through the viewfinder

AN EVIL MIRRORLESS THIN PENTAX K-MOUNT CAMERA WITH A MIRROR

2011-01-26T15:44:00.002+01:00

Some camera forums are currently full of rumors of something EVIL comming from Pentax. Speculations rage back and forth about format, mount, size etc. As far as I've been able to figure out, this comes from some sort of interview with some Pentax representative who refused to exclude the possibility of a Pentax EVIL, and another interview with someone saying that IF Pentax launched an EVIL camera it would be different from the existing. These guys could be politicians! There may be little substance to this.

Three facts that speak against it is:

-Pentax is a conservative company.

-Pentax have been more faithfull to their SLR camera mount than any other company, keeping compatibility with the K-mount since 1975 up to date.

-More so, they have kept the same registration distance since the asahiflex in 1952 over their first m42 camera in 1957 to the K-mount cameras from 1975, 45.46mm, which enables the use of all lenses since 1952 with simple adapters without optical elements.

-No other camera company have been so dedicated to the interchangeable lens SLR camera. They practically invented the modern 24x36mm film SLR by combining the best from earlier German models, and they have produced SLRs in more formats than any other company: 24x36mm, 6x7cm, 6x4.5cm, 110 film, and in digital ages APS-C and the 44x33mm of the 645D.

I think with this background it can be excluded that Pentax would abandone the K-mount entirely.

But my last argument also tell us that Pentax in the past had the courage to run several systems in parallell (and now do again with the APS-C K-mount DSLRs and the 44x33mm 645D). And Hoya may be less conservative?

But does that imply that an EVIL from Pentax would need to use a different mount and registration distance, one of their own, or the m4/3, NX or NEX? The deep registration distance inherrited from the early German m42 cameras have so far limited the thinnest Pentax film SLRs to about 50mm (see Why my digital Pentax bodies do not fit in my winter coat pocket?), and the DSLRs with sensors, SR system, electronics and LCDs to about 70-75mm, more than twice the tickness of the thinnest current EVIL cameras. It appears that the K-mount is not compatible with a thin EVIL camera.

Or is there any way around that?

I might have a crazy idea: An EVIL mirrorles thin Pentax K-mount camera with a mirror.

Keep the 45 degree mirror but make it fixed. It doesn't have to flip up for each shot. Move the sensor to where the focus screen is located on a SLR/DSLR. Add to this a EVIL viewfinder. In my dream concept version I would skip the back LCD in favor of a camera as thin as 35-40mm, and make the viewfinder interchangeable so that one can chose between a "traditional" EVIL viewfinder and a waist-level 2.5 inch LCD with shades that can be closed over the LCD. Perhaps other viewfinders could be added, like a swivel LCD? With the EVIL viewfinder we could get down to a size of 35-40mm depths and about 85mm height. Give the camera a width comparable to a traditional SLR to make room for batery, a good grip etc. What you would have would be a modern LX. And as far as I can figure out, there would even be roomframe sensor. It will also be silent (no mirror flapp).

Now you say that the mirror will cause image degradation. But of course it will have Pentax SMC coating, so it will not degrade the image more than an additional lens element, and it will be sitting behind the shutter, so it will not be exposed to more dust than the sensor. Some possible advantages will surface from this construction besides the possibility of a K mount on a thin body. 1) Mount the mirror in a similar way as the sensor and couple it to the SR system. This will enable the camera to move both the sensor and the mirror to correct for camera motions. That may be what the in body shake reduction (SR) system will need to catch up with the lens based systems of Nikon and Canon, with the advantage that moving the mirror and the sensor will not distance the lens from the ideal optical solution, which is what happens in the Canikon constructions. 2) As far as I can figure out, being able to tilt the mirror will turn every lens you have into a tilt lens.

Now, I realize that this is a dream camera, but the main point is that one do not have to abandone the K-mount and the 45.46mm registration distance to make a slim EVIL camera. All it takes is a mirror. And it gives some interresting advantages. A more realistc and modest camera would use this consept, but with a back LCD, and APS-C sensor and a fixed EVIL viewfinder. That would also be a cool camera and a small package that would be gorgeous with the DA limited lenses. A modern MX. And I wouldn't mind if Pentax build both of them.

Perhaps I've been too optimistic here and there about the millimeters, I'm not a camera tech. But the main idea remain. Keep a mirror in the EVIL camera and you can keep the K-mount and still make the camera slimmer than any other K-mount camera. It certainly would be different.

Please note, this is not a rumor. I have no inside information from Pentax. I'm sure someone will use this to start a rumor, that is how internet works. But it is just an idea I had all by myself.

NO SPACESHIP LOOKING FOR HIM

2010-11-23T11:21:00.000+01:00

The weather is now about the same in Stockholm, as when this was shot a year ago. I am greatfull I do not sleep outdoor this time of the year, that a warm bed awaits me at home, food and familly. I was on the streets of Stockholm for a while this past weekend, almost a tourist, and saw quite many beggars, most of them I presume without a real home. Twenty years ago when I first moved to Stockholm and roamed the streets with my cameras, I rarely saw homeless or beggars. They are of course not as common as in truly poor cities, but they are far more common here than in the past. If you ask me, the first large change came in the the mid to late 90's. Now I think it has increased again the last couple of years. Is it an effect of the current policy to let sick and unemployed people fall out of the well fare system? Open begging gets more and more common, but people have alsa learned to ignore them, and walk by. There is no space ship looking for these people if just they can send an S.O.S. to the stars.

HUNTING BUTTERFLIES

2010-08-09T12:46:00.004+02:00

What you need to shoot butterflies? A camera, a macro lens, butterflies (obviously) and patience. There are is course rules that apply. Macro work results in thin depth of focus (DOF). Actually so small that you are going to want to close down the lens as much as possible or else you wont be able to fit a whole bug within the DOF. On the other hand, bugs move, so you can't shoot with as long exposure time as you may do with a still object, like a flower. Longer lenses results in thinner DOF, but it also change the distance you can work at. Supposedly, the same framing should result in the same DOF at a given apperture. Longer lenses makes it more difficult to hold the camera steady enough to get a sharp shot. Shake reduction has partly changed this, but the same rule applies, except that you now can shoot sharp at about two steps longer exposure time than before. But there is another rule that over-rules all these optical rules:

The relationship between the lens and the amount of patience you need. Most butterflies are shy and will leave if even your shadow touch it. The relationship is approximately

Patience = 1 / (f x f)

where f is the focal length. So a 100mm lens requires only 1/4th of the patience you need to shoot butterflies with a 50mm lens. A 200mm lens would make do with 1/16th of the patience.

However, the really long macro lenses are rare and usually more expensive. Pentax made two 200mm macro lenses, the SMC Pentax-A*200 f4 macro 1:1 (manual focus) and the SMC Pentax-FA*200mm f4 macro 1:1 (autofocus). The "*" denotes Pentax highest grade or professional serie. These are both considered among the best long macro lenses ever made, partly because of a high ability to produce a smooth bokeh that helps isolate the subject. Unfortunately both are out of production and a high demand on the second hand market and because these lenses are rare, results in high prices. The FA*200 was supposedly only made in 1100 copies for the whole global market, and some copies are for sure living a useless life among collectors, and others have been converted for use on Canon's EOS bodies. The only current lens in this class made for Pentax are the Sigma 180mm f3.5 macro 1:1 lens, but Sigma has problems producing enough copies, and the queue to get one is long. So what to do? When I sneak around with my 35, 50, 90 and 100mm macro lenses the butterflies and dragonflies escape before I get enough of them in the viewfinder, or I end up cropping too much to maintain quality. Sitting for hours at a popular flower waiting for a butterfly to land there do work, but that is where the "patience-equation" comes in. Sometimes I have patience enough, sometimes not, and to complicate things, even if I do, my wife or kids may not (and I don't blame them).

Until now I've been playing around with converters on my 90 and 100mm macro lenses (resulting in a manual focus 180mm f5 or a 170mm ~f4.8. Optically compromises, as always with converters, even dedicated such as in the case of the Tamron Adaptall 2 SP 90mm f2.5 macro 1:2, and rather slowis/darkish. So what to do? I don't have the budget for an A* or FA* macro.

The two first images are of a small tortoiseshell ("nässelfjäril" in Swedish) feeding on an oregano flower. Like the rest of the photos of this post, they are shot with a 200mm macro of another brand, on an adaptor, a lens corresponding to the manual A*200mm. We are talking about the Canon FD 200mm f4 macro 1:1 lens. As Canon totally abandoned their FD mount when going into autofocus with the EOS mount, the prices are much lower than corresponding Pentax lenses (partly because these are still fully compatible with the Pentax digital SLRs). I'm mounting the Canon lens with help of a SCOPTIC made FD-K mount adapter that can be baught on the web very sheap. To maintain infinity focus it has an optical element that "enlarge" the picture a factor ~1.4. This makes the lens a ~280mm f5.6, and cause some optical degrading (see this thread on the Pentax forum). But the lens element is easy to remove, and while I loose infinity focus, it focus up to severall meter away, which is enough for macro work. I lose inifinty but gain speed and quality, and the lens remain a 200mm f4 lens, though it is now capable of a little bit more than 1:1 macro (the adapter and the difference in registration distance between the K mount and the FD mount act as were they small extension tubes). I've either shot on manual with flash or on Tv and the lens stopped down to f8 or f11 in natural light.

Below follows a Cabbage butterfly (large white or in Swedish Kålfjäril) and a common brimmstone (citronfjäril in Swedish) feeding on a Silene chalcedonica. I've also got unprocessed with this lens shots of a silver-washed fritillary (silverstreckad pärlemorfjäril) and the European peacock (påfågelöga) that I may add to this post later on. More shots in my flickr and in a Pentax forum thread.

BOH!

PLUNDERING BIRDS

2010-02-17T22:23:00.001+01:00

I'm not much of a bird photographer. But when a whole flock of allied Bohemian waxwing and fieldfares ransakes our rowan tree right outside our kitchen window I just had to bring the SMC Pentax-DA 55-300mm and try it out on these brave birds. Some images are not top sharp, which may partly be ibecause I was shooting in the upper end of the 300mm range, but may also be blamed on inpurities in the window glass (if I had tried to open the window they would all have gone in a flash).

It took them less than an hour to plunder the tree. When they left there were not more than a handfull of rowan berries on this pretty large tree. The winter have been hard and long and 60cm snow depth does not leave much for them to eat besides what are still on the trees. We have put out some old apples for them now when the tree is empty, and some of the field fares have been there, but I haven't seen a single waxwing since they emptied the tree. Hopefully they found some other trees to harvest.

THE EARTH AIN'T FLAT AND I HAVE THE EVIDENCE

2009-11-03T20:56:00.002+01:00

K20D with the SMC Pentax-DA10-17 fisheye, stitched with PTGui from 7 originals.

This is Stockholm (capital of Sweden) shot from ~115m above sea level (you can hint the baltic sea in the inner archipelageo on the upper right, north-east). I'm standing on a ~12m metal frame tower on top of the elevator machine room (dark grey square) on top of the concrete tower. The elevator goes to the 20th floor, after which we have to climb three steep stairs indoor, a fourth outdoor up in the machine room roof, and then 12 m vertical ladder to reach the platform. The tower is used for radio communication and mobile phone networking.

From the platform my research group at Stockholm University samples the concentration of carbondioxide and aerosol particles and turbulent motions which enables us to derive the emissions of both carbondioxide and aerosol particles from traffic combustion to the north and west of the tower. In the south to south-east we instead see how the forest area takes up carbondioxide through the photosynthesis of the plants and how particles are deposited.

The purpose of this photo is to show the surroundings and the different source or sink regions for carbondioxide and particles around the measurement site. It will probaby be included in some posters on scientific conferences and some publication in scientific journals together with measured data.

I'm not completely happy with the result because after having taken some shot inside the machine room where we have our computer and data logging I forgot to decrease the ISO when I got up onto the platform, so I need to go there again with the camera. Then I will probably also try to use the SMC Pentax-DA15mm ltd. After this shot I changed the settings on my K20D so that the top display show the ISO instead of remaining pictures on the memory card. Hopefully it will help avoiding such misstakes even when I'm in a cold and windy place like this.

Some land marks: to the north to north-west are the central Stockholm including Södermalm and the old town. If you zoom in there are many familiar land marks for those who are familiar with Stockholm. Just north of the tower is what used to be a worn down harbour area, Hammarby-hamn, but is since a few years a fancy living, office and shopping area (large emissions from cars here). Just north-east of the tower surfaces one of the exits from the long traffic tunnel that goes south of Stockholm. The green area to the east and south-east are the northern end of the Tyresö park, a large protected green area, but as you can see, the living areas just south of the tower are also rather green with low emissions. To the south-west you can see the indoor arena "Globen" (the white globe), a well known land mark of modern Stockholm (no it was not where Hamlet put up his original plays).

I must say that I'm really impressed by the PTGui software. Powerfull, easy to learn, inexpensive. The demo version let you try most functions.

HOWER FLOWER

2009-09-26T12:04:00.117+02:00

Despite an amazingly long summer, the garden life goes towards autumn, but we still have hower flies and sun flowers. A while ago I played around with the SMC Pentax-DFA 100mm f2.8 macro with converter (for reach), flash with diffuser on the K20D, and I was pleased with the result. Hope you like them too.

BUMBLE BEE IN BOKEH (BIB)

2009-08-18T11:34:00.003+02:00

I've noticed that bird photographers call pictures with a bird in flight for BIF, and that sometimes people use the same abbreviation (for fun) for a flying bee or bumble bee. But this one is BIB, Bumble bee in Bokeh.

Is this just terrible to look like, or does it look like the garden does without your eye glasses? Or is it actually a bit of beauty? You see the bumble bee, right? I didn't until in post processing, so that is pure luck, but the play with bokeh is on purpose, although this is a crop where I've ditched the sharp flower to the left.

The lens is a ~40 years old German m42 mount Meyer-Optik Görlitz Lydith 30mm f3.5 full open. It is one of those zebra striped lenses. Luckily there are enough m42 versions around for you to get one rather inexpensive, unless you want to adapt a Topcon, Exakta or Pentina mount to your camera. I would say it is worth it. The bokeh is smooth like butter. It lets you paint like an expressionist with your camera.

Now, where is that flickr group where you can only post pictures where at least 20% of the surface is bokeh...I think this picture will qualify.

By the way, if this blog looks strange, some pictures are missing. It appears that flickr have currently got itself invisible photos...let's hope it will resolve soon.

MEDUSA UFO?

2009-08-18T10:58:00.004+02:00

Looking at these images one could wonder if this is a picture of a UFO or an alien from another planet, so different is this life from what I see around me every other day.

These photo's where taken at the medusa/jellyfish aquarium at Universeum (a sort of hands-on science museum) in Gothenburg, Swedish west coast. The low light conditions made me use the SMC Pentax-FA 50mm 1:1.4, which is very suited for this sort of conditions.

Yet another reminder that there is always good to have a really fast lens in the bag. This implies a prime lens, zooms are rarely faster than f2.8 and often slower. But even with only one focal length you can usually adapt to that (zoom with your legs), but if the lens is just too slow, you cannot do anything (except turning up the iso to 6400, but that rarely leads to a happy ending).

SHOOTING PEOPLE

2009-08-11T21:28:00.007+02:00

So far one could think from my infrequent blogging here that my main interest is macro photo. On the contrary, what I shoot most is probably people, not bugs. Since my first camera my main subject have been people around me. People I know, people I don't know. Sometimes I ask before I take the picture, have a dialog of sort, get to know the person. Sometimes, it is as much a moment that is the subject as the person, and I take the photo, catch the moment, before it is gone.

The first picture was such a moment. It is taken from a parking house two stores up. I was just focusing a 85mm lens on a young man and woman standing on the small square below while they were talking...not really intending to take a picture, looking for something more interesting...and all of a suddenly they kissed, and I pressed the shutter. The old Konica T3 film SLR in question was both scratching the film (which took some editing to hide) and leaking light which stole contrast from the picture. But it was evident when I saw the negative that I had to save this photo, because I happened to catch a perfect moment of love. Currently picking pieces from the failing camera to save another.

The second photo is shot with a 135mm, the second best 135mm Pentax made, the SMC Pentax 135mm 1:2.5, on a Pentax KX in a shopping center on 400 ISO black and white film. The women are participating in a sort of make up demonstration, so focused that I could shoot the picture without getting their attention. The lights around the mirror certainly help given that they surroundings were otherwise rather dark with only 400 ISO. Perhaps also a moment of love, but for what?

The third photo is shot with a digital Pentax K20D and the SMC Pentax-DA 10-17mm at 17mm. It represents a different approach. The first two shots are taken with help of short tele lenses that allow me to observe and catch the light, the moment, unseen. With the wide angle shot of the old man and the even older motorcycle, I am acting totally openly. He must see me when I take the picture, but he does not care or he only have eyes for the bike. Perhaps this shot is also about love...nostalgic love.

The final photo is taken this last spring on Tri-X film with the SMC Pentax 28mm 1:3.5 on the KX (yes, it is a favourite camera) capturing a busy and a less busy student at the Stockholm University campus. I'm standing right in front of them with the camera openly in my hands. But I am invisible, because it is not in front of my face, I'm apparently fiddling with it, but I can't be taking a photo...can I? Shooting with a wide angle from the hips are also a good method to catch a moment completely naturally. Perhaps this photo is also about love...unfortunately the love for cigarettes.

You may have noticed that all four examples I've chosen are black and white, even if their original had color. This is correct. To me, people have no color. It is easier to isolate and emphasize the important parts in a picture if you do it in black and white. So I believe. But there are exceptions.

CUCUMBER SPIDER

2009-07-02T02:38:00.005+02:00

Found this Cucumber green spider (Araniella cucurbitina or Araniella opisthographa, you need a microscope to see the difference) in an ambush in one of our daisys. At least I think this is the correct name. It was sitting on the inside of a net which was spanning accross the flower. What I like with shooting spiders are that they are very patient models. Very patient. This one also have hairy legs, but I think the nice colors makes it more pretty than the cross-spider. Not as pretty as the butterflies I've been chasing around here, but they on the other hand have no patience at all!

BUTTERFLIES, WHAT A STRANGE NAME!

2009-06-25T21:55:00.009+02:00

Such beautiful and fragile creatures deserves a beautiful name: fjärill (Swedish), papillon (French), perhonen (Finish), mariposa (Spanish), farfalla (Italian), schmetterling (German) ... the most beautiful I know of is the Danish sommerfugl (Summer-bird). But what about English? Butterfly? Flies are not on the same map in my opinion...more uggly than beauty...and I've never seen any summerfugl eat butter! But this blog is in English, so I will have to do with butterfly.

I've always admired the photographers who are able to produce artistic pictures of flying bugs, not only documenting the specie etc. It is hard enough to catch them in the finder, more so to get them inside the DOF, then you need to think about where the DOF start and end and what more that is inside it, what is behind the DOF in the bokeh, to think about composition, when the bug is flying here and there. Luckily many of them are preoccupied by some flowers or similar, which helps, but it's not easy. It appears to me, with my limited experience, that the most difficult bugs to shoot flying is dragonflies and their different cousins. Ohh, so nervous, manoeuvring like helicopters on steroids. Second position is occupied by butterflies. Even more nervous than the dragonflies, not so good on aeronautics, flying like if they were affected by Brownian diffusion. Worked with the laptop in our garden today, and on the nearby daises several butterflies landed repeatedly, but each time I stood up and reached for the camera, they left like frightened rabbits...

...but a while ago I cheated...
Butterfly wings have two sides that may look very different.

Not so bad...

Quite OK...

I know, far too busy background, but there were no alternaitve...or were there?

Dam grass straw!

How did I cheat? I went to the Butterfly-house in the Haga park in Stockholm with my kids and my mother. After an hour in the heat and high humidity, we were soaked and the SD card was full. Those butterflies are much bigger than the local wild species and they are so used to tourists that they doesn't care that very much about me and my lens.

FUN WITH DFA 100mm macro AND A TUBE - GREATER THAN 1:1 MACRO - OR A LADY WITH HAIRY LEGS

2009-05-19T15:31:00.009+02:00

I'm often amazed by macro photo's taken by some photographers. What appears most difficult to me is not the technical side: how to get the picture sharp enough, bright enough, with enough DOF etc, but the estetical side: how do you compose a photo in macro, how do you remember to select the background to get a good bokeh, when you are trying to track a non-cooperative bug?

I make my own humble attempts, mostly for the fun of it. Since our Swedish bugs are often not as large and nor as colorfull as many of those that that I've seen from for example the tropics, it will take some trick to impress with them. So what about macro greater than 1:1? That would give me a chance to both test the limits of the SMC Pentax-D-FA 100mm f2.8 macro lens and the new screwdrive/SDM autofocus tube that I've made out of a 2x converter.

Firstly, below are two shots of flowers from our garden, one of them some white Narcissus. These shots are taken at about 1:2 ratio. Then follows a single picture of a spider shot at near 1:1 using the built in flash. The real spider was not more than about 5mm in this position, legs included. Then I mounted the autofcous tube I've made out of an old Kenko 2x converter. It has both screwdrive gear and SDM contacts. With the DFA100mm macro it will of course focus using the screwdrive. Or will it? I had not tested it before. So it was interresting to see if it would allow autofocus to work on the lens. The tube is about 25mm. I think that results in a 100mm ~f4.2 lens with a maximum reproduction ratio of 2:1 (twice the real size).

And it did focus...most of the time. It worked best to set the camera on using just the center AF point. When focusing on a small spider in a net, it is not hard to understand that the camera might get confused when the spider is some 20cm away and the background behind the web was about 1-2 meter away. That caused some hunting, but as the web was moving in the wind (the spider sat thre calmly without being impressed by me or the camera), I was happy to have the AF.

Pictures turned out quite good with my standards. Below are two examples that turned out both in focus, OK exposed, and with a calm background with ok Bokeh. Handheld, a tripod would not have worked since the web was moving back and forth as much as 5cm in the wind, built in flash, 800 ISO, no cropping, only some minor changes in lightroom. It does look like a real monster, doesn't it? At 2:1 it cover about 50% of the width of the sensor, and does not have to stand back to any decimeter sized tropical spider, despite its mediocre 5mm in real size. As far as I can judge, this is a European garden spider (Araneus diadematus) aka diadem spider aka cross spider (korsspindel in Swedish), a female. A lady with hairy legs ;)

The flash caused some reflections in the web, but the lens combo appeared to be quite flare resistant. The first picture above is the only one with massive flare, but in this case it is almost a special effect. Finally, I took a walk around the garden to see if I could find some more motives, but the bugs were hiding. Except in the plum tree, where I was surprised to find that there were sitting an ant in almost every flower. I did not know that ants were eating pollen?!

MORE SPRING (THROUGH THE SMC PENTAX-A*135mm f1.8)

2009-05-17T14:32:00.015+02:00

The spring is advancing more every day. Now all trees except the realy old ones have leaves, and more and more flowers for every day. Still very few butterflies.

Took out my most valuable glass one morning this week, the legendary SMC Pentax-A* 135mm f1.8, to try it out with a dedicated SMC Pentax-A 2x-S converter. What can an excellent lens with a very good converter do. Usually converters are dissapoing since the result is always a step worse than the worst component, weather this is the lens or the converter. So a mediocre converter on a mediocre lens is really bad, and a good converter on a good lens is only mediocre. But what does excellent and very good combine into?

First I shot some Lilac flowers, plum and apple blossoms playing with the thin DOF testing the bokeh. Contrast came out better than with any converter+lens combo I have ever tried and the bokeh was usually smoth as well. Only on one of the Lilac shots did I get a bit of aperture blade reflexes. The resulting lens almost gives me a 300mm f3.5 (almost), which I belive is also by far a better option for birds than my old Tokina 400mm, even if I have to do some cropping.

I got some decent shots on a black bird while it was eating earth worms. Jummy! But his shy wife watched me with suspicion in her eyes from the bushes, and the curious tree sparrow (antenna sparrow?) watched us from the neighbours roof. These birds we have in the gardens in Sweden are not that colorfull and exotic, but they are fun to watch just for their behaviour.

FINALLY SPRING!

2009-05-05T09:52:00.016+02:00

We spent a fantastic weekend with my parents in law. Down there in south-western Sweden spring had come a bit further than here in Stockholm. Many trees, especially the birches, had just got tiny little leafes that were shining in a light green color. While driving down I realised that it gives the landscape a character similar to that in the autumn when the leafes go yellow. The contrast between the coniferous and deciduous portions of the forest are larger than in the middle of the summar season.

One of the days we took a hike to a lake nearby. It is actually an artificial lake created to get a drinking water storage for the area, and it is called "Storsjön", which translated to "great lake", not to be confused with the bigger namesake in norther Sweden. Despite being artificial, it is a nice hiking area with mixed forest on the beaches , some cliffs and a few islands. Good canoeing area.
After a good lunch, while the kids were playng in the water, I rested on the blanket we braught, looking up into the canopy of fresh yellow-green leafes ahead of me against a brilliantly blue sky I realised that this made a nice motive and got the camera.

All pictures are taken with the SMC Pentax-DA 35mm f2.8 macro ltd lens on the K20D, except for one taken with the SMC Pentax-DA 10-17mm fisheye, and the wood anemone that was taken with the Tamron adaptal 2 SP 90mm f2.5 on the 2x convereter (making it a 180mm f5 1:1 macro lens). For the anemone I also used the AF240Z flash on a macro flash adapter.

HOW THE WINTER STARTED 08/09

2009-01-16T00:49:00.018+01:00

This winter has in many ways been a dissapointment as a winter. Some first snow came in November, but melted away after a week. My kids were dissapointed.

It started so well that week in November when we got some 20-30cm snow in two days.
Since I suspected it would not last I braught the camera downtown when running som errand (K20D with FA50/1.4). Snow flakes falling in light often makes an interresting motive.

City square became a dumping place for the snow from nearby roads, and it did not take long before kids were enjoying the unexpected snow mountain. However, when we did approach christmas, the same square looked like it always does when it was used as a market place for x-mas trees.

WHY MY DIGITAL PENTAX BODIES DOES NOT FIT IN MY WINTER COAT POCKET

2009-01-05T00:51:00.008+01:00

What's this?

Well, it is a summary of the development since the first Pentax K-mount camera to the current digital SLR K-mount bodies from Pentax. My purpose is to show how the size of the camera bodies have changed with the technical development. In many ways the depth is the most important factor for where you can fit a camera (in which pocket). If you follow the time line you will see how the initial bulky analog K series bodies (that was basically Spotmatic cameras with a K-mount instead of the m42 thread) are replaced by the minimized M serie and A serie models. Then the size begins to increase with the introduction of built-in winder and auto focus. Pentax tried to turn the trend with the MZ series which mimic the old attempts to minimize the size of the M serie bodies, with the MZ-M being the last really small body (and the last with manual focus). Then came the digital era and since the electronics of the picture sensors are thicker than film, the size increased again, though Pentax has successfully tried to make the *istD serie bodies and the K-m among the smallest digital SLRs on the market. But despite this, the bodies have on average got much more bulky (~50%) than they were 30 years ago. So they don't fit in my coat pocket :(

Worth notice is that the respectively top models, (semi)professional or advanced amateur, of most body families: K2, Z-1 and Z-1p, *istD, K20D are larger than the rest of their families. The exceptions are the LX and MZ-S.

Next diagram shows camera body weight instead of body depth. If you follow the time line you will see how the initial heavy analog K series bodies were replaced with the M serie models. Then the size begun to increase with the introduction of more electronics and built-in winder and auto focus. Pentax turned the trend with the MZ series where minimized size and plastic materials replacing metal resulted in the lightest 35mm Pentax SLR bodies ever. Then came the digital era. While it is clear to me that the bodies must get thicker because the electronics of the picture sensors are thicker than film, I don't really understand why the digital bodies have to get heavier. But they did, despite all plastic. Must be all electronics and the fact that the Pentax DSLRs appear better built than the 90's SLR bodies, despite similar amount of plastics. The weight increased despite that Pentax have tried to keep the *istD serie bodies and the K-m compact. Despite all plastics that have replaced all the metal in the K, M and A bodies, we are back were we started: the K20D is about the same weight as the K2 was (top model of the K serie), and the K-m is only slightly lighter than the KM was 30 years ago.

I have not put trends for length and hight into graphs, but they are partly linked to the same factors as seen in these two figures, with some additional effects. The length takes a jump from 130-140mm to 150-160mm with the introduction of the built in winders, which Pentax manage to compensate for in the MZ familly. With the introduction of digital SLRs, the size of the smaller bodies scrink to 120mm or below because there is no need any longer to make room for a film casset to the left side of the camer (seen from behind), while the bigger models remain around 140mm, probably using the space for all the electronics needed in the upper end bodies. With the exception of the initial K familly and the LX (with the standard seaker, it is interchangeable), all early cameras are less than 90mm in height. Then with the intriduction of the built in flash from the SF serie and beyond, the height takes a jump above 90mm (*ist being the only exception). The current top model K20D and the previous K10D is above 100mm high. Not only does the built in flash add about 10mm, but the flash-prisma combo is often much bulkier in all directions than it used to be, which is very noticeable when I try to squeze even the *istDS into my pocket.

I bet that most camera brands (those of the original players that have survived) will show similar trends if you do the work to collect the data graphically, though some will be bulkier on average than the Pentax cameras. Olympus is likely the other manufacturer that will challenge Pentax in the smallest and lightest bodies. Canikon will be bigger with some exceptions, but follow a similar trend with the introduction of built-in driver, autofocus and digital image sensors instead of film. Worth remembering is that not all DSLRs would fit in the pocket even if the body is small, because the brand in question may not have small enough lenses...

In summary: They got shorter (some at least), but higher and thicker, and in terms of weight we are back were we started despite less metal in the bodies. They don't fit in my pocket any longer, not even the *istDS. Maybe the K-m will? On the other hand, my MX, Super-A and Program-A easily fit in my pocket with any of several of my lenses, and even the LX and KX can be squeezed down with one of the smallest lenses. So I will keep in having the MX or Super-A there with a 28mm or 50mm lens. While waiting for a thin enough Pentax DSLR!
And don't try to tell me to get a Olympis E-400-something. It is not a K-mount.

Data sources: Pentax own web pages and folders, and the marvelous http://www.bdimitrov.de/
I might have mixed up weight with and without batteries in some cases. These data are not always reported in a systematic way. It will not change the over all conclusions.

AUTUMN THROUGH THE SMC PENTAX-DA 35mm f2.8 macro limited

2008-10-14T02:19:00.006+02:00

I miss the summer, though the autumn so far has been mild. I miss sunny days and warm evenings, flowers, birds, bee's, bugs and everything else that has now died, flown south or went under cover. (The photo is taken with the SMC Pentax-DA 10-17 fisheye zoom.)

The last few weeks it has taken much more fantasy to find targets for my macro lenses, which was first annoying because I was still trying out the new DA 35/2.8 macro limited lens. However, there are still motives enough. A few flowers have not yet given up, among them the yellow marigold, and a red flower which name I do not know, and the star-shaped blue flowers which name is "gurkört" in Swedish.

These photos are taken hand held at high ISO at low natural light one morning in September, benefiting from the shake reduction of the K20D body. The DA35/2.8 ltd offers a lot of sharp details even at these conditions.

There are also beauty in decaying flowers and in the fruits. Especially if you take the trouble to visit them when there is rain, morning dew or frost to enhance their beauty.

A rosehip fruit outside the school of my children.

If you look carefully there is also still some life left. In the raspberry bushes some garden snails still climb hiding in their shells. How does it feel to be a snail having to suffer a body temperature of a few degrees in the autumn nights? What do they do when the frost bites at night? Die?
The beautiful leopard snail is quite frequent in our garden. With its patterns and stripes it is a much more tempting photo object than the plain brown or black snails.

Here I had to use the built in flash since there were just too little light available. A tripod and long exposure times would have been an alternative, but the snails are not all that slow.

My oldest daughter was to help me in the garden one day, but she came back from the cabinet were we keep our gardening tools complaining that there was a spider on her spade. In Sweden we do not have very big spiders, so this one was impressive from our perspective.

Let's use this spider to take a look at the resolution of the DA35 ltd and K20D combo by cropping first the spider, then the spider mouth. As you can see, within the shallow depth of focus, the image is sharp down to the tiny hair on the spider tentacles. All hands-free with the built in flash.

One of these cold and rainy autumn days we found a butterfly hiding in our guest-room. Perhaps looking for a warm place to hybernate? I had not seen a butterfly for at least two weeks, but to my surprise, the week after I still saw a yellow butterfly. But there can't be many left now. The last few crickets stopped singing in our bushes two weeks ago, which I believe is unusually late (no pictures, they always goes silent when I come sneaking with my camera).

My final shot is a very tired bee that I found on the front window of my car one afternoon. It barely moved, and did not want to fly away. I had to lift it carefully and place it on a leaf of a nearby bush. I am so happy to be a mammal with a constant body temperature when the winter comes!