Pentax How do you like your Pentax K-5? And please show us some of your photos!

Armanius

Bring Jack back!
Jan 11, 2011
Houston, Texas
Jack
@Sue - Amazing color. That's a photo for the walls!

@MacBook - Razor sharp photo! I clicked on the thumbnail and was awestruck by the sharpness. Well done! Cute dog too!
 
Jan 31, 2011
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
Thanks Sue! How do you like the DA15? I had one for two weeks that was soft no matter what. Pentax apparently has QC issues with that lens, so I read. I was bummed given that it's a Ltd lens.
Here's some DA15 shots. I looked at the originals and I guess, on pixel peeping, that my shots are a bit soft but I assumed it was me. I find it difficult to nail the focus, anyway (or maybe thats why my XZ shots appear much sharper... yikes)


Canoe Pool Dawn 1 by kyte50, on Flickr
(Used the K-r here, it was before I had the K-5)

View attachment 47598
dinghystacks by kyte50, on Flickr

I must also admit that once I got the FA43 and then started visiting here and going more compact, I have not actually had it on the camera since I cant remember when. I should sell it, I guess.
 

Armanius

Bring Jack back!
Jan 11, 2011
Houston, Texas
Jack
Great photos Sue. I like the Hunter River photo. Another one of those photos that you can put up in a big print for the wall. At a first glance, I thought it was Mt. St. Michel. Where's Hunter River at?
 
Jan 31, 2011
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
Thanks, Armandao :)
Where's Hunter River at?
Hunter River, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. If you look at the flickr, I've put it on the map, I think.
And heres the Wikipedia entry

Here's one of Newcastle beach and some apartment buildings which have been erected on the site of the old Royal Newcastle Hospital. Its taken from much the same angle, but closer, as the other I posted earlier somewhere which was an XZ shot.


Newcastle Beach: K-5 by kyte50, on Flickr
K-5 + DA15mm

Post processed with Photoshop's own tools, and Dfine2 (for noise removal). I wanted to overemphasise the cloud and sky colours, as well as the buildings reflecting the sunshine.
 
Jan 31, 2011
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
Thanks!! The goofy looking hood makes the lens not so pancake-ish. Most of the Ltd lenses have these unconventional looking hoods.
Indeed! The 15 and 35macro have builtin hoods, very cool, which pull out or push back in when you dont want them. The FA43 screws in... not sure I like that... but its only pancaked without the hood. (15 and 35 are not pancake lenses though, they are small by comparison with others, but still not pancaked). I have a hankering for the 21 and the 70 (or FA 77 which I cannot afford). If I ever get the 21, I think I'll be selling my X100.

[edit] actually if I sold the X100, I could get both the 21 *and* the 70. Hmmmm.... *thinks*....
 

Armanius

Bring Jack back!
Jan 11, 2011
Houston, Texas
Jack
Indeed! The 15 and 35macro have builtin hoods, very cool, which pull out or push back in when you dont want them. The FA43 screws in... not sure I like that... but its only pancaked without the hood. (15 and 35 are not pancake lenses though, they are small by comparison with others, but still not pancaked). I have a hankering for the 21 and the 70 (or FA 77 which I cannot afford). If I ever get the 21, I think I'll be selling my X100.

[edit] actually if I sold the X100, I could get both the 21 *and* the 70. Hmmmm.... *thinks*....
The 21/3.2's hood is weird too! On the 70/2.4, the hood already sticks out, but you can pull it out to make it even longer. The crummy thing is that the lens cap doesn't really fit snuggly on the lens if I choose not to use the hood.

I liked the hood on the 15/4. I didn't like the hood on the 43/1.9.

Both the 21 and 70 are pancakes if you don't use the hood. Much better looking w/o the hood too! I liked the 21 when I had it for a couple of weeks. Very nice rendering. I returned it just because I felt that an expensive lens should be faster than f3.2, especially when it's a prime lens and calls itself "limited."

As for the 77, it supposedly is somewhat soft wide open (so I read). By the time it gets sharp, you are past f2.4. Hence my preference (other than much cheaper) for the 70 over the 77.
 
Jan 31, 2011
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
The 21/3.2's hood is weird too! On the 70/2.4, the hood already sticks out, but you can pull it out to make it even longer. The crummy thing is that the lens cap doesn't really fit snuggly on the lens if I choose not to use the hood.

I liked the hood on the 15/4. I didn't like the hood on the 43/1.9.

Both the 21 and 70 are pancakes if you don't use the hood. Much better looking w/o the hood too! I liked the 21 when I had it for a couple of weeks. Very nice rendering. I returned it just because I felt that an expensive lens should be faster than f3.2, especially when it's a prime lens and calls itself "limited."

As for the 77, it supposedly is somewhat soft wide open (so I read). By the time it gets sharp, you are past f2.4. Hence my preference (other than much cheaper) for the 70 over the 77.
Got some DA70 shots for me? You might help push me over the edge :) (LBA strikes easily right here)
 

Armanius

Bring Jack back!
Jan 11, 2011
Houston, Texas
Jack
Congrats Wolf!!! The 35/2.4 should be an excellent lens by what I've seen. The 18-135 has a fast and silent AF. And it's tiny for a lens with such a versatile focal length. I just didn't have much luck with the one that I had, because it was malfunctioning.
 

Andrewteee

All-Pro
Jul 8, 2010
It sounds like those who have the K5 don't really use it much anymore (we are, after all, here on Serious Compacts). Or do you? Where does it fit into your photography needs if you primarily use serious compacts?
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom