Re: PESO: Some stupid sunflower, or something . . .
On 9/11/2011 8:38 PM, Larry Colen wrote: On Sep 11, 2011, at 5:11 PM, Walt Gilbert wrote: Heh. Work with ISO 1600 and especially 3200 for a while. You'll see noise all right. I can imagine. I very, very rarely go that high with my K-x, so I figure I won't even try with the K100D. I do like the camera a lot, though. I actually like the way if feels in the hand better than I like my K-x, and the vast majority of features that the K-x has that are missing in the K100D are ones that I don't generally use anyway. When shooting RAW, going over ISO 800 in the K100 doesn't gain you anything. Rather than boosting gain in the electronics, it just does the math between the A/D and the data file to simulate the added speed. It's a pretty fine camera, I must say. I *much* prefer the feel of the K100 to the K-x. It has several important features that are missing in the K-x, and even a few that are still missing in the K-r. In good light, i.e. ISO 200, I think that the sensor actually gives better photos than the K-x or K20. It's nothing tangible, but there is just something really sweet about how that camera performs. I was very bummed when I noticed the de-lamination in the viewfinder. I have to agree, Larry. I was really pleased with that shot, and it certainly looked different from what I'm used to getting out of my K-x, though I can't really put my finger on what it is. And, considering I've grown accustomed to peering through the haze of a delaminated viewfinder, I'm not missing a beat by using it as it is. I'm really looking forward to what it'll do with a piece of fast glass like my K 50/1.4. It's definitely an intriguing little machine. -- Walt -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
Re: PESO: Some stupid sunflower, or something . . .
Many thanks, Steven. It does look like it's been through a rough storm, doesn't it? We haven't really had anything significant around here since June, though. I'm at a loss as to why it's in that kind of shape. But, I do think it's a much more interesting looking flower that way. -- Walt On 9/11/2011 8:17 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote: I like a lot, Walt. It looks almost wind blown. On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Walt Gilbert wrote: Hi all, As you can see, I've adopted a minimalist image titling convention. It simplifies things. Aside from that, having packed up and shipped off my K-x to have the viewfinder glass (hopefully) replaced (hopefully) under warranty, I broke out the K100D Super that Mr. Larry Colen so graciously loaned to me while I was out visiting in his eminently beautiful state. I threw the old Tokina SZ-X 28-200 f/3.5-5.3 on there and fired off a few shots to see what it can do. I've shot maybe a total of 5 shots on that lens before, just to see if there was anything wrong with it. I have to say, I don't know why I haven't used it more. I'm extremely surprised at how sharp the thing is. Considering I got it in a bunch of about 5 lenses for which I paid a total of $100, I'm extremely pleased with it. http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/6134029469/ ISO 800, f/4.5, 1/500, Av Yes, the background is a bit desaturated, and I know some (most?) aren't fond of that sort of gimmickry. But, I'm a contrarian. In any event, comments and critiques are welcome -- even if it's just to bitch about the desaturation. I was just so pleasantly surprised with the sharpness that I had to share. Also, I'm pleasantly surprised with the noise at ISO 800 on the K100D Super. I was expecting much more than is there. Thanks, Larry! -- Walt -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Shopping for an O-GPS1
* The calibration is slightly awkward, particularly if you have a big lens on. Makes me feel like I'm gonna drop it... :-/ The guy I was shooting with today was quite amused, watching me juggle my camera to get the thing calibrated. You don't need to do the physical calibration for GPS tagging at least, you just need to do it for astrotracing, if I am not mistaken. The astro-tracing has a more accurate calibration (forget what they call it offhand) - AFAIK in both cases, the calibration is all to do with the direction stuff (compass, perhaps accelerometers). Obviously the astrotracer relies heavily on this being accurate; but also just the direction tagged in the image uses it. I'm not sure how off the mark the compass heading is without it. The actual GPS position (not direction), is unaffected AFAIK. - Peter -- 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.
Re: PESO - 'Joisey Shore'
Beautiful, Ken! Congrats too. cheers, Christine On Sep 9, 2011, at 2:47 PM, wrote: > I might have posted this image before, but I post it now to show an image > that was awarded second place in the color category at a recent local gallery > show. Around 150 images were entered in B+W and color category. > > I specifically entered this show since it was being judged by Monte Nagler, a > student of Ansel and a nationally know photographer. > > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14181152 > > comments appreciated. > > Kenneth Waller > http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: Astronomy Photographer of the Year 2011
Thanks for posting. Darrel & I really enjoyed this. Cheers, Christine On Sep 9, 2011, at 9:58 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: > Wow. Just wow. > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14792580 > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: Epson R3000
Don't know much about the R3000. I've seen the hot/cold press natural/bright white paper but haven't tried them yet. Cheers, Christine On Sep 11, 2011, at 4:51 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote: > > > Thank you Godfrey, for the response and congratulations! > > My brother just bought the R3000, and I was helping him to figure out > certain things. > I was surprised that > 1) how few profiles are available for it for download on Epson website: > http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/support/supAdvice.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes¬eoid=174005&type=highlights > (I am not sure if R2880 profiles are compatible or not - probably not, > as R2440 didn't work with R2880) > > 2.) There are these new papers from Epson "Hot/Cold Press Natural/Bright > White". Does anybody know what they are? > > > Igor > > PS. Finding things (printer profiles in particular) on Epson website > via its menues is close to impossible. Google search is more suitable > for that. > > > Sat Sep 10 16:21:51 EDT 2011 > Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > >> The R3000 looks like a good upgrade from the R2880 but that's all I >> know about it. >> >> Congratulations on your new daughter! > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: Muddlety and Fenway
Very cute! Cheers, Christine On Sep 10, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: > Muddlety on the right and Fenway on the left: > http://www.robertstech.com/temp/kitties.jpg > > We got them from local animal rescue group a week ago - they were > approximately 12 weeks old. After having been with us for a week > they're still quite timid and afraid of everything but getting bolder > by the day. > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: Pentax 67
Thanks for posting, Joseph! Cheers, Christine On Sep 6, 2011, at 7:34 PM, Joseph McAllister wrote: > Noe Dewitt, a fashion photographer and resident of lower Manhattan was the > person who took the photos with the 67II and a Polaroid 600E. His girlfriend > was Kerrie, an art director. I spent four hours trying to get a look at Noe's > images, with little success. > > I was able to find an image of Noe holding one of his prints up as if viewing > where the towers once stood. Being a pro photog, I'm sure he made certain > that no one would see images without a contingency fee of some sort. > http://www.smithsonianchannel.com/site/sn/show.do?show=139903 > > You can probably take a look at the whole program "On Demand" from the > Smithsonian Channel HD. If you cannot, I snapped some stills of interest with > the program on pause. Not great, but viewable. I will put them up on some > site somewhere later today. > > His girlfriend was not the one who donated a video camera to the museum. It > was the french documentarian who shot all day, starting with the image of the > first plane hitting the towers while he was doing a piece on the NYFD as they > checked for a gas leak in the sewer on the street. He spun around to try to > catch the plane he had heard when it was visible coming out from behind some > buildings. Video of a lifetime without hardly trying. > > > On Sep 6, 2011, at 08:57 , Bob Sullivan wrote: > >> Joe, >> I haven't heard of this before and hope you find links to the photos. >> Regards, Bob S. >> >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:52 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote: >>> 9/11 - a man and his wife who were in their apartment several blocks from >>> the twin towers, started filming shortly after the first plane hit the >>> towers. The woman had a Sony Hi-8 camera, and many of you have already seen >>> some of her footage in the reportage of the event over the past ten years. >>> The man, who had been asleep when she woke him up, cleared his head and >>> picked up his Pentax 67. >> > > > It's not that life is too short, it's that you're dead for so long.. > — Anon > > Joseph McAllister > pentax...@mac.com > > http://gallery.me.com/jomac > > > > > > > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: September PUG - Self Portrait Gallery is up
Excellent gallery! Thanks for all your work, Brian. Cheers, Christine On Sep 9, 2011, at 8:28 AM, Brian Walters wrote: > G'day all > > The September PUG is now up and a top gallery it is too - everything > from the conventional to the obscure and one or two mildly > disturbing > > There are several excellent contributions to the Open Gallery as well. > > You'll find the gallery here (as usual): > > http://pug.komkon.org/ > > (you may need to refresh your browser if you see the previous Gallery > there) > > + > > Next up - "Roads". > > Submit here: > > http://pug.komkon.org/submit/ > > Submission Guidelines here: > > http://pug.komkon.org/general/autosubmit.html > > > The main requirements are: > > * Max. pixel dimensions: 800 x 800 pixels > * Max file size: 300k > * Third party equipment is acceptable provided either the camera body or > lens used is Pentax. > > Also - as not all browsers are colour space aware, if you embed a colour > space in the image, it should be sRGB to ensure the image looks right on > line. > > > Cheers > > Brian > > ++ > Brian Walters > Western Sydney Australia > http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ > -- > > > -- > http://www.fastmail.fm - Accessible with your email software > or over the web > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On 12 September 2011 10:51, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > > Is the version of Camera Raw that you are using running process 2010 > or process 2003 code? That could be the issue you're seeing. The > Camera Raw raw conversion routines were significantly improved with > the introduction of Camera Raw v6.x (Process 2010)... i don't know > whether that runs in PSE8. > That sounds like something I should look into. It's v5.5 not v6.x. Presumably its 2003 code if there's nothing in between that and 2010 code. > Also, PSE8 can only utilize the basic mode operations of Camera Raw > ... another thing that might affect this issue. The Advanced mode > allows much more finesse in conversion settings and noise reduction > processing. > You sent me searching, and I've found that I can upgrade as far as ACR v6.2. Do I need to go through all the intervening updates, or can I just go straight to the highest version and skip over the others? > As I said in a prior post, there's much more to this than just what > sensor is being used in a camera. The whole capture to file to > processing chain has to be considered. > -- I'm on it :-) regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- 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.
PAW--Week 36--Young Buck
Caught this on a walk in the woods. Cheers, Christine http://aguilapaw.posterous.com -- 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.
Re: Shopping for an O-GPS1
On 11/09/2011 7:29 PM, Peter Loveday wrote: * The calibration is slightly awkward, particularly if you have a big lens on. Makes me feel like I'm gonna drop it... :-/ - Peter The guy I was shooting with today was quite amused, watching me juggle my camera to get the thing calibrated. You don't need to do the physical calibration for GPS tagging at least, you just need to do it for astrotracing, if I am not mistaken. -- William Robb -- 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.
Re: Shopping for an O-GPS1
On 11/09/2011 6:54 PM, Larry Colen wrote: Long story short, I'm getting one for my birthday. Yes, I'm stoked. I showed Zab the astro photos from the link yesterday and despite it being a bit outside our initial budget, she seemed to think that it would make a much better birthday present than the large capacity battery for my cordless drill that I had been slated to get. Before I spend a lot of time shopping for one: A) Has anyone on the list been recently shopping for one? Any strong recommendations on places to check out, or to avoid? I just bought one. I don't shop around, I just go into my local pusher, tell him what the item is worth and pay what he rings it up at. B) Has anyone that has one run into critical problems that made them decide that it wasn't really worth the money after all? It's been good so far. It doesn't work really well inside some buildings. If there is too much metal, it gets lost. It's eerie though, the first time you plug coordinates into Google Earth and it points at exactly where you were standing. -- William Robb -- 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.
Re: PESO: AAK
Believe it or not, this vehicle belongs to the heavy metal karaoke singer from an earlier PESO: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14097852 . The car matches the man. Dan Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > 5450 must be a police code for some sort of drug violation. > > Jack > > > - Original Message - > From: Daniel J. Matyola > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Cc: > Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 2:39 PM > Subject: PESO: AAK > > http://blogs.delphiforums.com/n/blogs/blog.aspx?nav=main&webtag=djm1963&entry=131 > > Comments are invited. > > Dan Matyola > http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola > > -- > 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. > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: PESO: Harvest Moon
That undergrowth be mature corn. Over the which I was not tall enough to see. We (my neighbor and I) chose the site because of the barn. We wanted a long view, over a field, something interesting (like the barn) mid-distance, with the moon low in the sky. But we miscalculated a bit plus there was low-lying haze on the horizon. The sun didn't set until well after the moon rose, by the time the moon looked like a moon rather than a white blob, it was too high in the sky to be able to make the barn a more prominent element. We'll go back tomorrow, the sun sets a few minutes earlier, the moon rises 20 minutes later, and we have a better feel for the angles now. Back to the undergrowth/corn: I have many shots taken from a few feet to the left, a point which allows me to look along the roadside edge of the corn field. And some from a bit further back, higher on the crown of the road we were on. I felt that this one that used the corn field as the foreground was less cluttered and allowed the focus to be on the barn and moon. Thanks for looking Jack! stan On Sep 11, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > Really well done exposure balance. If only the barn were somewhat more > prominent. The undergrowth gets in the way, but my guess is it's considered > needed to obstruct some unwanted feature(s).(?) > > Jack > > > - Original Message - > From: Stan Halpin > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Cc: > Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 6:40 PM > Subject: PESO: Harvest Moon > > From earlier this evening: http://smhalpin.posterous.com/harvest-moon > > The previous two entries in the blog include a color and a B&W version of an > egret. Comments on any or all are welcome. > > stan > -- > 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. > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On 12 September 2011 09:55, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > > So why was this reference to film brought up at all? Films have not > changed substantively since 1996 or so. > Now, now, Godfrey, you're not trying to mess with my mind are you? You brought up the subject of comparison with film, even after I'd stated that using digital cameras WASN'T like using film, On 12 September 2011 00:20, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 4:31 AM, Anthony Farr wrote: >> It's not like the >> "good ole days" when we could throw a faster film into a camera >> on spec, if a digital camera doesn't have good high sensitivity >> performance out of the box it never will have. > > There were never any 35mm films with ISO 800 or above that were as > grainless as most people obsessed with ultra high ISO sensitivity seem > to want to see these days. Nearly any DSLR class sensor camera made > since 2004 outperforms all ISO 800 35mm films on sensitivity and > noise. > There's the smoking gun, directly above, and it's in your hand. > > Discontinued as of October 2011, wow, three quarters of a year ago. > Ancient history, eh? > Huh? Would you like to run those dates by me again? Next month? Nine months ago? My brain hurts. > > Whether distributors in other geographies have > out of date websites is irrelevant. > The rest of the world may be irrelevant to you, but it's relevant to the rest of the world. Hell, you're in the rest of the world from where I stand. The websites aren't out of date, they're showing what's still in the catalogue country by country, and being sold as new product. > > You can't say a four year old sensor is obsolete then say that a known > discontinued product is current without contradicting yourself. > No contradiction has come from me. Where did I say it was obsolete? I did infer that it should be. It's not obsolete while Olympus, on its global website, still lists cameras using it as current in major markets, and I don't mean Turkmenistan, Mali and the Principality of Hutt River. However, in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, the Middle East, South Africa, Mexico, Singapore, "Other Countries" of Asia/Oceania which apparently includes the Philippines, in all these countries and more Olympus will gladly and proudly sell you an E-4xx or E-5xx as a new model, not a discontinued model. Perhaps the success of the Pen series means they're not too desperate to cash in their back-catalogue, but they're not doing their reputation any favour at all. Did you know that in Mexico and Latin America an E-420 is a "Profesionales SLR Digital"? That's a generous description, I'd say. > >> No, I'm aware of their history in the segment. And I'm aware that >> they sourced the core of these cameras, chassis, reflex assemblies, >> shutters, viewfinders &s. from Olympus. They put on the outer shells, >> installed their own processors and image engines, and fitted their own >> lenses. > > Not quite, but splitting hairs is a waste of time. > So you're suggesting that Olympus made the lot, then? (evil grin.) I've read that Olympus built the underlying cameras, you've read different. We won't agree. > > The L10 was under development and hit the market while the G1 and GH1 > were reaching first working prototype stages, likely with the older > sensor in them. Olympus has their own development schedules, etc. > That's SOP, but doesn't say much. Companies always have future models in planning, but they can't sell prototypes in shops. The clever companies are planning several model generations ahead. If that planning is so far advanced that substructures of it aren't available they just get along with whatever they have at hand. One department can't stop work and wait while another catches up, after all. But that is a sideshow to this discussion. The simple truth, proven by history, is that Panasonic used the 10MP sensor once and once only , then let it go. Olympus kept churning out cameras that it's still trying to sell around the world, for the most part in denial that it's yesterday's technology and should be presented as such. >> >> Both of those cameras are considerably more expensive in Australia. >> Our dollar may have surpassed the greenback, but our buying power is >> still much lower than U.S.A.'s. > > I can't help that. Buy them from New York then. > No thanks, no reason for me to contribute to the demise of bricks and mortar stores and send retail profits offshore. I like to see and feel what I'm buying. > > I don't know about you, but I never bought ASA 800 film because I > thought it would be grainless. I bought it so I could make photographs > in low light. > Ditto for me. Apparently you think I abhor grain/noise, and that I hold the view that visible high ISO noise defines a camera as crap. Not so, my grievance is with an uncontrolled defect, shadow banding, that just happens to go hand in hand with high ISOs. Here is what I wrote about grain/noise, "I have
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
I really don't care much what Google has heard of. I just want to see what the issue is. Mark ! Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" Subject: Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness I really don't care much what Google has heard of. I just want to see what the issue is. Sorry, trying to look at a JPEG image at this size is just about useless to see "shadow banding" ... I can't see anything from comparing the unprocessed image to the processed one with these tools other than than you rendered the processed one nicely. I don't even see a useful way to move from the first to the second image. Picasa just sucks rocks, IMO. I capture only with raw format, are you capturing JPEGs? That might be the issue. On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Anthony Farr wrote: On 12 September 2011 00:20, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I've never seen this "shadow banding" stuff, or at least I don't recognize what you mean. Can you provide an example? You'r very lucky to have never seen it. Google has heard of it. You'll find plenty of references there. Frank Theriault pointed it out in one of his pictures a year or two back. Here's a photograph with some serious shadow banding: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/UZHmptXW4qsffklRS3lX_aAuqTB9pnndhHCi9-Fvgfs?feat=directlink Here's my repair: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/a75LaelivUllMwgs9RCR56AuqTB9pnndhHCi9-Fvgfs?feat=directlink That's about as bad as it gets. The histogram doesn''t show any shadow clipping, although most of the tonal distribution is towards the left. Even so, there isn't much room at the right to raise the exposure. Another stop more would have seen clipped highlights. The grain/noise isn't as bad as this suggests, but the resizing seems to have worsened it. You can get a picture to display bigger in Picasa by closing the information panel on the right. Click on the >> near the top right corner of the picture. regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- 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.
Re: Shopping for an O-GPS1
DFS? Sorry, Dark-Frame Subtraction. The lack of multiple exposures seems annoying. Could it have something to do with the movement limitations of the sensor? I certainly wouldn't expect it to be able to exceed the total duration (ie movement limits) over all the shots. But within the, say, 3min window there's really no reason it couldn't take several exposures with the sensor tracking over the whole sequence. I did a quick bit of shopping around and ran into another annoying limitation. They don't seem to be currently available. They do seem to have released in an unusual region order with this one; usually these things are available in the US somewhat before Europe/Australia would see them. PentaxWebstore.com still lists them as on pre-order too. - Peter -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" Subject: Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Anthony Farr wrote: I couldn't find a camera with the 10MP Panasonic sensor that could reach iso6400. Olympus 410 and above, 510 and above and the Panasonic DMC-L10 all top out at iso1600. The Olympus E-3 tops out at iso3200, but its sensor is quoted as being 10.1MP and I can't verify that it's the same unit as the 10MP sensor. Easy to obtain higher ISOs: set the highest and underexpose by the number of stops required. Boost in processing. I was never interested in any of the E-xxx bodies because of the viewfinders, but the E-1, E-3 and E-5 are superb. Even the ancient E-1 with it's old, slow hardware now produces superb results at ISO 3200 and even ISO 6400 if you know what you're doing when you expose and process the raw files. The E-5 produces very clean results at ISO 6400 almost without any processing at all. Overall, though, this obsession with ultra high ISO settings and the desire for noiseless results is, to me, utter and complete nonsense. You don't shoot enought wildlife with a 600mm f4.0 lens ! -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- 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.
Re: PESO: Harvest Moon
Really well done exposure balance. If only the barn were somewhat more prominent. The undergrowth gets in the way, but my guess is it's considered needed to obstruct some unwanted feature(s).(?) Jack - Original Message - From: Stan Halpin To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Cc: Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 6:40 PM Subject: PESO: Harvest Moon >From earlier this evening: http://smhalpin.posterous.com/harvest-moon The previous two entries in the blog include a color and a B&W version of an egret. Comments on any or all are welcome. stan -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Muddlety and Fenway
Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" Subject: Re: Muddlety and Fenway Ken Waller wrote: Cute, cute, cute ! Are they litter mates ? Same sex? Yep. Littermates. They're both male (orange tabbies are almost always male). Ther're replacements for our Siamese guy who died at age 17 in June (after years with diabetes, asthma and various GI disorders) and our orange tabby who dies about a year and a half earlier (also about 17 years old). Our last cat - Sammy - was a female orange tabby. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/kitties.jpg -- Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- 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.
Re: Frustration & Aggravation - part 26
On Sep 11, 2011, at 6:41 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: > On 9/11/2011 7:46 PM, Anthony Farr wrote: >> On 12 September 2011 07:12, John Sessoms wrote: >>> When I moved out of my apartment I had a brand-new, unopened set of 4 AA >>> Lithium batteries. I know exactly which pocket, in which camera bag I put >>> them in. >>> >>> They're not there. They're not in any of my camera bags. They're not >>> anywhere in this house that I can think to look. >>> >> You'll find them in the last place you look ;-) > > Isn't that always the way. I usually seem to find them in the first or second place I look. The second or third time that I look there. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
Re: Shopping for an O-GPS1
On Sep 11, 2011, at 6:24 PM, Peter Loveday wrote: >> A) Has anyone on the list been recently shopping for one? Any >> strong recommendations on places to check out, or to avoid? > > Bought mine here in Oz, so I can't help you there. But some observations: > > >> B) Has anyone that has one run into critical problems that made them >> decide that it wasn't really worth the money after all? > > The GPS works well; though don't expect it to work that well indoors. It > will work in my house (not that I use it here, for security), though it can > take quite a long time to get a lock - if I wander in from outside it > maintains it ok though. Recently in some galvanised iron shed type > buildings, I couldn't get a lock. Nonetheless, pretty happy with the GPS > side of it. That's fine. Most of the time I'd do perfectly well with a GPS tagged shot of the outside of the building. > > The astrotracer function is interesting, and works well within its > limitations. But some (silly, to me) decisions with the software > implementation limit it a little. > > Specifically: > > * No ability to do any sort of multi-exposure for layering. Most > astrophotographers will take multiple short exposures rather than one long > one, for noise and dynamic range benefits. You can do a nice 3min exposure, > but you can't do over the same astro-track, say, 60 x 1sec exposures, each > with DFS (or not). DFS? The lack of multiple exposures seems annoying. Could it have something to do with the movement limitations of the sensor? > > * There is also no way to get it to do multiple traced frames in sequence; > note this is different to the previous point where I wanted to do multi > exposure in one trace, this is to do a time-lapse of lots of astrotraced > shots to put together in a video. The astro trace function only works in its > own custom menu, so there's no way to use the intervalometer with it. Right, > I thought, I can use an external interval remote with it on bulb/astrotrace - > but that doesn't work either, because for an astrotrace shot, you don't push > the shutter release, you press OK. That sounds very annoying. This is one of those cases where you should be able to connect it to an external device (smartphone, camera etc.) and have access to every feature. > > Like I said, silly little implementation decisions that severely (for me) > limit the flexibility of the function; which is frustrating considering the > function *does* work well otherwise. I did a quick bit of shopping around and ran into another annoying limitation. They don't seem to be currently available. Except for one that is being sold at approximately twice list price: http://www.langtoninfo.com/showitem.aspx?isbn=0027075189003 > > - Peter > > > > -- > 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. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
PESO: Harvest Moon
>From earlier this evening: http://smhalpin.posterous.com/harvest-moon The previous two entries in the blog include a color and a B&W version of an egret. Comments on any or all are welcome. stan -- 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.
Re: PESO: Some stupid sunflower, or something . . .
On Sep 11, 2011, at 5:11 PM, Walt Gilbert wrote: >> >> Heh. Work with ISO 1600 and especially 3200 for a while. You'll see noise >> all right. > I can imagine. I very, very rarely go that high with my K-x, so I figure I > won't even try with the K100D. I do like the camera a lot, though. I > actually like the way if feels in the hand better than I like my K-x, and the > vast majority of features that the K-x has that are missing in the K100D are > ones that I don't generally use anyway. When shooting RAW, going over ISO 800 in the K100 doesn't gain you anything. Rather than boosting gain in the electronics, it just does the math between the A/D and the data file to simulate the added speed. > > It's a pretty fine camera, I must say. I *much* prefer the feel of the K100 to the K-x. It has several important features that are missing in the K-x, and even a few that are still missing in the K-r. In good light, i.e. ISO 200, I think that the sensor actually gives better photos than the K-x or K20. It's nothing tangible, but there is just something really sweet about how that camera performs. I was very bummed when I noticed the de-lamination in the viewfinder. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
Re: Frustration & Aggravation - part 26
On 9/11/2011 7:46 PM, Anthony Farr wrote: On 12 September 2011 07:12, John Sessoms wrote: When I moved out of my apartment I had a brand-new, unopened set of 4 AA Lithium batteries. I know exactly which pocket, in which camera bag I put them in. They're not there. They're not in any of my camera bags. They're not anywhere in this house that I can think to look. You'll find them in the last place you look ;-) Isn't that always the way. I make it a rule to continue searching for a while after I find a misplaced item. That way things are never in the last place I looked. regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthily search. -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On Sep 11, 2011, at 6:01 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >> ... Oh come on Godfrey, you know that wasn't meant as an attack. > > The way you wrote it could be considered an ad hominem attack. As long > as you want to comment on my writing style, I'll comment on yours, ok? Sure thing, it doesn't bother me. Then again my hide is a bit thicker than some of the delicate souls on this list. > >> ... your writing style is not always the most conducive to love, peace and >> understanding ... > > You should be used to it by now. I could care less about love, peace > and PC smarminess in a discussion of camera technology and technique. > Good, clear information and directly stated opinions are all I find > useful. That's kind of where the understanding bit comes in. > >>> There are legitimate uses for extraordinary sensitivity. There's never >>> any point to being obsessed with it as some sort of Holy Grail. >> >> Unless, for example, it is the performance limitation that keeps you from >> getting the pictures that you're trying to take. > > I don't know how being obsessed with something as a Holy Grail helps > you in getting the pictures you want to make. People are always looking for technical solutions that'll solve all of their problems. Taking a look at cars you have: ABS, soon to be mandated, even though it has shown not to reduce accidents, just change the likelihood of types of accidents. Passive restraints: that were mandated, even though many of them worked worse than manual seatbelts. Four Wheel Drive: Useful for getting cars in the snow, or mud, to go forward, doesn't help their ability to stop or turn, and just adds weight on dry pavement. Hybrids: In most cases, a pure internal combustion engine car could have lower total overall cost and impact to the environment Most of them are actually useful to some percentage of people (though I would argue against expending resources to save the lives of people too stupid to put on a seatbelt, especially at the expense of my own safety), but are certainly not useful, nor worthwhile to the vast majority. I wouldn't say that I obsess over high ISO quality, but it's been the principal limiting factor that I run up against the most often. Two more stops of speed and I could use f/2.8 zooms in most cases where I now need to us f/1.8 and faster primes. Another stop or two of speed and I could use relatively inexpensive f/4 zooms rather than annoyingly expensive f/2.8 zooms, where I can get away with the zooms today. Even when you aren't pushing the performance envelope, a few more stops of sensor speed, and you could get todays performance without the cost and complexity of image stabilization. I've played with Marco's camera and Voigtlander 25/0.95 lens, and it's a really sweet system, but the poor high ISO sensor performance keeps it from getting as good of shots as I can with my K-5 and an f/1.8 lens. Even with the advantages that EVIL has for manually focusing in a dark room. I won't say that it's a holy grail, but in terms of image quality, I'd say that it, along with the closely related dynamic range, would solve more problems than just about any other measurable quantity. > > When I run into the limitations of my equipment, I work on thinking up > ways to extend the envelope so I can still make my photographs. Or you swap out to another system. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
Re: Shopping for an O-GPS1
Some other notes: * Even though it's hotshoe mounted, it doesn't prevent all flash usage. The PC sync socket still works fine, and in conjunction with an appropriate hotshoe cable set, I can use my 540FGZ (off-camera) in PTTL just fine. Using the GPS off camera likely would work too, but that could present issues with the compass direction, unless you kept it lined up nicely. Note Pentax say you can't (shouldn't?) use this with a flash - so use at your own risk. * The calibration is slightly awkward, particularly if you have a big lens on. Makes me feel like I'm gonna drop it... :-/ - Peter -- 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.
Re: Shopping for an O-GPS1
A) Has anyone on the list been recently shopping for one? Any strong recommendations on places to check out, or to avoid? Bought mine here in Oz, so I can't help you there. But some observations: B) Has anyone that has one run into critical problems that made them decide that it wasn't really worth the money after all? The GPS works well; though don't expect it to work that well indoors. It will work in my house (not that I use it here, for security), though it can take quite a long time to get a lock - if I wander in from outside it maintains it ok though. Recently in some galvanised iron shed type buildings, I couldn't get a lock. Nonetheless, pretty happy with the GPS side of it. The astrotracer function is interesting, and works well within its limitations. But some (silly, to me) decisions with the software implementation limit it a little. Specifically: * No ability to do any sort of multi-exposure for layering. Most astrophotographers will take multiple short exposures rather than one long one, for noise and dynamic range benefits. You can do a nice 3min exposure, but you can't do over the same astro-track, say, 60 x 1sec exposures, each with DFS (or not). * There is also no way to get it to do multiple traced frames in sequence; note this is different to the previous point where I wanted to do multi exposure in one trace, this is to do a time-lapse of lots of astrotraced shots to put together in a video. The astro trace function only works in its own custom menu, so there's no way to use the intervalometer with it. Right, I thought, I can use an external interval remote with it on bulb/astrotrace - but that doesn't work either, because for an astrotrace shot, you don't push the shutter release, you press OK. Like I said, silly little implementation decisions that severely (for me) limit the flexibility of the function; which is frustrating considering the function *does* work well otherwise. - Peter -- 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.
Re: Muddlety and Fenway
Littermates make nice pets. We had a pair a while back and they were so good together. On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 10:26 AM, David J Brooks wrote: > Very nice > > Dave > > On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 8:05 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: >> Muddlety on the right and Fenway on the left: >> http://www.robertstech.com/temp/kitties.jpg >> >> We got them from local animal rescue group a week ago - they were >> approximately 12 weeks old. After having been with us for a week >> they're still quite timid and afraid of everything but getting bolder >> by the day. >> >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > > > -- > Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. > www.caughtinmotion.com > http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ > York Region, Ontario, Canada > > -- > 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. > -- Steve Desjardins -- 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.
Re: PESO: Some stupid sunflower, or something . . .
I like a lot, Walt. It looks almost wind blown. On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Walt Gilbert wrote: > Hi all, > > As you can see, I've adopted a minimalist image titling convention. It > simplifies things. > > Aside from that, having packed up and shipped off my K-x to have the > viewfinder glass (hopefully) replaced (hopefully) under warranty, I broke > out the K100D Super that Mr. Larry Colen so graciously loaned to me while I > was out visiting in his eminently beautiful state. > > I threw the old Tokina SZ-X 28-200 f/3.5-5.3 on there and fired off a few > shots to see what it can do. I've shot maybe a total of 5 shots on that > lens before, just to see if there was anything wrong with it. I have to > say, I don't know why I haven't used it more. I'm extremely surprised at > how sharp the thing is. Considering I got it in a bunch of about 5 lenses > for which I paid a total of $100, I'm extremely pleased with it. > > http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/6134029469/ > ISO 800, f/4.5, 1/500, Av > > Yes, the background is a bit desaturated, and I know some (most?) aren't > fond of that sort of gimmickry. But, I'm a contrarian. > > In any event, comments and critiques are welcome -- even if it's just to > bitch about the desaturation. I was just so pleasantly surprised with the > sharpness that I had to share. Also, I'm pleasantly surprised with the > noise at ISO 800 on the K100D Super. I was expecting much more than is > there. Thanks, Larry! > > -- Walt > > -- > 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. > -- Steve Desjardins -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > ... Oh come on Godfrey, you know that wasn't meant as an attack. The way you wrote it could be considered an ad hominem attack. As long as you want to comment on my writing style, I'll comment on yours, ok? > ... your writing style is not always the most conducive to love, peace and > understanding ... You should be used to it by now. I could care less about love, peace and PC smarminess in a discussion of camera technology and technique. Good, clear information and directly stated opinions are all I find useful. >> There are legitimate uses for extraordinary sensitivity. There's never >> any point to being obsessed with it as some sort of Holy Grail. > > Unless, for example, it is the performance limitation that keeps you from > getting the pictures that you're trying to take. I don't know how being obsessed with something as a Holy Grail helps you in getting the pictures you want to make. When I run into the limitations of my equipment, I work on thinking up ways to extend the envelope so I can still make my photographs. Having extra-high, clean-resolving sensitivity to work with helps a lot. It wasn't available for 40 of the 45+ years I've been doing photography, so I learned how to get around that limitation for the most part. There are always limits. -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate, silliness
Wow. Another escalation of tangental rhetoric. if you look at the mu43 forums or rumor sites, you do see some that have elevated the high iso issue to the former status of MP. It can be pretty maddening simply because they can't see past it. Of course it matters for most and for some it's critical. OTOH, it should be no mystery that a body that can give decent results to 1600 can be someone's favorite camera. On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 5:17 PM, John Sessoms wrote: > From: Bruce Walker >> >> On 11-09-11 3:18 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >>> >>> On Sep 10, 2011, at 10:19 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Overall, though, this obsession with ultra high ISO settings and the desire for noiseless results is, to me, utter and complete nonsense. >>> >>> I only ever use my computer to write plain ASCII text, so this desire for >>> fast clocks speeds and graphical interfaces, to me, utter and complete >>> nonsense. >>> >>> Godfrey, you might get into fewer arguments if you phrased things more >>> like: [...] >> >> Now where would be the fun in that? If fewer arguments was a goal, >> there wouldn't be anyone here. >> >> > > I think our goal should be to trade quantity for quality. > > >>> By the way, do you still have a link to that post you made after >>> photographing an indoors event, where you commented that your then current >>> camera was right on the edge of its performance envelope? >>> >>> Frankly, with the K-5, I finally have a camera that meets the minimum >>> performance that I need in terms of high ISO and low light noise, but I >>> still find myself missing shots because it isn't clean enough at a high >>> enough ISO. >> >> Larry, what you need to do is get a hold of Kubrick's modified Zeiss >> f/0.7 50mm glass ... >> >> http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/ac/len/page1.htm >> >> And I'd like to borrow it after you. >> >> -bmw > > -- > 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. > -- Steve Desjardins -- 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.
Shopping for an O-GPS1
Long story short, I'm getting one for my birthday. Yes, I'm stoked. I showed Zab the astro photos from the link yesterday and despite it being a bit outside our initial budget, she seemed to think that it would make a much better birthday present than the large capacity battery for my cordless drill that I had been slated to get. Before I spend a lot of time shopping for one: A) Has anyone on the list been recently shopping for one? Any strong recommendations on places to check out, or to avoid? B) Has anyone that has one run into critical problems that made them decide that it wasn't really worth the money after all? -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Anthony Farr wrote: > That was an unanticipated consequence of the permissions that I'd set > for this album. The direct links to the pictures don't let you > navigate away from them to other restricted pictures. If you want to > toggle between pictures this link will take you to the album, > https://picasaweb.google.com/FarrAnthony/ShadowBanding?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCPfPt66UxvTwvQE&feat=directlink > > then when you view a picture you'll have the navigation arrows > available. Another lesson I've learned about Picasa. Oh don't worry: Picasa still sucks rocks. Unfortunately, the image size you're presenting is too small to understand what I'm seeing, but if it's as large as you can post, so be it. >> I capture only with raw format, are you capturing JPEGs? That might be >> the issue. >> > > These are raw captures. The unedited picture is a straight conversion > to jpeg by ACR and PSE8 with the parameters at default (not zero). My > experience is that noise is better controlled when shooting jpeg, but > the reduced exposure latitude and limited recovery potential inherent > in jpeg means I almost never use them, unless an instant result > out-of-the-camera is called for. Is the version of Camera Raw that you are using running process 2010 or process 2003 code? That could be the issue you're seeing. The Camera Raw raw conversion routines were significantly improved with the introduction of Camera Raw v6.x (Process 2010)... i don't know whether that runs in PSE8. Also, PSE8 can only utilize the basic mode operations of Camera Raw ... another thing that might affect this issue. The Advanced mode allows much more finesse in conversion settings and noise reduction processing. As I said in a prior post, there's much more to this than just what sensor is being used in a camera. The whole capture to file to processing chain has to be considered. -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On Sep 11, 2011, at 5:04 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >> I only ever use my computer to write plain ASCII text, so this desire for >> fast clocks speeds and graphical interfaces, to me, utter and complete >> nonsense. > > So stick with a Linux or UNIX system running in the terminal. Why > complain about it? No one's stopping you from doing so. Do I really need to explain that I wrote the above as a metaphor? That just because some performance limitation doesn't significantly affect you doesn't mean that it's not vitally important to some people. > >> Godfrey, you might get into fewer arguments if you phrased things more like: >> I only ever photograph still moving things in good light, and since I'm >> more interested in artistic effects than image quality, I don't really need >> high ISO. > > Because it's not true. I often do need ISO 800-ISO 1600. Even ISO 3200 > has proven useful once in a great while. I've never *needed* ISO > 6400-ISO 12800 ... Ever ... although I've used them to see what they > did. > > I am not arguing. We're having a discussion. Participate if you care > to, but cut it with the ad hominem bullshit, ok? Oh come on Godfrey, you know that wasn't meant as an attack. We've both seen, and made, far better attacks than that. I was pointing out that your writing style is not always the most conducive to love, peace and understanding, and that it often comes off as your saying that there is no reason for anybody to have different needs from yours. >> By the way, do you still have a link to that post you made after >> photographing an indoors event, where you commented that your then current >> camera was right on the edge of its performance envelope? > > I've taken that one down, I think. For that event, I was shooting at > ISO 800 as the assignment needed color and that camera, with the raw > converter of LR2, didn't pass muster for color work at ISO 1600. With > LR3's better raw converter, no problem: I could have used ISO 1600, > that would have done the job nicely. The camera was on the edge of > its performance envelope more on the basis of its responsiveness and > viewfinder than because of its sensitivity. Excuse me, I misremembered which limitations you were referring to. > > There are legitimate uses for extraordinary sensitivity. There's never > any point to being obsessed with it as some sort of Holy Grail. Unless, for example, it is the performance limitation that keeps you from getting the pictures that you're trying to take. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On 12 September 2011 09:43, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > I really don't care much what Google has heard of. I just want to see > what the issue is. > I suggested Google to illustrate that it was a known issue, not something I'd invented for the sake of an argument. > Sorry, trying to look at a JPEG image at this size is just about > useless to see "shadow banding" ... I can't see anything from > comparing the unprocessed image to the processed one with these tools > other than than you rendered the processed one nicely. I don't even > see a useful way to move from the first to the second image. Picasa > just sucks rocks, IMO. > That was an unanticipated consequence of the permissions that I'd set for this album. The direct links to the pictures don't let you navigate away from them to other restricted pictures. If you want to toggle between pictures this link will take you to the album, https://picasaweb.google.com/FarrAnthony/ShadowBanding?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCPfPt66UxvTwvQE&feat=directlink then when you view a picture you'll have the navigation arrows available. Another lesson I've learned about Picasa. > I capture only with raw format, are you capturing JPEGs? That might be > the issue. > These are raw captures. The unedited picture is a straight conversion to jpeg by ACR and PSE8 with the parameters at default (not zero). My experience is that noise is better controlled when shooting jpeg, but the reduced exposure latitude and limited recovery potential inherent in jpeg means I almost never use them, unless an instant result out-of-the-camera is called for. I'm sorry, but this is the largest size I'll be uploading this picture. I know more pixels are better ;-) but the picture is from a private rehearsal and shouldn't be published. You won't tell anyone, will you? regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- 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.
Re: PESO: Some stupid sunflower, or something . . .
On 9/11/2011 3:47 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: On 11-09-10 7:24 PM, Walt Gilbert wrote: Hi all, As you can see, I've adopted a minimalist image titling convention. It simplifies things. Aside from that, having packed up and shipped off my K-x to have the viewfinder glass (hopefully) replaced (hopefully) under warranty, I broke out the K100D Super that Mr. Larry Colen so graciously loaned to me while I was out visiting in his eminently beautiful state. I threw the old Tokina SZ-X 28-200 f/3.5-5.3 on there and fired off a few shots to see what it can do. I've shot maybe a total of 5 shots on that lens before, just to see if there was anything wrong with it. I have to say, I don't know why I haven't used it more. I'm extremely surprised at how sharp the thing is. Considering I got it in a bunch of about 5 lenses for which I paid a total of $100, I'm extremely pleased with it. http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/6134029469/ ISO 800, f/4.5, 1/500, Av Yes, the background is a bit desaturated, and I know some (most?) aren't fond of that sort of gimmickry. But, I'm a contrarian. I like it a lot, Walt. I also like the background texture/grain in that. Did you add that in PP? Thanks, Bruce! That grain is straight out of the camera. The only change I made was auto-leveling, which for some reason brought out a lot of cyan, which I desaturated out. I actually tried to de-noise it, but it looked much better without the noise reduction, so I undid it. In any event, comments and critiques are welcome -- even if it's just to bitch about the desaturation. I was just so pleasantly surprised with the sharpness that I had to share. Also, I'm pleasantly surprised with the noise at ISO 800 on the K100D Super. I was expecting much more than is there. Thanks, Larry! -- Walt Heh. Work with ISO 1600 and especially 3200 for a while. You'll see noise all right. I can imagine. I very, very rarely go that high with my K-x, so I figure I won't even try with the K100D. I do like the camera a lot, though. I actually like the way if feels in the hand better than I like my K-x, and the vast majority of features that the K-x has that are missing in the K100D are ones that I don't generally use anyway. It's a pretty fine camera, I must say. -- Walt -bmw -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > I only ever use my computer to write plain ASCII text, so this desire for > fast clocks speeds and graphical interfaces, to me, utter and complete > nonsense. So stick with a Linux or UNIX system running in the terminal. Why complain about it? No one's stopping you from doing so. > Godfrey, you might get into fewer arguments if you phrased things more like: > I only ever photograph still moving things in good light, and since I'm more > interested in artistic effects than image quality, I don't really need high > ISO. Because it's not true. I often do need ISO 800-ISO 1600. Even ISO 3200 has proven useful once in a great while. I've never *needed* ISO 6400-ISO 12800 ... Ever ... although I've used them to see what they did. I am not arguing. We're having a discussion. Participate if you care to, but cut it with the ad hominem bullshit, ok? > By the way, do you still have a link to that post you made after > photographing an indoors event, where you commented that your then current > camera was right on the edge of its performance envelope? I've taken that one down, I think. For that event, I was shooting at ISO 800 as the assignment needed color and that camera, with the raw converter of LR2, didn't pass muster for color work at ISO 1600. With LR3's better raw converter, no problem: I could have used ISO 1600, that would have done the job nicely. The camera was on the edge of its performance envelope more on the basis of its responsiveness and viewfinder than because of its sensitivity. There are legitimate uses for extraordinary sensitivity. There's never any point to being obsessed with it as some sort of Holy Grail. > Frankly, with the K-5, I finally have a camera that meets the minimum > performance that I need in terms of high ISO and low light noise, but I still > find myself missing shots because it isn't clean enough at a high enough ISO. Good for you. -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Anthony Farr wrote: > That was then and this is now. I'm not comparing my camera's > performance against film in 2001, I'm comparing it against its direct > competitors sold at the same time. So why was this reference to film brought up at all? Films have not changed substantively since 1996 or so. >> Two to three years is "too long"? Do you want to buy a new camera >> every six months? >> > > 2007 was 4 years ago, Olympus's current E-4xx and E-5xx series cameras > are only minor updates of the cameras that introduced the 10MP CMOS > sensor from Panasonic, but they're still listed as current models in > many countries on the Olympus global website. Discontinued as of October 2011, wow, three quarters of a year ago. Ancient history, eh? Whether distributors in other geographies have out of date websites is irrelevant. You can't say a four year old sensor is obsolete then say that a known discontinued product is current without contradicting yourself. > No, I'm aware of their history in the segment. And I'm aware that > they sourced the core of these cameras, chassis, reflex assemblies, > shutters, viewfinders &s. from Olympus. They put on the outer shells, > installed their own processors and image engines, and fitted their own > lenses. Not quite, but splitting hairs is a waste of time. > What I found worth mention was that Panasonic only used the 10MP > sensor in a single model of their own. Just one year later their next > 4/3 camera had the new 12.3MP sensor. It was as if they couldn't move > on quickly enough. So should have Olympus. The L10 was under development and hit the market while the G1 and GH1 were reaching first working prototype stages, likely with the older sensor in them. Olympus has their own development schedules, etc. >> An E-5 is MSRP at $1699 and currently sells for $1499. A Pentax K5 >> sells for $1199 including a $300 discount at B&H. If a school lunch >> costs $2, your son will need to miss 150 of them so you can shoot with >> an Olympus E-5. > > Both of those cameras are considerably more expensive in Australia. > Our dollar may have surpassed the greenback, but our buying power is > still much lower than U.S.A.'s. I can't help that. Buy them from New York then. >> Since the manufacturers and marketeers are the ones who incited the >> dual obsessions of megapixels and sensitivity, they have to deal with >> what they've created. >> >> I could care less ... I make photographs with the equipment I evaluate >> to suit my purposes and don't worry about what manufacturers or >> salesmen worry about. >> > > Speed, grain and sharpness were ever the selling points of films. Now > it's sensitivity, noise and pixel count of cameras. What's different? I don't know about you, but I never bought ASA 800 film because I thought it would be grainless. I bought it so I could make photographs in low light. > Some customers want the best and never mind the cost. Some want the > cheapest and never mind the quality. I want good value for money. > When I hand over my hard-earned to a company I've also bought the > right to judge their performance. Go ahead, judge all you want. I'll express my opinions too. >> "... Equipment often gets in the way of Photography. ..." > > I've seen very few photographs taken without equipment. > On second thought, make that none. That doesn't mean it doesn't often get in the way. Hmm. ... I guess you've never seen or made a photogram. -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- 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.
Re: Frustration & Aggravation - part 26
On 12 September 2011 07:12, John Sessoms wrote: > When I moved out of my apartment I had a brand-new, unopened set of 4 AA > Lithium batteries. I know exactly which pocket, in which camera bag I put > them in. > > They're not there. They're not in any of my camera bags. They're not > anywhere in this house that I can think to look. > You'll find them in the last place you look ;-) I make it a rule to continue searching for a while after I find a misplaced item. That way things are never in the last place I looked. regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
I really don't care much what Google has heard of. I just want to see what the issue is. Sorry, trying to look at a JPEG image at this size is just about useless to see "shadow banding" ... I can't see anything from comparing the unprocessed image to the processed one with these tools other than than you rendered the processed one nicely. I don't even see a useful way to move from the first to the second image. Picasa just sucks rocks, IMO. I capture only with raw format, are you capturing JPEGs? That might be the issue. On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Anthony Farr wrote: > On 12 September 2011 00:20, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: >> >> I've never seen this "shadow banding" stuff, or at least I don't >> recognize what you mean. Can you provide an example? >> > > You'r very lucky to have never seen it. Google has heard of it. > You'll find plenty of references there. Frank Theriault pointed it > out in one of his pictures a year or two back. > > Here's a photograph with some serious shadow banding: > https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/UZHmptXW4qsffklRS3lX_aAuqTB9pnndhHCi9-Fvgfs?feat=directlink > > Here's my repair: > https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/a75LaelivUllMwgs9RCR56AuqTB9pnndhHCi9-Fvgfs?feat=directlink > > That's about as bad as it gets. The histogram doesn''t show any > shadow clipping, although most of the tonal distribution is towards > the left. Even so, there isn't much room at the right to raise the > exposure. Another stop more would have seen clipped highlights. > > The grain/noise isn't as bad as this suggests, but the resizing seems > to have worsened it. > > You can get a picture to display bigger in Picasa by closing the > information panel on the right. Click on the >> near the top right > corner of the picture. > > regards, Anthony > > "Of what use is lens and light > to those who lack in mind and sight" > (Anon) > > -- > 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. > -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- 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.
Re: Frustration & Aggravation - part 26
Tell he you know exactly where they were, but SOMEONE moved them. Also, don't tell her when you do find them exactly where you really put them. Jack - Original Message - From: Tim Bray To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Cc: Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 4:13 PM Subject: Re: Frustration & Aggravation - part 26 The only thing that could make this worse is a spouse, saying in an understanding tone of voice "Where did you seem them last?" -T On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > As is invariably the case with me, you'll find them, eventually, exactly > where you put them. > > Jack > > > - Original Message - > From: John Sessoms > To: pdml@pdml.net > Cc: > Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 2:12 PM > Subject: Frustration & Aggravation - part 26 > > When I moved out of my apartment I had a brand-new, unopened set of 4 AA > Lithium batteries. I know exactly which pocket, in which camera bag I put > them in. > > They're not there. They're not in any of my camera bags. They're not anywhere > in this house that I can think to look. > > I'll have to go to the store and buy more. > > If you never hear from me again, you'll know I tripped over them and broke my > fool neck walking in the front door. > > -- 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. > > -- > 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. > -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Frustration & Aggravation - part 26
The only thing that could make this worse is a spouse, saying in an understanding tone of voice "Where did you seem them last?" -T On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > As is invariably the case with me, you'll find them, eventually, exactly > where you put them. > > Jack > > > - Original Message - > From: John Sessoms > To: pdml@pdml.net > Cc: > Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 2:12 PM > Subject: Frustration & Aggravation - part 26 > > When I moved out of my apartment I had a brand-new, unopened set of 4 AA > Lithium batteries. I know exactly which pocket, in which camera bag I put > them in. > > They're not there. They're not in any of my camera bags. They're not anywhere > in this house that I can think to look. > > I'll have to go to the store and buy more. > > If you never hear from me again, you'll know I tripped over them and broke my > fool neck walking in the front door. > > -- 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. > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: Additional questions about screen calibrators
Spyder3 pro works fine with multiple monitors, I have a couple different outboards that I plug into my mac and they're all hunky dory. The software is kind of clumsy and stupid to use, but it gets you there. -T On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote: > > > Hello All! > > There many useful suggestions and responses to my question about screen > calibrators last month. > > I've got a step closer to buying one in the sense that I think I > narrowed my choice to 2-3 models: > Spyder3 Pro or Elite > and > X-rite i1Display Pro or i1Display 2. > > As far as I understand, the differense between Spyder3 Pro and Elite > is just in the software (B&H actually sells "upgrade" CD from Pro to > Elite). The main difference I can see is that Elite software can handle > projectors. (This, while is not the primary goal for me, can be useful, > as I occasionally give presentation with slide shows.) > > 1. What I cannot understand is whether Pro or Elite can handle multiple > monitors, and if they do, - how do they do this: do they create separate > profiles for each monitor? > > 2. The way somebody mentioned that Spyder3 Pro/Elite takes care of the > ambient luminance is that it offers the user options of what to do > (add/do a different calibration or adjust the lights). > Is it different from how other calibrators deal with the ambient luminance? > (in particular X-rite i1Display devices?) Does X_rite i1Display change > the calibration automatically when the ambient luminance changes? > > 3. Is the hardware (the device) different for i1 Display Pro and 2 > in the functionality? What is the difference? > > 4. Besides i1Display 2 (which is discontinued) not being able to deal > with projectors, what other features does lack, compared to the Pro version? > > 5. If I understand correctly, i1 Display systems allow comparing > (measuring) the prints to the display, and adjusting the display > calibration that way. Is this correct? > > 6. On Amazon, one of the reviews says that using i1 Display 2 with 2 > monitors on one card was not trivial. Is that right? > If somebody is using i1 Display Pro -- is it still the case? > > All and any inputs are greatly appreciated. > > Thank you, > > Igor > > > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: Additional questions about screen calibrators
On 2011-09-11 17:54, Igor Roshchin wrote: 1. What I cannot understand is whether Pro or Elite can handle multiple monitors, and if they do, - how do they do this: do they create separate profiles for each monitor? Spyder 3 Pro supports multiple monitors, each with their own profile. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- 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.
Re: PESO: AAK
5450 must be a police code for some sort of drug violation. Jack - Original Message - From: Daniel J. Matyola To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Cc: Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 2:39 PM Subject: PESO: AAK http://blogs.delphiforums.com/n/blogs/blog.aspx?nav=main&webtag=djm1963&entry=131 Comments are invited. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Frustration & Aggravation - part 26
As is invariably the case with me, you'll find them, eventually, exactly where you put them. Jack - Original Message - From: John Sessoms To: pdml@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 2:12 PM Subject: Frustration & Aggravation - part 26 When I moved out of my apartment I had a brand-new, unopened set of 4 AA Lithium batteries. I know exactly which pocket, in which camera bag I put them in. They're not there. They're not in any of my camera bags. They're not anywhere in this house that I can think to look. I'll have to go to the store and buy more. If you never hear from me again, you'll know I tripped over them and broke my fool neck walking in the front door. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: the body I wish pentax would build
On Sep 11, 2011, at 5:30 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: > We talked about lenses but there is something needed in bodires. > I was remimded of this recently when my son got his hands > on a Fiji GA645. I had forgotten how nice that vertical frame > was for shooting people. You can rotate the camera yourself. Just turn it 90 degrees counterclockwise. And if you have the battery grip, you'll have controls and a shutter button right up there on top. Paul > What Pentax could do is (a) rotate the frame to a vertical > orientation or (b) create a square sensor. (A) would be great for shootimg > people > and (b) would fill the Blad niche. (A) would excite me. > > Sincerely, > > Collin Brendemuehl > "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose" > -- Jim Elliott > > > > > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Additional questions about screen calibrators
Hello All! There many useful suggestions and responses to my question about screen calibrators last month. I've got a step closer to buying one in the sense that I think I narrowed my choice to 2-3 models: Spyder3 Pro or Elite and X-rite i1Display Pro or i1Display 2. As far as I understand, the differense between Spyder3 Pro and Elite is just in the software (B&H actually sells "upgrade" CD from Pro to Elite). The main difference I can see is that Elite software can handle projectors. (This, while is not the primary goal for me, can be useful, as I occasionally give presentation with slide shows.) 1. What I cannot understand is whether Pro or Elite can handle multiple monitors, and if they do, - how do they do this: do they create separate profiles for each monitor? 2. The way somebody mentioned that Spyder3 Pro/Elite takes care of the ambient luminance is that it offers the user options of what to do (add/do a different calibration or adjust the lights). Is it different from how other calibrators deal with the ambient luminance? (in particular X-rite i1Display devices?) Does X_rite i1Display change the calibration automatically when the ambient luminance changes? 3. Is the hardware (the device) different for i1 Display Pro and 2 in the functionality? What is the difference? 4. Besides i1Display 2 (which is discontinued) not being able to deal with projectors, what other features does lack, compared to the Pro version? 5. If I understand correctly, i1 Display systems allow comparing (measuring) the prints to the display, and adjusting the display calibration that way. Is this correct? 6. On Amazon, one of the reviews says that using i1 Display 2 with 2 monitors on one card was not trivial. Is that right? If somebody is using i1 Display Pro -- is it still the case? All and any inputs are greatly appreciated. Thank you, Igor -- 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.
Re: Epson R3000
Thank you Godfrey, for the response and congratulations! My brother just bought the R3000, and I was helping him to figure out certain things. I was surprised that 1) how few profiles are available for it for download on Epson website: http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/support/supAdvice.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes¬eoid=174005&type=highlights (I am not sure if R2880 profiles are compatible or not - probably not, as R2440 didn't work with R2880) 2.) There are these new papers from Epson "Hot/Cold Press Natural/Bright White". Does anybody know what they are? Igor PS. Finding things (printer profiles in particular) on Epson website via its menues is close to impossible. Google search is more suitable for that. Sat Sep 10 16:21:51 EDT 2011 Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > The R3000 looks like a good upgrade from the R2880 but that's all I > know about it. > > Congratulations on your new daughter! -- 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.
Re: K-x videos
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 12:19:28PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote: > Very cool. I've never seen a steam roller that actually ran on steam before. You need to get out more :-) This one is a regular at Pacific Coast Dream Machines: http://www.jfwaf.com/PAW/PAW.php?name=PAW0720&style=1&year=2007 P.S. Enjoy your party! -- 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.
PESO: AAK
http://blogs.delphiforums.com/n/blogs/blog.aspx?nav=main&webtag=djm1963&entry=131 Comments are invited. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- 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.
the body I wish pentax would build
We talked about lenses but there is something needed in bodires. I was remimded of this recently when my son got his hands on a Fiji GA645. I had forgotten how nice that vertical frame was for shooting people. What Pentax could do is (a) rotate the frame to a vertical orientation or (b) create a square sensor. (A) would be great for shootimg people and (b) would fill the Blad niche. (A) would excite me. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose" -- Jim Elliott -- 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.
Re: OT: Warning for the UK and Europe- touring band headed your way
On 11 September 2011 18:42, Stan Halpin wrote: .. > More to the point for this group - if you like doing stage photography, or if > you would like to give it a try, these guys are very open. I could probably > arrange a VIP pass for you if you are interested. > > stan > -- I like what I hear. September 24 in Bedford looks good to me. Only 10 miles away. I'll contact you off-list Stan... Chris -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate, silliness
From: Bruce Walker On 11-09-11 3:18 PM, Larry Colen wrote: On Sep 10, 2011, at 10:19 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Overall, though, this obsession with ultra high ISO settings and the desire for noiseless results is, to me, utter and complete nonsense. I only ever use my computer to write plain ASCII text, so this desire for fast clocks speeds and graphical interfaces, to me, utter and complete nonsense. Godfrey, you might get into fewer arguments if you phrased things more like: [...] Now where would be the fun in that? If fewer arguments was a goal, there wouldn't be anyone here. I think our goal should be to trade quantity for quality. By the way, do you still have a link to that post you made after photographing an indoors event, where you commented that your then current camera was right on the edge of its performance envelope? Frankly, with the K-5, I finally have a camera that meets the minimum performance that I need in terms of high ISO and low light noise, but I still find myself missing shots because it isn't clean enough at a high enough ISO. Larry, what you need to do is get a hold of Kubrick's modified Zeiss f/0.7 50mm glass ... http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/ac/len/page1.htm And I'd like to borrow it after you. -bmw -- 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.
Frustration & Aggravation - part 26
When I moved out of my apartment I had a brand-new, unopened set of 4 AA Lithium batteries. I know exactly which pocket, in which camera bag I put them in. They're not there. They're not in any of my camera bags. They're not anywhere in this house that I can think to look. I'll have to go to the store and buy more. If you never hear from me again, you'll know I tripped over them and broke my fool neck walking in the front door. -- 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.
Re: GESO: The Drive by night
If I minded questions or comments, I wouldn't throw photos to the wolves here. No, that last one was pretty underexposed, so I just cranked the exposure and also the Lightroom "Fill light" slider. A touch of negative Clarity for glowiness. Interestingly the white balance is also as-shot; I twiddled it a bit but nothing was an improvement. -T On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: > On 11-09-10 2:12 AM, Tim Bray wrote: >> >> http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2011/09/07/The-Drive-by-Night >> >> Low-light photography is so easy these days. When I was a kid we had >> to fling individual photons at the Tri-X and try for an even grain >> pattern. -T >> > > I really like the 3rd one, Tim. Did you up the contrast significantly in > that one, if you don't mind me asking? > > -bmw > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: PESO: Some stupid sunflower, or something . . .
On 11-09-10 7:24 PM, Walt Gilbert wrote: Hi all, As you can see, I've adopted a minimalist image titling convention. It simplifies things. Aside from that, having packed up and shipped off my K-x to have the viewfinder glass (hopefully) replaced (hopefully) under warranty, I broke out the K100D Super that Mr. Larry Colen so graciously loaned to me while I was out visiting in his eminently beautiful state. I threw the old Tokina SZ-X 28-200 f/3.5-5.3 on there and fired off a few shots to see what it can do. I've shot maybe a total of 5 shots on that lens before, just to see if there was anything wrong with it. I have to say, I don't know why I haven't used it more. I'm extremely surprised at how sharp the thing is. Considering I got it in a bunch of about 5 lenses for which I paid a total of $100, I'm extremely pleased with it. http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/6134029469/ ISO 800, f/4.5, 1/500, Av Yes, the background is a bit desaturated, and I know some (most?) aren't fond of that sort of gimmickry. But, I'm a contrarian. I like it a lot, Walt. I also like the background texture/grain in that. Did you add that in PP? In any event, comments and critiques are welcome -- even if it's just to bitch about the desaturation. I was just so pleasantly surprised with the sharpness that I had to share. Also, I'm pleasantly surprised with the noise at ISO 800 on the K100D Super. I was expecting much more than is there. Thanks, Larry! -- Walt Heh. Work with ISO 1600 and especially 3200 for a while. You'll see noise all right. -bmw -- 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.
Re: GESO: The Drive by night
On 11-09-10 2:12 AM, Tim Bray wrote: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2011/09/07/The-Drive-by-Night Low-light photography is so easy these days. When I was a kid we had to fling individual photons at the Tri-X and try for an even grain pattern. -T I really like the 3rd one, Tim. Did you up the contrast significantly in that one, if you don't mind me asking? -bmw -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On 11-09-11 1:07 PM, Anthony Farr wrote: On 12 September 2011 00:20, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I've never seen this "shadow banding" stuff, or at least I don't recognize what you mean. Can you provide an example? You'r very lucky to have never seen it. Google has heard of it. You'll find plenty of references there. Frank Theriault pointed it out in one of his pictures a year or two back. The K100D and Super exhibit banding noise very badly from ISO 1600 and up. This type of noise, which is *very* hard to cleanup, is one of the main reasons I got a K20D (which is completely free of it no matter how noisy the image gets). I assume the same banding noise appears in *istD bodies as they have the same sensor. Here's a photograph with some serious shadow banding: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/UZHmptXW4qsffklRS3lX_aAuqTB9pnndhHCi9-Fvgfs?feat=directlink Here's my repair: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/a75LaelivUllMwgs9RCR56AuqTB9pnndhHCi9-Fvgfs?feat=directlink My hat's off to you, Anthony! You did a really remarkable cleanup on that image. A great shot too. -bmw -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On 11-09-11 3:18 PM, Larry Colen wrote: On Sep 10, 2011, at 10:19 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Overall, though, this obsession with ultra high ISO settings and the desire for noiseless results is, to me, utter and complete nonsense. I only ever use my computer to write plain ASCII text, so this desire for fast clocks speeds and graphical interfaces, to me, utter and complete nonsense. Godfrey, you might get into fewer arguments if you phrased things more like: [...] Now where would be the fun in that? If fewer arguments was a goal, there wouldn't be anyone here. By the way, do you still have a link to that post you made after photographing an indoors event, where you commented that your then current camera was right on the edge of its performance envelope? Frankly, with the K-5, I finally have a camera that meets the minimum performance that I need in terms of high ISO and low light noise, but I still find myself missing shots because it isn't clean enough at a high enough ISO. Larry, what you need to do is get a hold of Kubrick's modified Zeiss f/0.7 50mm glass ... http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/ac/len/page1.htm And I'd like to borrow it after you. -bmw -- 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.
Re: K-x videos
Very cool. I've never seen a steam roller that actually ran on steam before. On Sep 11, 2011, at 3:22 AM, mike wilson wrote: > Nothing more than video snapshots, all about 90s or less. K-x and 18-55 with > a rather sticky zoom ring, it appears. > > Let's see if this works. > http://www.youtube.com/user/bardzodobra#p/u > > -- > 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. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On Sep 10, 2011, at 10:19 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > > > Overall, though, this obsession with ultra high ISO settings and the > desire for noiseless results is, to me, utter and complete nonsense. I only ever use my computer to write plain ASCII text, so this desire for fast clocks speeds and graphical interfaces, to me, utter and complete nonsense. Godfrey, you might get into fewer arguments if you phrased things more like: I only ever photograph still moving things in good light, and since I'm more interested in artistic effects than image quality, I don't really need high ISO. By the way, do you still have a link to that post you made after photographing an indoors event, where you commented that your then current camera was right on the edge of its performance envelope? Frankly, with the K-5, I finally have a camera that meets the minimum performance that I need in terms of high ISO and low light noise, but I still find myself missing shots because it isn't clean enough at a high enough ISO. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On 12 September 2011 00:20, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > > There were never any 35mm films with ISO 800 or above that were as > grainless as most people obsessed with ultra high ISO sensitivity seem > to want to see these days. Nearly any DSLR class sensor camera made > since 2004 outperforms all ISO 800 35mm films on sensitivity and > noise. > That was then and this is now. I'm not comparing my camera's performance against film in 2001, I'm comparing it against its direct competitors sold at the same time. > > The E-1 was often slammed (inappropriately, IMO) for > its 'noisiness' back in the day when it was a current model camera. > Not by me. > > Two to three years is "too long"? Do you want to buy a new camera > every six months? > 2007 was 4 years ago, Olympus's current E-4xx and E-5xx series cameras are only minor updates of the cameras that introduced the 10MP CMOS sensor from Panasonic, but they're still listed as current models in many countries on the Olympus global website. > Panasonic only produced two DSLRs, the 2006 L1 and 2007 L10. They were > headed to the mirrorless cameras by the time the L10 shipped ... You > make it sound as if they were in the business for decades and this > sensor killed their DSLR business. > No, I'm aware of their history in the segment. And I'm aware that they sourced the core of these cameras, chassis, reflex assemblies, shutters, viewfinders &s. from Olympus. They put on the outer shells, installed their own processors and image engines, and fitted their own lenses. What I found worth mention was that Panasonic only used the 10MP sensor in a single model of their own. Just one year later their next 4/3 camera had the new 12.3MP sensor. It was as if they couldn't move on quickly enough. So should have Olympus. I'm not down on Panasonic, you know. I have one now. > > An E-5 is MSRP at $1699 and currently sells for $1499. A Pentax K5 > sells for $1199 including a $300 discount at B&H. If a school lunch > costs $2, your son will need to miss 150 of them so you can shoot with > an Olympus E-5. > Both of those cameras are considerably more expensive in Australia. Our dollar may have surpassed the greenback, but our buying power is still much lower than U.S.A.'s. > > Since the manufacturers and marketeers are the ones who incited the > dual obsessions of megapixels and sensitivity, they have to deal with > what they've created. > > I could care less ... I make photographs with the equipment I evaluate > to suit my purposes and don't worry about what manufacturers or > salesmen worry about. > Speed, grain and sharpness were ever the selling points of films. Now it's sensitivity, noise and pixel count of cameras. What's different? Some customers want the best and never mind the cost. Some want the cheapest and never mind the quality. I want good value for money. When I hand over my hard-earned to a company I've also bought the right to judge their performance. > "... Equipment often gets in the way of Photography. ..." > -- I've seen very few photographs taken without equipment. On second thought, make that none. regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- 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.
Re: PESO - Twist
Heck Rick, Can't you just run over to Bryce Canyon over lunchtime? Regards, Bob S. (it's a nice picture too!) On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Rick Womer wrote: > Good idea! Get me the time off and the money, and I'll head right out there! > > Rick > > > --- On Sun, 9/11/11, Bob W wrote: >> > >> > Another from the Art Gallery of Ontario: >> > >> > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14149416 >> >> you could probably get some shots of that staircase that >> would make a nice >> pair with pictures from that place in the US with the >> twisty red sandstone - >> Bryce Canyon? >> >> B >> >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
OT: Warning for the UK and Europe- touring band headed your way
Meg's nephew Dave Harding and his "Alt Country" rock band (Richmond Fontaine) will be back in the UK Sept 15-27, then across the channel for another 5 nights. Later in October they'll be back over for another three weeks, with several dates in Spain, then on to Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Ireland . . . See their website http://www.richmondfontaine.com/ for detailed tour dates and some music samples so you can decide if you want to go hear them. Their new album got a 5-star review from the Irish Times, was named Americana Album of the Month by Uncut, four stars from Q magazine . . . More to the point for this group - if you like doing stage photography, or if you would like to give it a try, these guys are very open. I could probably arrange a VIP pass for you if you are interested. stan -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate, silliness
On 12 September 2011 01:25, John Sessoms wrote: > > All *obsession* is ridiculous ... except for my own of course. > Exactly. Obsession is a character flaw in other people. I, on the other hand, am passionate about certain matters. regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- 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.
RE: PESO - Twist
Good idea! Get me the time off and the money, and I'll head right out there! Rick --- On Sun, 9/11/11, Bob W wrote: > > > > Another from the Art Gallery of Ontario: > > > > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14149416 > > you could probably get some shots of that staircase that > would make a nice > pair with pictures from that place in the US with the > twisty red sandstone - > Bryce Canyon? > > B > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On 12 September 2011 00:20, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > > I've never seen this "shadow banding" stuff, or at least I don't > recognize what you mean. Can you provide an example? > You'r very lucky to have never seen it. Google has heard of it. You'll find plenty of references there. Frank Theriault pointed it out in one of his pictures a year or two back. Here's a photograph with some serious shadow banding: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/UZHmptXW4qsffklRS3lX_aAuqTB9pnndhHCi9-Fvgfs?feat=directlink Here's my repair: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/a75LaelivUllMwgs9RCR56AuqTB9pnndhHCi9-Fvgfs?feat=directlink That's about as bad as it gets. The histogram doesn''t show any shadow clipping, although most of the tonal distribution is towards the left. Even so, there isn't much room at the right to raise the exposure. Another stop more would have seen clipped highlights. The grain/noise isn't as bad as this suggests, but the resizing seems to have worsened it. You can get a picture to display bigger in Picasa by closing the information panel on the right. Click on the >> near the top right corner of the picture. regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate, silliness
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: David Savage wrote: I actually use the D700's high ISO a lot (many of my star shots make use of that cameras capabilities), so for me the desire for low noise @ high ISO isn't complete nonsense. Actually, I was about to mention you as an example of someone who really does need and use high ISO. You beat me to it. Not many Dave Savages in the world, though... I never said ultra-high ISO sensitivity without noise is not useful. It does enable some kinds of work that without it wasn't accessible and eases some other kinds of work which were more difficult. I said the *obsession* with this one dimensional view of what makes a camera "good' is ridiculous. Just like the other modern obsession: "more megapixels uber alles." All *obsession* is ridiculous ... except for my own of course. -- 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.
Re: Peso's sunflowers
On 9/11/2011 9:44 AM, David J Brooks wrote: I have not been doinga lot of photography this summer, the shed is keeping me busy, but we do have some sunflowers maturing in the yard now.: This one must be a rouge seed from the feeder: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14191113 Triple heads, the squirrels cut the top off of this one a while back but it fought back in style: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14191114 I think I dig the triple-head shot most. It seems to be in considerably better shape than mine, squirrel-related decapitation notwithstanding. Hope you get more shooting opportunities this fall, and that the foliage is good this year. -- Walt K10D, D FA 50-200 af 360 FOR FILL Dave -- 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.
Re: PESO: Some stupid sunflower, or something . . .
Thanks, Dave. It's a pretty old, banged-up lens and there's absolutely zero snap in the aperture ring. But, thankfully, it's an A lens, and I tend to shoot in Av mode more than any other when the option is feasible. It's a bit of a brute, not all that great as walking-around lens. But, I may just have to suffer the burden if it performs as well as it seems to so far. -- Walt On 9/11/2011 9:27 AM, David J Brooks wrote: I like this one a lot. Dave On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Walt Gilbert wrote: Hi all, As you can see, I've adopted a minimalist image titling convention. It simplifies things. Aside from that, having packed up and shipped off my K-x to have the viewfinder glass (hopefully) replaced (hopefully) under warranty, I broke out the K100D Super that Mr. Larry Colen so graciously loaned to me while I was out visiting in his eminently beautiful state. I threw the old Tokina SZ-X 28-200 f/3.5-5.3 on there and fired off a few shots to see what it can do. I've shot maybe a total of 5 shots on that lens before, just to see if there was anything wrong with it. I have to say, I don't know why I haven't used it more. I'm extremely surprised at how sharp the thing is. Considering I got it in a bunch of about 5 lenses for which I paid a total of $100, I'm extremely pleased with it. http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/6134029469/ ISO 800, f/4.5, 1/500, Av Yes, the background is a bit desaturated, and I know some (most?) aren't fond of that sort of gimmickry. But, I'm a contrarian. In any event, comments and critiques are welcome -- even if it's just to bitch about the desaturation. I was just so pleasantly surprised with the sharpness that I had to share. Also, I'm pleasantly surprised with the noise at ISO 800 on the K100D Super. I was expecting much more than is there. Thanks, Larry! -- Walt -- 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. -- 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.
Re: PESO: Some stupid sunflower, or something . . .
On 9/11/2011 5:59 AM, Larry Colen wrote: On Sep 10, 2011, at 4:24 PM, Walt Gilbert wrote: http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/6134029469/ ISO 800, f/4.5, 1/500, Av Very nice! Thanks, Larry! But, I'm a contrarian. That, my friend, is the understatement of the week. I do tend to wear it on my sleeve, I reckon. -- Walt -- 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. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
RE: PESO - Twist
> -Original Message- > From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of > > Another from the Art Gallery of Ontario: > > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14149416 you could probably get some shots of that staircase that would make a nice pair with pictures from that place in the US with the twisty red sandstone - Bryce Canyon? B -- 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.
Peso's sunflowers
I have not been doinga lot of photography this summer, the shed is keeping me busy, but we do have some sunflowers maturing in the yard now.: This one must be a rouge seed from the feeder: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14191113 Triple heads, the squirrels cut the top off of this one a while back but it fought back in style: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14191114 K10D, D FA 50-200 af 360 FOR FILL Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On 12 September 2011 00:21, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > BTW, Anthony, why are you debating about low-end Olympus DSLRs on the > PDML list? > -- Dario mused that he'd like to see an m43 MILC with a Sony sensor. He expressed the view that Sony's superior sensor technology would "blow away" Panasonic. On 8 September 2011 20:27, Dario Bonazza wrote: > > Pity that Sony does not make a 4/3 format sensor, as their current sensor > technology will allow them to blow away Panasonic. My dream mirrorless > camera is a m43 shaped like a rangefinder (viewfinder included) with a Sony > sensor. > I simply followed through with my observations as a 4/3 user and a Panasonic sensor user. I'm debating because my direct observations as a user of this equipment is being refuted. regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- 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.
Re: PESO: Some stupid sunflower, or something . . .
I like this one a lot. Dave On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Walt Gilbert wrote: > Hi all, > > As you can see, I've adopted a minimalist image titling convention. It > simplifies things. > > Aside from that, having packed up and shipped off my K-x to have the > viewfinder glass (hopefully) replaced (hopefully) under warranty, I broke > out the K100D Super that Mr. Larry Colen so graciously loaned to me while I > was out visiting in his eminently beautiful state. > > I threw the old Tokina SZ-X 28-200 f/3.5-5.3 on there and fired off a few > shots to see what it can do. I've shot maybe a total of 5 shots on that > lens before, just to see if there was anything wrong with it. I have to > say, I don't know why I haven't used it more. I'm extremely surprised at > how sharp the thing is. Considering I got it in a bunch of about 5 lenses > for which I paid a total of $100, I'm extremely pleased with it. > > http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/6134029469/ > ISO 800, f/4.5, 1/500, Av > > Yes, the background is a bit desaturated, and I know some (most?) aren't > fond of that sort of gimmickry. But, I'm a contrarian. > > In any event, comments and critiques are welcome -- even if it's just to > bitch about the desaturation. I was just so pleasantly surprised with the > sharpness that I had to share. Also, I'm pleasantly surprised with the > noise at ISO 800 on the K100D Super. I was expecting much more than is > there. Thanks, Larry! > > -- Walt > > -- > 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. > -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- 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.
Re: PESO - Twist
Yes it is.:-) Nice geometry here. Dave On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Rick Womer wrote: > Another from the Art Gallery of Ontario: > > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14149416 > > (K7, DA 16-45) > > Rick > > > -- > 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. > -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- 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.
Re: September PUG - Self Portrait Gallery is up
As noted in the comments, that image was taken with my M42 screw mount SMC Takumar 50 mm f/1.4, which was the only lens I had for the first two months, until the PX could special order a super takumar 135mm f/3.5 and a super takumart 28mm f/3.5 for me. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 4:24 AM, Bob W wrote: >> >I had honestly forgotten that I had used that image in a previous PUG, >> >and I don't like to take images of myself, so I dredged up one from my >> >old Asahi Spotmatic. >> >> Hay mate - for style, the words 'self portrait taken in my F4 Phantom' >> is pretty hard to beat! >> > > f1.4 would be better though > > > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: Muddlety and Fenway
Very nice Dave On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 8:05 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: > Muddlety on the right and Fenway on the left: > http://www.robertstech.com/temp/kitties.jpg > > We got them from local animal rescue group a week ago - they were > approximately 12 weeks old. After having been with us for a week > they're still quite timid and afraid of everything but getting bolder > by the day. > > > -- > 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. > -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
BTW, Anthony, why are you debating about low-end Olympus DSLRs on the PDML list? -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 4:31 AM, Anthony Farr wrote: > But I don't see that it's about obsession with speed, it's about > defining a camera's limits of performance. It's not like the > "good ole days" when we could throw a faster film into a camera > on spec, if a digital camera doesn't have good high sensitivity > performance out of the box it never will have. There were never any 35mm films with ISO 800 or above that were as grainless as most people obsessed with ultra high ISO sensitivity seem to want to see these days. Nearly any DSLR class sensor camera made since 2004 outperforms all ISO 800 35mm films on sensitivity and noise. >> Easy to obtain higher ISOs: set the highest and underexpose by the >> number of stops required. Boost in processing. >> > > If only it was always that simple. Like you, I find it a simple > matter to clean up noise when I need to, weighing up the pros and cons > of detail losses versus smoothness gains on an ad hoc basis. The > problem that isn't so easy to fix is the shadow banding that > frequently occurs at iso1600 especially at 3200K white balance, which > utterly spoils many otherwise good shots even when grain/noise is > acceptable. ... I've never seen this "shadow banding" stuff, or at least I don't recognize what you mean. Can you provide an example? > ... The E-1 as you know uses a 5MP Kodak CCD. Those low megapixel sensors > like that one and the 6MP Sony, with their big fat photosites, were > famously good at minimising noise. ... That's so funny. The E-1 was often slammed (inappropriately, IMO) for its 'noisiness' back in the day when it was a current model camera. > What my complaint goes back to is that Olympus kept flogging that > generation of sensor, the 10MP Panasonic, for too long. Long after > their competitors moved on to better sensors. Long after Panasonic > itself left it behind, 2007's DMC L-10 was their only camera with the > 10MP sensor. It was short lived and was their last DSLR. Two to three years is "too long"? Do you want to buy a new camera every six months? Panasonic only produced two DSLRs, the 2006 L1 and 2007 L10. They were headed to the mirrorless cameras by the time the L10 shipped ... You make it sound as if they were in the business for decades and this sensor killed their DSLR business. >> The E-5 produces very clean results at ISO 6400 >> almost without any processing at all. >> > > That's very nice, but I already noted the better processor that the > E-single digit cameras use, and the price premium that is required to > get one. I wonder how many school lunches my son would need to > sacrifice for me to get one? An E-5 is MSRP at $1699 and currently sells for $1499. A Pentax K5 sells for $1199 including a $300 discount at B&H. If a school lunch costs $2, your son will need to miss 150 of them so you can shoot with an Olympus E-5. > ... If I was still working for payment I wouldn't call it nonsence to > worry my cameras' performance. And if I was making and selling > cameras I would worry about what the potential buyers worry about, > rightly or wrongly. ... Since the manufacturers and marketeers are the ones who incited the dual obsessions of megapixels and sensitivity, they have to deal with what they've created. I could care less ... I make photographs with the equipment I evaluate to suit my purposes and don't worry about what manufacturers or salesmen worry about. "... Equipment often gets in the way of Photography. ..." -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: > David Savage wrote: > >>I actually use the D700's high ISO a lot (many of my star shots make >>use of that cameras capabilities), so for me the desire for low noise >>@ high ISO isn't complete nonsense. > > Actually, I was about to mention you as an example of someone who > really does need and use high ISO. You beat me to it. > Not many Dave Savages in the world, though... I never said ultra-high ISO sensitivity without noise is not useful. It does enable some kinds of work that without it wasn't accessible and eases some other kinds of work which were more difficult. I said the *obsession* with this one dimensional view of what makes a camera "good' is ridiculous. Just like the other modern obsession: "more megapixels uber alles." -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
David Savage wrote: >I actually use the D700's high ISO a lot (many of my star shots make >use of that cameras capabilities), so for me the desire for low noise >@ high ISO isn't complete nonsense. Actually, I was about to mention you as an example of someone who really does need and use high ISO. You beat me to it. Not many Dave Savages in the world, though... -- Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- 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.
Re: Muddlety and Fenway
Ken Waller wrote: >Cute, cute, cute ! > >Are they litter mates ? Same sex? Yep. Littermates. They're both male (orange tabbies are almost always male). Ther're replacements for our Siamese guy who died at age 17 in June (after years with diabetes, asthma and various GI disorders) and our orange tabby who dies about a year and a half earlier (also about 17 years old). >> http://www.robertstech.com/temp/kitties.jpg -- Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- 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.
PESO - Twist
Another from the Art Gallery of Ontario: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14149416 (K7, DA 16-45) Rick -- 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.
Re: Muddlety and Fenway
Very nice. We've got two 16-year old cats (one of them somewhat incontinent) if you ever want to trade. Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW --- On Sat, 9/10/11, Mark Roberts wrote: > From: Mark Roberts > Subject: Muddlety and Fenway > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Date: Saturday, September 10, 2011, 8:05 PM > Muddlety on the right and Fenway on > the left: > http://www.robertstech.com/temp/kitties.jpg > > We got them from local animal rescue group a week ago - > they were > approximately 12 weeks old. After having been with us for a > week > they're still quite timid and afraid of everything but > getting bolder > by the day. > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On 11 September 2011 21:31, Anthony Farr wrote: > regards, Anthony > >"Of what use is lens and light > to those who lack in mind and sight" >(Anon) > > Please forgive me for starting with my sig. It was but a simple cut & paste error regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) On 11 September 2011 15:19, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > > > Easy to obtain higher ISOs: set the highest and underexpose by the > number of stops required. Boost in processing. > If only it was always that simple. Like you, I find it a simple matter to clean up noise when I need to, weighing up the pros and cons of detail losses versus smoothness gains on an ad hoc basis. The problem that isn't so easy to fix is the shadow banding that frequently occurs at iso1600 especially at 3200K white balance, which utterly spoils many otherwise good shots even when grain/noise is acceptable. It's fixable given enough time, but I've had to resort to multiple layering where I isolate subject matter from background, run extremely destructive amounts of NR on the background layer, then restore grain so that it matches the subject layer. Selecting the subject is unfortunately not always a simple click of the magic wand tool, it's often a laborious hand-selection with a graphics tablet and stylus. It's not a job I'd choose for the love of retouching. Because that banding is already present at iso1600, and is worsened by underexposure, I could never dream of pushing the ISO any higher, nor do I need to. > I was never interested in any of the E-xxx bodies because of the > viewfinders, but the E-1, E-3 and E-5 are superb. Even the ancient E-1 > with it's old, slow hardware now produces superb results at ISO 3200 > and even ISO 6400 if you know what you're doing when you expose and > process the raw files. The E-1 as you know uses a 5MP Kodak CCD. Those low megapixel sensors like that one and the 6MP Sony, with their big fat photosites, were famously good at minimising noise. The next generation of sensors didn't perform so well at anything except having a higher pixel count. What my complaint goes back to is that Olympus kept flogging that generation of sensor, the 10MP Panasonic, for too long. Long after their competitors moved on to better sensors. Long after Panasonic itself left it behind, 2007's DMC L-10 was their only camera with the 10MP sensor. It was short lived and was their last DSLR. > The E-5 produces very clean results at ISO 6400 > almost without any processing at all. > That's very nice, but I already noted the better processor that the E-single digit cameras use, and the price premium that is required to get one. I wonder how many school lunches my son would need to sacrifice for me to get one? > Overall, though, this obsession with ultra high ISO settings and the > desire for noiseless results is, to me, utter and complete nonsense. > If I was still working for payment I wouldn't call it nonsence to worry my cameras' performance. And if I was making and selling cameras I would worry about what the potential buyers worry about, rightly or wrongly. regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- 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.
K-x videos
Nothing more than video snapshots, all about 90s or less. K-x and 18-55 with a rather sticky zoom ring, it appears. Let's see if this works. http://www.youtube.com/user/bardzodobra#p/u -- 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.
Re: PESO: Some stupid sunflower, or something . . .
On Sep 10, 2011, at 4:24 PM, Walt Gilbert wrote: > Hi all, > > As you can see, I've adopted a minimalist image titling convention. It > simplifies things. > > Aside from that, having packed up and shipped off my K-x to have the > viewfinder glass (hopefully) replaced (hopefully) under warranty, I broke out > the K100D Super that Mr. Larry Colen so graciously loaned to me while I was > out visiting in his eminently beautiful state. > > I threw the old Tokina SZ-X 28-200 f/3.5-5.3 on there and fired off a few > shots to see what it can do. I've shot maybe a total of 5 shots on that lens > before, just to see if there was anything wrong with it. I have to say, I > don't know why I haven't used it more. I'm extremely surprised at how sharp > the thing is. Considering I got it in a bunch of about 5 lenses for which I > paid a total of $100, I'm extremely pleased with it. > > http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/6134029469/ > ISO 800, f/4.5, 1/500, Av Very nice! > > Yes, the background is a bit desaturated, and I know some (most?) aren't fond > of that sort of gimmickry. > But, I'm a contrarian. That, my friend, is the understatement of the week. > > In any event, comments and critiques are welcome -- even if it's just to > bitch about the desaturation. I was just so pleasantly surprised with the > sharpness that I had to share. Also, I'm pleasantly surprised with the noise > at ISO 800 on the K100D Super. I was expecting much more than is there. > Thanks, Larry! > > -- Walt > > -- > 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. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On Sep 11, 2011, at 1:19 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Anthony Farr wrote: >> I couldn't find a camera with the 10MP Panasonic sensor that could >> reach iso6400. Olympus 410 and above, 510 and above and the Panasonic >> DMC-L10 all top out at iso1600. The Olympus E-3 tops out at iso3200, >> but its sensor is quoted as being 10.1MP and I can't verify that it's >> the same unit as the 10MP sensor. > > Easy to obtain higher ISOs: set the highest and underexpose by the > number of stops required. Boost in processing. > > I was never interested in any of the E-xxx bodies because of the > viewfinders, but the E-1, E-3 and E-5 are superb. Even the ancient E-1 > with it's old, slow hardware now produces superb results at ISO 3200 > and even ISO 6400 if you know what you're doing when you expose and > process the raw files. The E-5 produces very clean results at ISO 6400 > almost without any processing at all. > > Overall, though, this obsession with ultra high ISO settings and the > desire for noiseless results is, to me, utter and complete nonsense. > Low noise, high ISO can be extremely useful for anyone who shoots with long lenses in bad conditions or who covers indoor events in low light. Many clients don't want grainy or noisy photos, and being able to shoot noise free at ISO 800 can be a huge advantage. When shooting cars for publication, I was pretty much limited it ISO 200 with the K7. With the K5, I can easily go to ISO 800. That has made my life much easier. I've also found its a great advantage when shooting wildlife. Where ISO 800 was pretty much the highest practical sensitivity with the K7, I now get better results at ISO 1600 with the K5. And 3200 isn't out of the question. Paul > -- > Godfrey > godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On 11 September 2011 16:31, Bob W wrote:
>> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
>> Godfrey DiGiorgi
> [...]
>> Overall, though, this obsession with ultra high ISO settings and the
>> desire for noiseless results is, to me, utter and complete nonsense.
>>
>
> Mark!
>
> And I kind of agree with you. It's always seemed to me to be a demand stoked
> up by the manufacturers rather than one that comes naturally to many
> photographer. I admit that some photographers might 'need' it, but really
> very, very few. But men like big numbers, even when they're meaningless
> ("these go to 11"), so the marketers pander to it.
>
> B
I actually use the D700's high ISO a lot (many of my star shots make
use of that cameras capabilities), so for me the desire for low noise
@ high ISO isn't complete nonsense.
DS
--
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.
Re: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
On 11 September 2011 18:31, Bob W wrote:
>> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
>> Godfrey DiGiorgi
> [...]
>> Overall, though, this obsession with ultra high ISO settings and the
>> desire for noiseless results is, to me, utter and complete nonsense.
>>
>
> Mark!
>
> And I kind of agree with you. It's always seemed to me to be a demand stoked
> up by the manufacturers rather than one that comes naturally to many
> photographer. I admit that some photographers might 'need' it, but really
> very, very few. But men like big numbers, even when they're meaningless
> ("these go to 11"), so the marketers pander to it.
>
> B
>
One of my photography lecturers said as much in the 1970s, referring
to silly students wanting faster film speeds, equating faster with
better.
"HP4 must be better than FP4, it has 275 more ASAs."
But I don't see that it's about obsession with speed, it's about
defining a camera's limits of performance. It's not like the "good
ole days" when we could throw a faster film into a camera on spec, if
a digital camera doesn't have good high sensitivity performance out of
the box it never will have.
regards, Anthony
"Of what use is lens and light
to those who lack in mind and sight"
(Anon)
--
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.
RE: Pentax K-Q adapter and an OT rant about corporate silliness
> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
> Godfrey DiGiorgi
[...]
> Overall, though, this obsession with ultra high ISO settings and the
> desire for noiseless results is, to me, utter and complete nonsense.
>
Mark!
And I kind of agree with you. It's always seemed to me to be a demand stoked
up by the manufacturers rather than one that comes naturally to many
photographer. I admit that some photographers might 'need' it, but really
very, very few. But men like big numbers, even when they're meaningless
("these go to 11"), so the marketers pander to it.
B
--
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.
RE: September PUG - Self Portrait Gallery is up
> >I had honestly forgotten that I had used that image in a previous PUG, > >and I don't like to take images of myself, so I dredged up one from my > >old Asahi Spotmatic. > > Hay mate - for style, the words 'self portrait taken in my F4 Phantom' > is pretty hard to beat! > f1.4 would be better though -- 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.
Re: September PUG - Self Portrait Gallery is up
On 10/9/11, Daniel J. Matyola, discombobulated, unleashed: >I had honestly forgotten that I had used that image in a previous PUG, >and I don't like to take images of myself, so I dredged up one from my >old Asahi Spotmatic. Hay mate - for style, the words 'self portrait taken in my F4 Phantom' is pretty hard to beat! -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- 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.
Re: September PUG - Self Portrait Gallery is up
On Sep 10, 2011, at 8:05 PM, Cotty wrote: > I have to say that this gallery is one of the best, if not THE best > gallery I have ever seen from such a talented collection of > photographers. Each one is simply brilliant. Seriously every single one > of them is superb - congratulations all. I agree, it's a fantastic gallery. I think I should have cropped mine but I didn't want to give the impression that I'd cut my face out deliberately :) I think Dan's has the highest coolness factor... Cheers, Dave -- 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.
Re: September PUG - Self Portrait Gallery is up
On Sep 11, 2011, at 10:11 AM, John Francis wrote: >Apache/1.3.41 Server at www.komkon.org Port 80 > > > What that appears to be saying is that the request sent by my browser > (IE8) includes a header field that is too long. It also displays what > is probably the header record in question, showing the types of image > (and similar formats) that the browser is capable of displaying. Apache 1.3? Holy crap, I think they need to upgrade. That version is no longer maintained so I'd consider it a security risk. Hmm, the changes coming for 2.4 are looking very useful, too. But I'm getting off track :) Dave -- 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.
