DA lenses)many times could optically work but because they are designed for smaller formats may have good baffling and front rings that will vignette if used on a larger format like FF. JC O'Co

RE: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

.net] On Behalf Of Mark Roberts Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 12:56 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF? Luiz Felipe wrote: > I was looking for data on the available 180~200mm 2.8 lenses for K and > EF mounts, and found some s

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

- Original Message - From: "Thibouille" Subject: Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF? > > You mean those people who reacted like kids plaing in the sand? > If you are talking about the people who thought he should be pimping his own r

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:24 PM, William Robb wrote: > > Perhaps the whole Leica D-Lux fiasco caused Pentax to rein in their wild > horse a little, and got him start talking more like the president of a > camera company. > > William Robb You mean those people who reacted like kids plaing in the

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

- Original Message - From: "Luiz Felipe" Subject: Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF? > Possibly not... wich part of the criteria would be more of a problem: > covering almost entirely a 35mm film frame; primes and zooms with long end > into

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

- Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" Subject: Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF? > I strongly suspect that the light falloff in the corners that presents an > issue with full-frame digital isn't so much caused by design differenc

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

;Luiz Felipe" Subject: Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF? Guess I will have to read that debate... Bottom line - never mind a full frame dslr isn't available from Pentax and most likely will never be - wich current (DA included) Pentax lenses would cover almos

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

William Robb wrote: There has been a rather protracted and sometimes heated debate about this on ForumNeurotica over the past day or two. The best arguement that the naysayers can come up with is that wide open corner performance isn't good enough on some lenses, so the entire full frame senso

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

- Original Message - From: "Luiz Felipe" Subject: Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF? > Guess I will have to read that debate... > > Bottom line - never mind a full frame dslr isn't available from Pentax and > most likely will never be

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

lluminated would be a 35mm film frame exposed with current Pentax lenses... in particular those ending in the 135~200mm range, 2.8 aperture preferred. That idea that "most of the above XXmm DA lenses have larger enough image circles" actually puts the "there is no lens supp

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

- Original Message - From: "John Francis" Subject: Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF? > > Above some focal length (well below 200mm) it's likely that just about > any lens will have an image circle easily large enough to cover 36x24mm. >

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

> frame. > > That got me wondering if one of the tech-oriented actually knows the > image circle dimensions for the DA lenses, and how much is missing. I > know the difference should be proportional to the difference from APS-C > to 24x36mm, but would like ko know the

Re: image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

actually knows the image circle dimensions for the DA lenses, and how much is missing. I know the difference should be proportional to the difference from APS-C to 24x36mm, but would like ko know the size and borderline falloff evolution on the DA lenses. Just wondering, TIA. :-) It varies. Some

image circle of DA lenses: how much smaller than FF?

circle dimensions for the DA lenses, and how much is missing. I know the difference should be proportional to the difference from APS-C to 24x36mm, but would like ko know the size and borderline falloff evolution on the DA lenses. Just wondering, TIA. :-) LF -- Luiz Felipe luiz.felipe at

Re: Do the DA* lenses autofocus on the older bodies?

Leon, just keep in mind this might change. All DA* till now are indeed Dual-AF lenses. Future DA* might be SDM-only. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- Photo: K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... Thinkpad: X23+UB,X60+UB Programing: D7 user (trying out D2007) -- PD

Re: Do the DA* lenses autofocus on the older bodies?

Thanks Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Adam Maas wrote: > Yes, the DA* lenses are dual-focus and support both SDM and > screwdriver AF. The only non-DA* SDM lens (17-70 f4 SDM) does not do > screwdriver AF. > > -Adam > > On Sat, Aug 9,

Re: Do the DA* lenses autofocus on the older bodies?

Yes, the DA* lenses are dual-focus and support both SDM and screwdriver AF. The only non-DA* SDM lens (17-70 f4 SDM) does not do screwdriver AF. -Adam On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 8:52 PM, Leon Altoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi All, > > Could someone who has one of the DA

Do the DA* lenses autofocus on the older bodies?

Hi All, Could someone who has one of the DA* lenses (16-50 specifically at the moment, but I want to know for both) let me know if they auto focus on the older bodies such as the *istD and *istDS? Thanks. -- Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon -- PDML

Re: Cost speculation on a few DA lenses

"I had a nice chat with the local Pentax rep last week. The 60-250 is slated for a spring release, and he (and I presume PCI as an entity) isn't able to give a guess on the price." What Bill said re: release date. I have seen no speculation about a DA* 70-200 F2.8. It is not on either the offi

Re: Cost speculation on a few DA lenses

If thats the case, i can wait.:-) Nothing really happens for me til spring anyway. $800ish would be good. Dave On Dec 19, 2007 8:35 AM, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "David J Brooks" > Subject: Cost speculation on a

Re: Cost speculation on a few DA lenses

- Original Message - From: "David J Brooks" Subject: Cost speculation on a few DA lenses >I just had a peek at the Lens Roadmap pdf. It could be an older > version whow knows. > > I see the 50-135 which is now out and in stores. I also see the > DA60-250 F4. I

Cost speculation on a few DA lenses

I just had a peek at the Lens Roadmap pdf. It could be an older version whow knows. I see the 50-135 which is now out and in stores. I also see the DA60-250 F4. I have searched Henrys web site, and its not there, so i guess it has not been released. I also do not see a DA70-200 F2.8 lens, but i'm

DA* lenses with FF sensor (was next move from Pentax: hints about sensor)

corners, meaning DA* lenses cover almost full frame and would definitely cover 1.3x or 1.25x crop. This is good news in anticipation of bigger that APS-C crop sensors to come into game. Just my 2¢ Roman. -- new photos once and again... roman.blakout.net <http://roman.blakout.net> -- PDML

Re: DA Lenses, Entrance Pupil

I found this on the panotools list: http://michel.thoby.free.fr/Tokina_10_17/NPP-Tokina.jpg On 8/8/07, jon carver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi All, > I've been using a couple DA lenses in panoramic shots > and was hoping to compare the results of my experiment > to de

Re: DA Lenses, Entrance Pupil

; I found this on the panotools list: > http://michel.thoby.free.fr/Tokina_10_17/NPP-Tokina.jpg > > On 8/8/07, jon carver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi All, > > I've been using a couple DA lenses in panoramic shots > > and was hoping to compare the results of

DA Lenses, Entrance Pupil

Hi All, I've been using a couple DA lenses in panoramic shots and was hoping to compare the results of my experiment to determine the location of the entrance pubil of two lenses: DA 40 f/2.8 Limited DA Fisheye Zoom 10-17 I'm using a K10D and Nodal Ninja. The 40 seems to like a 62mm o

Re: Lessons in supply and demand: The new Pentax DA * lenses

Roman, I don't know if we live in different Estonias, but AFAIK our Pentax dealer is going to get initially AT LEAST 50 of both DA* lenses (100 in total). Those should arrive around August 15. This year. BR, Margus Roman wrote: >http://1001noisycameras.blogspot.com/2007/08/lessons-i

Lessons in supply and demand: The new Pentax DA * lenses

http://1001noisycameras.blogspot.com/2007/08/lessons-in-supply-and-demand-new-pentax.html <<>> The initial production output for these lenses was at 1000 per month each . <<>> It seems I'll get mine in

Release Dates for First Two DA* :Lenses

I recall some people here inquiring. Here are the dates: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=24051902 I also understand that Amazon is saying the DA* 16-50 will go on sale August 15. Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/

Re: Pentax DA lenses/body interaction vs. third party lenses

That's the FA series, Tim. F series don't provide MTF data. But I'm sure the DA series are better tuned for the DSLR bodies. G On Apr 14, 2007, at 11:24 AM, Tim Øsleby wrote: > With the F-series Pentax introduced a chip storing the MTF data for > each > individual lens. So with F or later th

RE: Pentax DA lenses/body interaction vs. third party lenses

EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Pentax DA lenses/body interaction vs. third party lenses I don't know whether you'd noticed that camera body interacts with DA lenses in a different, more logical way than with third party lemses. For example, my DA 50-200mm with auto iso 200-800 switches ISO

Re: Pentax DA lenses/body interaction vs. third party lenses

I'm not surprised at all. I guess it is part of the price to pay for buying third party lenses. 2007/4/13, Roman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I don't know whether you'd noticed that camera body interacts with DA > lenses in a different, more logical way than with third part

Pentax DA lenses/body interaction vs. third party lenses

I don't know whether you'd noticed that camera body interacts with DA lenses in a different, more logical way than with third party lemses. For example, my DA 50-200mm with auto iso 200-800 switches ISO speed whenever shutter is slower than 1/200 for selected apertures in AE prior

Re: list of all DA lenses

Mmm using images from dpreview for the DA 35mm Macro will surely be appreciated by Phil (from DPR). It seems they don't care much about image copyright, do they ? -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail Li

RE: list of all DA lenses

Indeed, I didn't notice these were missing. Henk > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jaume Lahuerta > Sent: 27 March, 2007 12:16 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: list of all DA lenses > >

Re: list of all DA lenses

Thanks, although it seems that there are some primes missing, like the DA 40 or the DA 21. - Mensaje original De: Henk Terhell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Enviado: martes, 27 de marzo, 2007 11:32:23 Asunto: list of all DA lenses here is a nice list of all

list of all DA lenses

here is a nice list of all the DA lenses and some other current lenses. http://www.fotokonijnenberg.nl/product_list.php?idc=725 Henk -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: DA lenses on 35mm (found some info)

On Mar 12, 2007, at 5:35 PM, Juan Buhler wrote: > On 3/12/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Makes a great 24x24 mm Pentax Superwide on a 35mm body ... >> >> http://homepage.mac.com/godders/DA14FF-sq.jpg >> > > Which brings to mind... There's really no specific reason for DSLRs >

Re: DA lenses on 35mm (found some info)

On 3/12/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Makes a great 24x24 mm Pentax Superwide on a 35mm body ... > > http://homepage.mac.com/godders/DA14FF-sq.jpg > Which brings to mind... There's really no specific reason for DSLRs sensors to be rectangular, except for the size of mirror and

Re: DA lenses on 35mm (found some info)

Makes a great 24x24 mm Pentax Superwide on a 35mm body ... http://homepage.mac.com/godders/DA14FF-sq.jpg G On Mar 12, 2007, at 1:41 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote: > Richard Day has posted a scan of an image taken with the DA 14 on > film: > > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&

Re: DA lenses on 35mm (found some info)

Richard Day has posted a scan of an image taken with the DA 14 on film: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=22421936 It clearly won't work with any sensor much larger than what we have. In my mind, this greatly diminishes the possibility that Pentax will ever bring out

DA lenses on 35mm (found some info)

Hi, Some time ago I asked for the 35mm coverage of the DA70, but it seemed that nobody could check it on a film camera. I have found a thread on dpreview with info about this and other lenses that may be of your interest. (I know that Pentax is only at APS-C, but for us that don't make a living

Re: upcoming longer DA lenses..

For weddings, I would like a short tele zoom that is reasonable to handhold for periods of time - maybe even hanging around my neck while I shoot with another body. I had an 80-200/2.8 and found it too big and heavy. The A 70-210/4 is passable (certainly wouldn't want it any larger) and I need it

Re: upcoming longer DA lenses..

The DA*60-250/4 does not look like it will be ferociously larger than the DA*50-135/2.8 ... http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06092102pentaxdastarlenses.asp How about a DA*135/2 or DA*180/2.8, and a matched Pentax-DA Rear Converter 2x-S? But then I tend to prefer primes ... :-) Godfrey

Re: Dual AF system in DA* lenses ? It seems so :D

I didn't want any fanfare but this at least indicates that Pentax did or still does investigate that possibility. It also points to the fact that if those lenses do have dual AF system the following DA* might not so this information is still VERY interesting. As usual, before wez do have them offi

Re: Dual AF system in DA* lenses ? It seems so :D

On 15/10/06, Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I hope this is correct. But the report originates with "Pentax guys." > "Pentax guys" in Canada said that the K10D would take replaceable > batteries. We know how that turned out. So I no longer have confidence > in predictions from "Pentax

Re: Dual AF system in DA* lenses ? It seems so :D

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=20442947 Be happy :) - I hope this is correct. But the report originates with "Pentax guys." "Pentax guys" in Canada said that the K10D would take replaceable batteries. We know how that turned out. So I no longer have confidenc

Re: Dual AF system in DA* lenses ? It seems so :D

Jan van Wijk wrote: >On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 18:05:46 +0200, Bertil Holmberg wrote: > >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=20442947 > >Well, I sure would like the ability to use the new lenses on >my istD as well, since that would be my backup body. How about this: Rember t

  1   2   3   >