going with the easy answer

A good kit doesn't come much more simple than this: three talented zooms covering 10-300mm.

For ultimate image quality the kit should have more primes, faster glass - and 24Mpix or greater camera to make best use of them.  For the amount of shooting that I do right now and in the near future, such investments make no sense - and today's Pentax primes are not weather resistant.  The 10-17 can focus to point-blank range, capture anything I want to shoot and its fishiness is great fun; sadly it's not foul-weather friendly like the other two lenses.  The venerable 18-55 DAL WR has really never let me down; its markdown features like distortion at 18mm certainly are irrelevant compared to the fisheye at 17mm, and the red kit lens also gives me 1/3 lifesize images.  These two lightweights will keep the rather bulky 16-85mm zoom out of my bag.. for a while, at least! Hmmm, I'd save 50 grams in the bag, lose $250 in the wallet and 10-16mm coverage, and an occasional lens change.  Nope, not for a while.  If anything would prove more convenient it might be the new 18-50RE, with its silent focus and 58mm filters that match the HD55-300.  The new red-ring HD is the newest version of the best Pentax-fit telezoom in its price range, and none speak ill of it other than its leisurely speed to focus.

These are not my only lenses; the 50mm f/1.7 A can be useful when light fails, the 300mm mirror lens is small and creates unique images and the manual zooms are fun at times.  In general though, for what I shoot (and how seldom I print big) the three AF zooms can handle anything that I need a camera to manage.  The K50's higher ISO abilities make faster glass less crucial (and only the 150-450mm beast is WR) so the balance of bulk and image quality is just right for me.

The 100-300 Sigma DL now can keep the NX adapter mounted and become the unstabilized NX300 telezoom for a while, where its old-school aperture ring will be useful. I've never tried keeping both the 100-300 and 55-300 before; it's nice to have them both yet not crowding each other!

Red, hot K-50 deal

I found a fine price for a cheerful, red K-50 with WR kit lens (yes, it's red too).  Its price with lens was very low due to having no battery or charger; I never liked the Pentax charger anyway so yippee!  And in case of  any other issues the 14-day return policy is a good thing to have.  Two generic batteries and charger were about $17 so this didn't hurt much.. sure hope it tests out well.

Here's the grip, which I always found 

to make a fairly happy face!

20-40 LimiZoom and friends

A quick outdoor test yielded little data of value.  All four lenses produced images with great colors and decent sharpness.  Color fringing was most visible on the 17-28 but its image was also the widest so you gain more view but it's not the best part of the field.  The tests were three wide (18-55@18, 17-28@17+ and 20-40@20, then all four lenses at 28mm; all were shot iso80 f/5.6, shade WB.

The one noteworthy point was between the 20-40 and Tamron 28-75 at 28mm.  Exposure data is shown as identical but the Tamron is darker by a notch; it is clear in the leaves against the tree trunk and especially in the skyline clouds.   The other images look like the LimiZoom, only the Tamron has cloud detail.  These all were jpeg/bright so processing was the same, and focus was obtained on the notch in the left-side tree trunk.  Honestly though, these clouds were moving fast... some changes just happen with outdoor scenes.  I was not planning to shoot these but the sun came out with no early notice, so I used it!

These two shots were cropped by Picasa when converted to a collage so 

more of the scene is visible on my screen for all the images.

comparing good lenses

It's easy to pick out a bad lens with a few revealing tests.  Focus is inconsistent, or results not sharp from one side to another.  Perhaps contrast is weak or colors appear warmer or cooler than expected.  Maybe the images are fine but areas beyond focus distract or otherwise detract from the overall shot.

If a lens passes these tests, and you pick up another design, then it gets interesting.  How does one compare lenses that each pass the basic tests?  For most of us, it becomes a balancing act between what else we already own and use, features like weather seals, the weight of one lens over another, compatible  filters, or simple cost.  If a lens costs four times as much but both give great results, was that cash well spent?

I own Pentax' 18-55 WR "kit lens" for foul-weather shooting.  It's a decent lens, can focus close and go out in the rain.  Yes it has more distortion than many at the wide end, and it's f/5.6 past maybe 40mm; these concerns will make a big difference to some, not so much to others.

Other options are available, which brings up the Big Question: if a lens costs several times as much as the 18-55, how many times 'better' should it be?  Faster, smaller, more seals, incredible optics - some combination of these or other factors will be in play.  No two people will weigh these factors quite the same, nor can they quantify  'twice as good' - so like every lens ever made the better / faster / more expensive lens is not for everyone.

I have owned Pentax' 18-135 DC WR, two or three times in fact.  Its specs are compelling relative to the 18-55: more telephoto range, a quiet focus motor, still f/5.6 but not until longer focal lengths.  Good points - yet I sold it each time.  I found issues with image quality above 100mm and did not wish to carry a bulkier, more expensive lens that I only found useful for 2/3 of its range.  I could choose to correct most of its issues in the camera with a speed penalty, or fix them on my computer which also takes time.  Or I could own the 18-55.  Many others disagree strongly that this lens has any more problems than other lenses and is better than most; that's OK as their needs are different, just as their copies are different from mine.

So it comes to this: a Limited 20-40mm zoom has arrived on my doorstep, and tests against my other lenses will commence.  It's a new open-box lens obtained for over $100 less than any price I'd seen, but still cost about six times what I paid for the used DA18-55 - all that for a narrower focal range!  Why would anyone pay that much more for this lens?

Well, it has the weather seals but includes a DC motor.  It's faster at f/2.8-4.0.  Stopping at 20mm avoids the worst of zoom distortions.  Primarily though, it's a Limited lens which means great build and superior image quality.  Until now it also meant primes; this is the first Limited zoom so it's the proverbial odd duck.  Many current Limited users cannot bring themselves to accept a zoom as deserving the Limited label while others have found it too expensive to bother with.  Let's pretend that I replaced both the DA21/3.2 Limited (slightly faster at f/2.8) and the DA40/2.8 Limited (slower at f/4) for less money.  You could say I replaced the 35 Limited too but it's a 1:1 macro, so not quite an even trade - but the Limited primes have no weather seals.

Given its uniqe nature, should the LimiZoom be tested against primes, zooms, Limited lenses only?  That's a problem for pro review websites,  professional users or geeked-by-gear folks; I'll skip that question and just compare it with what I have.  Its 'competition' in my bag comes from the 18-55WR and a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, with a Pentax F 17-28mm fish-eye thrown in despite its fishiness.  I shall also just let the 20-40 be itself on a solo jaunt or two, unencumbered by the abilities of other lenses.

How do these four zooms compare?
17-28: really wide fisheye view, fairly slow at f/3.5-4.5, compact & light, fairly inexpensive
18-55: weather seals, 1:3ish close focus, ~$100, slow f/3.5-5.6
20-40: Limited metal build, weather seals, 9 aperture blades, DC silent focus, f/2.8-4
28-75: fast f/2.8 = relatively large and bulky, 7 aperture blades

On to the 'tests', at which I'm pretty poor.  I shall try to keep them on common levels re. shooting parameters but I always leave something out that makes a difference.  Oh well...

happy ending for 55-300

though a bit sad for the white 18-55mm lens.

The DAL 55-300 arrived, and sure enough only the mount itself was broken in a couple of places - no contact-pin or aperture-lever issues at all.  I compared screw-points to other spare lenses, but Sigmas use fewer screws so the spacing was off - so that left the DAL 18-55 mount.  That's too bad as the white DAL was a fine match to the upcoming K-s1, but I have a WR version on my K-5 that makes it expendable.  I suppose it would be practical to swap my DA WR for a white DAL WR, if any K50 users are up for it; that would be pretty on the K-s1 yet functional on my K-5.  Takers, anyone?

After about a half hour of slow-motion detail work, I now have a fine copy (again) of the DAL 55-300 lens!  How nice.

p.s. I modified my K-s1 preorder to be a black body - far less effort than working in a white lens!

aaaaaaaand we're back

Now that internet has been added to our new estate, I can tell you what's new!  

Well -- we moved.
 That's it really, all our energy has gone there. 

In other news,  the 18-55WR was sitting on the porch when we arrived; also, the SMC 30mm arrived from Great Britain.  So that's it for a while for inbound gear. Well not quite: while we were away I won a bid on a telescope platform that lets just about anything track the stars, so that's kinda nice. Actually it nearly renders the O-GPS1 redundant as an Astro-Tracer, and at about the same price! We shall see how that all plays out. In the meantime, back to unpacking.

Oh yes, the view. Very nice in the daytime (Rainier, Goat Rocks, St.Helens, trees) and very nice at night (Milky Way &c &c).  In a couple of years the mountains will be a memory as the trees stubbornly insist on getting taller... but some will shed and allow peeking in the winter.
Peace and quiet abound, unless you count bird songs as annoying; we don't.

1 for the road

Reporting from our camp trailer via tablet --

Deals come and go, and almost by definition they come at a 'bad' time.  This rule was evident as I found deals on two Pentax lenses: an original mid-'70s k-mount 30mm f2.8 (from England!) and a newish foulweather 18.55wr!  These deals decisively close my wheeling & dealing window for the forseeable future (for me that's maybe 2 weeks).

Oh yes, also picked up an OGPS1 attachment for my K-5: not because I care about where I am to within 10' but so I can image the stars while the module tells the camera's sensor to compensate for Earth's rotation.  Cool!

Primes: k17 a24 k30 40Ltd a50macro m85 tak105, m200, tak300 (all Pentax), hanimar 400 
Zooms: 18'55, 18'250, 100'300 plus a few others..

good news all around

• The SMC 17mm Fish-Eye has arrived, and its condition is if anything a bit better than the last copy.  Both take excellent images judging from my first efforts: decently sharp, colors and contrast excellent, and the size is so nice for a lens that won't be my most-used.  (Update - turns out this is the 1st-edition 17mm fish-eye, labeled 1:4 17mm not 1:4/17mm.  Also no cute case.  This is no big deal to me, but others have reported the second iteration as the better of the two by a slim margin.)

• The 18-250 Sigma has also arrived, and it too shows great results from early tests.  Good and sharp, far better control of color fringing than the DA18-135, closeups between 1:3 and 1:2, and all in a (relatively) small and light package.  I always liked the first 18-200 from Sigma, and this one is easily as good and has the HSM silent focus.  The DA18-135 seems to focus more confidently while the Sigma double checks itself, but these are very quick tests so that may be situational.  In any case this will serve me better, and I'll shoot with more confidence with the 18-250.

• The home sale is so close I can almost feel it after photos were taken this week.  Gosh it will be nice to pay off medical, car and other pre-retirement debts (and yes I confess, a few pay-later photo buys are out there too).

This post originally included a great deal on an 18-55WR from amazon - alas, the affiliated company sent me an 18-55 non-WR.  Even more surprising it was a version-1 18-55, replaced many years ago by an improved optical formula.  That was not good news, but the refund and return shipment went smoothly enough so no harm done to me.  Now will they get it labeled properly for the next person, that's what I would really like to know.

the kit reborn?

So the 50-150 f/2.8 is moving on soon*, and the DA40 Limited is gone.  Never thought the 40 would go, but at 770 grams the 50-150 was a risk I chose to take.  A 450-gram Sigma 105 macro is not a lightweight, but 70+105 fast lenses combined will do well with the DA16-45.  Heck, the 70+105+DA50-200WR weighs a bit more but gives me more range, some weather seals and 1:1 macro!  Yes I'm stretching to justify my actions, but it works for me!

Why am I doing this?  The K-5 II is the new goal.  With the K-5 awaiting repairs & the wet season upon us, a II (or praps a IIs) makes sense... if the price becomes right in the next few months.  I could pick up a classic K-5 but the SAFOX X has a few important upgrades I would like to have:

• better AF predictions in continuous-AF mode
• much less light needed for autofocus (-3EV)
• f/2.8 precision (center point) and 
• more decisive focusing in nearly all cases

The gapless-screen update will be quite nice as well.

The K-3 has still more updates, but the 24Mpix sensor does not beat the sweet-16 for low-light imaging so more pixels hold less appeal.  Many of the other features (variable AA simulation, better/easier video, USB3) are good but not wildly relevant to me -- well OK a few shifted buttons would be nice.  A larger screen and faster electronic pipeline sounds like battery-life sacrificed as much as anything else.  And even with sale prices, the K-3 will be at twice the price of the basic II.  But hey, the shopping season approaches: if discounts are in the right places and the house is getting a lot of buying attention, who knows where this will end?

Once my K-5 is fixed it may go on the market... or should the K-01 depart?  Keeping the K-5 makes more sense for identical controls, the K-01 has the interesting video and interval-movie setting - but those are also available on the Q!  Acquiring a brand-new II with three years of warranty feels like a good decision - though a better one would be to swear off all imaging 'upgrades' for six months!
Ha ha very funny... and oh yeah just picked up a white 18-55 for the white K-01 :^p

Today's pile of imaging gear:

• primes: 8 fisheye, 24, 50, 70Ltd, 105 macro, 400 (all manual focus except 70 + 105)
• zooms: DAs 16-45, 18-55, 50-200wr (28-90 & 100-300 for full frame/film)
• bodies: K-01, K-5 (needs repairs), Q with 02 zoom and PK adapter

* first sale fell through, try try again..

Update - the 50-150 went through the 2nd time, and is being replaced by a DA21.  Yes this was not needed thanks to the 16-45.  More shuffling in the works; what a surprise.

Everything Changes.

That title about covers it.  Whether it's the ideal set of lenses in your bag, the camera they fit on, or saying farewell to a 33-year career with no real plans in sight, life just keeps moving along, and forcing decisions.

Re: imaging: I seem to be turning a bit of the kit upside down.  The DA18-55 WR has been my foul-weather standby, but I'd really prefer a DA16-45 for hiking, a bit of extra light grasp and wide-angle fun, and generally better image quality.  If that happens though, a different WR lens would be a good idea - and looky here: a grade-9 used DA50-200WR for comfortably below the going rate at B&H. Done! - but what will the 55-300 think?  For that matter, what will the 15 fisheye think of a 16mm zoom?  Good thing lenses don't think out loud... but sometimes owners do!

The DA21 Limited calls my name, but I continue to resist - and the 16-45 can help with that.  For half the price of a DA21/3.2, the DA16-45 is a smidge slower but a lot more versatile, and very very good.  I've owned it before but only with non-WR cameras like the k-100d and k-x... so why not the K-01?  If I don't find a very good deal though, I'm fine with the 18-55 WR.

On the tele side, the K-01 is quite awkward for me with the 55-300, so the 50-200 will be a better fit with that camera - and WR gives it high value on the K-5.  I owned the 50-200WR before too, and I found it acceptably sharp and liked its consistently good bokeh.  And how often do I find 300mm useful really, is it worth having the range if it's seldom used - or worse yet used badly in lesser light, replacing lens sharpness with image shake?  Hmmm...

As to the DA70 and the 100mm macro, they are safely tucked in the bag come what may!  While I know of prettier lens in the 90-105mm macro range, Promaster's results speak for themselves, and they say very good things.

Any kit shifts will need to be balanced with sales, but I'm OK with that; in fact the SMC-A 24 and 50mm lenses will depart soon.  The DA55-300 is an impressive lens, but I can grab another easily - and letting go could allow more chances for the Hanimar 400mm to play.

This realignment would make the kit appear thus:

• zooms: 18-55wr (possibly DA16-45), 50-200wr, manual Rikenon 70-150/4 
• primes: 15/2.8 fisheye, Rikenon 28, DA Limiteds 40 & 70, 100/3.5 macro, 400/6.3
• on the fence: DA 55-300, Vivitar 28-105, SMC-As 24 and 50

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

As to the adventure of retirement - well that's true too, and coming soon.  My pension will be decent but the LBA needs to end!  At some point I will likely add a part-time job but it's not guaranteed to be awaiting me, so it's a leap of faith.  My wife is very happy about this upcoming change, so it's a leap of love too.

the gear list, part XVII, give or take X

As 2013 approaches (and the Mayan calendar panic recedes!) the gear list has earned another entry in the 'blog.  Much gear has been sacrificed for Limited primes and the K-01 bargain, but what remains is truly good stuff.  I can look back and miss a few items that have left the list, but overall regrets are few. For example, the K-01 and its focus peaking would have rendered the 50mm f/1.4 Sears lens much more usable - but the DA40 Limited that has taken its range is far too good for any regrets!

Bodies:

• K-5, still amazing after a year in my bag.  No real complaints, especially now that I have the next item with its focus peaking ability (yes more versatile video too, and some day I'll learn how to use it!).
• K-01 (white), great fun since early November.  It's definitely a different way to achieve similar goals, some better and some worse.  I find I can manage a few things I didn't think I'd ever be willing to try, which is seldom a bad thing.

Lenses, in approximate FL order:

• Sigma 15/2.8 fisheye: yes the DA15 would be smaller, but this has so many good things going for it that I have no complaints.  It's not all that large in any case, and it's faster, focuses closer and works with full-frame (film) cameras. Oh yes, often a bit cheaper too on the used market!  Great fun and very talented, and really not all that fishy for landscapes on an 16×24mm sensor.
• Pentax 18-55WR: when the weather outside is frightful, this will do nicely.  Yes the 18-135 has its place and I enjoyed some time with a good copy - but the price difference was enough for this lens and a DA40 Limited (oops, that came up out of order).
• SMC-A 24/2.8: I had once owned a Vivitar 24/2.0 but it was larger heavier and for some reason didn't resonate with me.  This one does just great, and colors are more correct than the Rikenon 28mm that I've enjoyed so much.  The 24mm also focuses closer and images are equally sharp by my my casual inspection.
• Pentax DA40/2.8 Limited - yes it's true what others say: absurdly small, absurdly talented and worth owning.  For many it's the first Limited because of its price; I got such a good deal that I cannot repeat it, and it's a real keeper even had I paid $100 more like most other owners.  Sharp in focus and smooth elsewhere, thanks to great optics and nine-blade aperture, and too small to justify leaving behind.
• Pentax DA 55-300: the perennial favorite telephoto lens for Pentaxians on a budget, whether financially or by weight.  Most owners and testers say it outperforms the many 70-300 zooms on the market, and other than some vignetting and not being f/2.8 it's hard to find much fault.  For 420 grams I'll take the speed penalty, especially with the sweet-16Mpxl sensors that I have in the K-5 and K-01.  When I need telephoto it's hard to need more than this.
• Pentax DA70/2.4 Limited - ditto at least, except that this one was not to be found cheaply.  It's still worth the price.  Something about this feels illegal, to be a bit telephoto yet tiny and fast - and let's not forget the nine aperture blades to make the images really snap.  Live and learn: Limiteds are worth having.
• Rikenon XR 70-150/4: when I put down my bid at auction I barely knew this lens existed.  It's been with me quite a while, relatively speaking, and other than its old-school lens coating it's a real marvel.  I don't recall seeing many 2-ring internal-zoom lenses in my 1980s film days but clearly a few were out there, and this one is smooth and sharp.  It's a bit dense and at 440 grams it's heavier than all but the 400mm - but fixed f/4 through the range, 52mm filter threads and a built-in shade are nice to have.  Optically it's of prime caliber and can sorta do close focusing in its 'macro' mode.  O What Fun!
• Promaster 100mm f/3.5 macro (AF): I had tried two other macros, and felt like Goldilocks.  The Tamron 90 was excellent but too bulky, the Sigma 50 excellent but I had to get sooo close for real macro images.  The Promaster only goes 1:2 on its own - but I have the original 'matched' multiplier to achieve 1:1 shots (which works fine with the Limiteds by the way), and it's well under half the size and weight of the Tamron.  This does very well for my mid-tele and macro work, and is another small wonder.  I've made it pretty clear that I like that in lenses!
• Hanimar 400/6.3: and then there's this thing.  A preset T-mount lens (with 16 aperture blades!) it's a curiosity that was handed to me by my father-in-law; for the price of a K-mount adapter any 400mm lens is hard to beat.  I need to use it more but it's done quite well on my few test outings.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

A few additional items have not yet left the building.
The Rikenon-P 28/2.8 has been a real gem, and I've enjoyed its time on the camera.  While the 24mm has crowded it a bit I still find occasional use for it; perhaps one day it will leave me, which I did not think I'd ever say aloud.  That's saying something about the SMC-A 24!  The SMC-M 50mm f/2 is very good but the DA40 takes its spot for nearly everything, and the Vivitar (Kobori) 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 is a fun one-touch zoom that the 24-40-70-100 primes have supplanted.

Compared to earlier times, that's not many lenses - but it's more than I can use at any one event that's certain.  Most events can go with perhaps two primes and a zoom, and seldom would more than four go anywhere with me.  A very comfortable kit.

Micro four-thirds:
On the non-Pentax side, we own two Lumix G1 cameras, two 14-42 OIS kit lenses and a 45-200 OIS zoom to share.  My wife really wants to learn about imaging, and having identically-spec'd cameras was how she wanted to learn.  These are decently talented micro/43 cameras with electronic viewfinders and flip screens, so very versatile.  I also have a basic adapter to allow the K-mount lenses with aperture rings to work as well, though no stabilization in that case.  I must try the 400mm Hanimar on the G1 soon!!

Software:
 I now own Elements 10 and Premiere 10, having upgraded from 9.  Not usually worth taking a single step up, but I didn't have Premiere before this, and the package price was very good - and since I now have the K-01 I might do some video work.  Some day.
Plugins for the above include NeatImage for noise reduction, SmartCurve for lighting adjustments and ReDynamix for gentle redistribution of dynamic lighting without all the HDR effort. I also use Picasa software for the easy changes and quick text additions.  That'll do for now.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Update March '13

Add a Pentax Q to the list with its standard 02 zoom, and yet another SMC-A 50mm f/1.7 - I had one just a few months ago, but that was before the K-01 made faster lenses practical thanks to focus peaking.  This one cost about half the other's price too - bargains get to me like that!  It will get used when light is really scarce, otherwise the DA40/70 team will crowd it.  
The Q does not have a PK adapter... yet... so expect another update when I break down at last.

April update - subtract a G-1, add a DA 50-200WR to the mix.

the updated kit - today's version :^)

A week after speculating on missing gear I have a 15mm. A month after seeking and finding a 35-70 lens for my manual-focus kit I have my favorite 28-105 again. When does it end? Obviously about two weeks after I'm dead, since I could go suddenly after placing a bid.

 So am I happy? Well, I'm a naturally happy guy so that doesn't quite fit - but I am satisfied, which is the equivalent in gear-lust terms.  The lenses in my possession only lacks a super-zoom and for now that's OK; the K-5 is a camera that still leaves too little missing to cause me any concern.

•  Today's AF kit: Sigma EX15, Pentax DA18-55, EX/DG50 macro, DA55-300. 
• The MF lightweight kit: Rikenon 28P, 35-70P, 70-150XR. 
• The MF 2-lens (or video) kit: Vivitar(Kobori) 28-105 and 70-150XR. 
• The alternate kit: Lumix G1, 14-42 and 45-200 OIS zooms.
• The full-frame-sensor kit? 15, 28, 50 primes, 28-105 and 70-150 zooms!

Good stuff all, and plenty of time to learn it all (assuming  I do not go suddenly!).  And now the film bodies, which now consists of two Pentax MEs and two Ricohs (XR-10 and KR5 super).  The Vivitar 28-105 came with a leather-wrapped ME 'SE', a special edition with diagonal split-image focusing screen.  Pretty cool, and now my lead body for the rare use of film.  I really want to learn more about the XR-10 that came with the 35-70 Rikenon though, it shows some interesting features from the early days of electronic cameras.  I need to download a manual so I can brush up, and to figure out what the button near the lens-mount does!

more coming soon ..

Pentax K-5: so it begins

Pentax K-5, DA18-55wr and DA 35/2.4

Several packages arrived at our house today, heralding a new era in my imaging 'career'.  Lately, 'career' has been more like 'careen' as I hopped from one K-mount camera to another in the past twenty months, attempting to have the best possible camera while paying medical bills.  My wife finally called my bluff and my birthday-present arrived a couple of weeks early (but just in time for our 5th anniversary!).  Now I can't justify looking at sales sites for a few years.. unless one of my lenses happens to fail :^( but we won't let that happen, will we?

my new lucky number? Fives are everywhere!

This month I will turn 55, and I plan to celebrate appropriately by picking up a Pentax K-5.  It will make use of both DA 18-55wr and 55-300 lenses, and I will keep the Fuji F550 as my pocket shooter.  And anniversary #5 is also this month!  Almost like a trend or something..