:52 PM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Dayton
Subject: Re: K10D focusing quirk
Hello William,
I think there is another factor involved as well. When shooting
film,
the cost and time to do serious testing was something to take into
account. Most of us just
I've had many nice photos from the K10D/16-45 combo.
So, this evening, I used Lightroom to show me all of
my photos taken with the K10D at f/4. Of the several
hundred such photos, there were maybe 50 or so that
could be informative on focus accuracy (e.g., not
scenics, and not a receding row of
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Dayton
Subject: Re: K10D focusing quirk
Hello William,
I think there is another factor involved as well. When shooting film,
the cost and time to do serious testing was something to take into
account. Most of us just accepted the cameras
Message -
WR Subject: Re: K10D focusing quirk
WR It comes up in other groups as well. Plain and simple, it's a quality
WR control issue.
WR We want cheap cameras, we get cheap cameras.
WR William Robb
GZ From Gonz
I had the same problem with my *istD and the K100D with a FA24-90 lens
that back
I had the same problem with my *istD and the K100D with a FA24-90 lens
that back focused also. Drove me crazy. My FA85f1.4 also has focus
issues, but only when I manually focus. I never had a problem with
film cameras in this regard, I wonder what makes digital cameras
different that this comes
- Original Message -
From: Gonz
Subject: Re: K10D focusing quirk
I had the same problem with my *istD and the K100D with a FA24-90 lens
that back focused also. Drove me crazy. My FA85f1.4 also has focus
issues, but only when I manually focus. I never had a problem with
film
On Jan 24, 2008, at 11:17 AM, William Robb wrote:
We want cheap cameras, we get cheap cameras.
Mark!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
I took another careful look at Loving Chimps, posted
earlier this week, and indeed it is back-focused.
Several of my shots of the stone circle show the same
thing.
That seemed odd. I use the autofocus, but I use it
carefully.
So, this evening I tested the focus on my K10D using
an off-camera
Result: The FA 50 was spot-on, the DA 50-200 was
slightly back-focused, and the DA 16-45 was
significantly back-focused (by about 20 cm at the 1.5m
distance).
Obviously any global adjustment that fixes the 16-45
focus will throw the other two off.
Any similar experiences?
As you may
- Original Message -
From: John Celio
Subject: Re: K10D focusing quirk
Result: The FA 50 was spot-on, the DA 50-200 was
slightly back-focused, and the DA 16-45 was
significantly back-focused (by about 20 cm at the 1.5m
distance).
Obviously any global adjustment that fixes the 16
John and Bill,
I'm concerned that correcting the back-focus with the
16-45 will make the 50-200 and 50/1.7 front-focus. Is
that a legitimate worry?
Rick
--- William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: John Celio
Subject: Re: K10D focusing quirk
Result
- Original Message -
From: Rick Womer
Subject: Re: K10D focusing quirk
John and Bill,
I'm concerned that correcting the back-focus with the
16-45 will make the 50-200 and 50/1.7 front-focus. Is
that a legitimate worry?
The 16-45 has much less depth of focus than the longer
12 matches
Mail list logo
