Anthony Farr escribió:
The early Pentax DSLRs had IR cutoff filters in front of their imaging
sensors that nevertheless transmitted enough near IR light to make a useful
IR exposure with an R-72 or similar filter. Can you assert that the IR
cutoff filter over the AF sensor is more absolute in
On Feb 25, 2008, at 6:29 PM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Steve Desjardins
Subject: Re: K20D back focus
I've never really noticed any back/front focusing issues, but you
folks
are making me paranoid. Is there a good kind of shot for testing
this?
I'm
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Bob Sullivan
Sent: Monday, 25 February 2008 4:21 PM
To: PDML
Subject: K20D back focus
Reading the promo literature on the K20D, I noticed a new feature.
The camera has the ability to store adjustments for backfocus
From: Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reading the promo literature on the K20D, I noticed a new feature.
The camera has the ability to store adjustments for backfocus (or
forward) for 20 lenses.
The claim is that all the DA lenses are fine, but others may need adjusting.
Any ideas on
Anthony Farr escribió:
The difference between IR focus and visible wavelength focus is not constant
from lens to lens. Different designs of the same focal length can have
different IR focus corrections, and the correction is not necessarily
proportional when comparing lenses of different
The early Pentax DSLRs had IR cutoff filters in front of their imaging
sensors that nevertheless transmitted enough near IR light to make a useful
IR exposure with an R-72 or similar filter. Can you assert that the IR
cutoff filter over the AF sensor is more absolute in its prohibition of IR
I think it's more likely that the sensor's focus plane is more
accurate rather than tighter than that of film. The focal point is
the focal point. And since film is somewhat curved, it can never be
totally accurate.
Paul
On Feb 25, 2008, at 3:58 AM, mike wilson wrote:
From: Bob Sullivan
I'm most positive that Izumi Taniguchi who contributed allot to
explaining tips and tricks of K10D shall cover back focus adjustments
issue for K20D as soon as camera shall get on production lines.
See Digiichi website here -
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/special/digiichi/
One,
--
K100D
A better way of saying what I was trying to
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/02/25 Mon AM 11:26:58 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K20D back focus
I think it's more likely that the sensor's focus plane is more
accurate rather than
indicator or would other conditions be better?
mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2/25/2008 3:53 PM
A better way of saying what I was trying to
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/02/25 Mon AM 11:26:58 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K20D back focus
I
- Original Message -
From: Steve Desjardins
Subject: Re: K20D back focus
I've never really noticed any back/front focusing issues, but you folks
are making me paranoid. Is there a good kind of shot for testing this?
I'm thinking of using the 50 1.4 and 135 2.8, wide open, to take
Reading the promo literature on the K20D, I noticed a new feature.
The camera has the ability to store adjustments for backfocus (or
forward) for 20 lenses.
The claim is that all the DA lenses are fine, but others may need adjusting.
Any ideas on why this might be?
Do some lenses transmit more of
- Original Message -
From: Bob Sullivan
Subject: K20D back focus
Reading the promo literature on the K20D, I noticed a new feature.
The camera has the ability to store adjustments for backfocus (or
forward) for 20 lenses.
The claim is that all the DA lenses are fine, but others
At 02:38 PM 25/02/2008, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Bob Sullivan
Subject: K20D back focus
Reading the promo literature on the K20D, I noticed a new feature.
The camera has the ability to store adjustments for backfocus (or
forward) for 20 lenses.
The claim
14 matches
Mail list logo
