Re: Camera Raw 3.7 is Here
On 19/02/07, Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now I am going to reset my K10D to PEF format. you might want to test if profile embedded into ACR is good enough for your purposes - having used DNG you were using calibration stored in DNG by the camera, that is colours were exactly as intended by camera vendor for all colour temperatures etc., while using PEF you depend on calibration stored in RAW converter. I you are interested I could compare calibration of ACR 3.7 PEF vs. DNG using ColorChecker (write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ). B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 77 Ltd. vs FA*85
K.Takeshita wrote: 85 is of course the gem of pentax lenses but when I got a 77, I was beginning to find that use of 85 was not as versatile as 77 could. It all depends on how your friend intends to use it. If his nephew is young (small?) and active, 85 is unwieldy. Azlso on K10D, it is no longer a mid tele. F1.4 speed is excellent for low light shooting or if he wants good I cannot comment on 85, but I find FA 50/1.4 coupled with K10D a great photographic tool for indoor portraiture of my (young) children. It is small and versatile, AF is pretty fast. I'm also going to try 77 Ltd in the same role (just ordered it from BH). B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Monitor Calibration - help wanted
Brian Walters wrote: John Don't know if this will help but I find both the foillowing links useful, particularly the gamma charts in the first link. http://www.photoscientia.co.uk/Gamma.htm but pls. remeber to use gamma 2.2 , as this is the standard. Gamma 1.8 is used only by old Macs B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Monitor Calibration - help wanted
keith_w wrote: but pls. remeber to use gamma 2.2 , as this is the standard. For whom? For what? good question. You will find answer in Color Management by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy, Fred Bunting. In my (2nd) edition it is in chapter 6 . Needless to say, gamma 2.2 is recommended (there) because in our testing, we've found that calibrating to around gamma 2.2 produces the smoothest display of gradients, with little or no visible banding or posterization. Surely, you can use whatever works for you, but I assumed that OP is confused enough. If I can suggest something to OP that would be: - learn basics of colour maganegent (above mentioned book is very good) - buy colorimeter and calibrate monitor using hardware. I'd lend mine, but Australia is bit too far away from UK. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Fw: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
Digital Image Studio wrote: On 03/01/07, Bronek Kozicki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Digital Image Studio wrote: factor relative to FF 35mm ;-) keyword underscored. ...and? full frame is not a format name. It can be used as a format name only if supplemented by information which frame ? In citation above it is 35mm, or 135, and the crop factor is relative to full frame of 135 format. It annoys me that you people buy Canona marketing speach as if 135 was the only format used in photography. It might be for Canon users, but that's it. Some other vendors, most notable Pentax, venture in other formats. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Fw: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
they = who? Canon users or marketing? Then you are perfectly righ. But if they includes users of other systems, including medium format ones, then it becomes annoying. Pentax, opposite to Canon, is present in medium format market segment. There is no default 135 format, which is especially visible in DLSR market segment (as only Canon produces DSLR cameras in this format). B. Quoting J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Come on, dude, Canon EOS system was designed for 24x36mm format initially. When they state FULL FRAME its not too much to understand assume they mean the full 24x36mm, 35mm, 135 format, format frame. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bronek Kozicki Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 5:02 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Fw: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D Digital Image Studio wrote: On 03/01/07, Bronek Kozicki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Digital Image Studio wrote: factor relative to FF 35mm ;-) keyword underscored. ...and? full frame is not a format name. It can be used as a format name only if supplemented by information which frame ? In citation above it is 35mm, or 135, and the crop factor is relative to full frame of 135 format. It annoys me that you people buy Canona marketing speach as if 135 was the only format used in photography. It might be for Canon users, but that's it. Some other vendors, most notable Pentax, venture in other formats. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Fw: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
Quoting William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: - Original Message - From: David Savage Subject: Re: Fw: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D Your just arguing nomenclature. He's not the only person on list who argues nomenclature. I'd even hazzard a guess, without looking into my filtered emails, that I know who he is arguing with.. Father, I sinned. I will try very hard not to do it again ;) B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Fw: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
Quoting David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 1/2/07, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've got some samples I took in store with a Canon 5D and EF 17-40mm f4 L lens. At 17mm 40mm there is vignetting, but it's easily treatable in the RAW converter. I think this says more about the lens than the camera IMO. it tells about the whole system - light leaving lens is hitting sensor under steep angle, and microlenses are only able to focus part of this light on the silicon. This lens might be perfect on film, but sensor is sensitive to qualities that film won't notice. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Fw: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
Quoting Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED]: B obviously hasn't looked at too many big Canon or Leica M8 produced images. http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/eos_5d (only currently 281942 sample images) and how many from wide lenses ? B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Fw: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
Quoting Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED]: B obviously hasn't looked at too many big Canon or Leica M8 produced images. Leica M8 is croppped, although not APS. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
Quoting Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The pertinent consideration of course is that the now defunct resolution sensors would have used a similar silicon area to those by which they were replaced. FF and APS sensors will always differ in price by at least the value of area of silicon that they utilize. Silicon is least part of price, it is yield that matters. And it drops exponentially with increase of size of sensor, thus making production expensive. Anyway, the cost should be dropping due to advances in chip production, but again I do not understand why stop at 24x36mm while 48x36mm is not really that much more expensive (as we already entered multi-thousand $ price region). There is nothing that makes 24x36mm sweet spot except for Canon's marketing strategy - they do not exists in MF market segment and using old lenses is the only upgrade path for their customers. The same logic might apply to Sony, but it does not to Pentax. Personally, it annoys me that people see whole DSLR market through pink glass of Canon marketing department. Given obvious issues with wide lenses and 24x36mm sensor I do not see it as attractive alternative to APS. Someone who does not use wide lenses might not care, but given that Pentax offer is especially strong at the wide end, it should matter for Pentax customers. In other words, would you buy 24x36mm DLSR from Pentax, if pictures it takes with your lovely 31/1.8 or 24/2 or 35/2 or 20-35 would look good only in the centre of frame? I certainly would not. There might be some ways around this problem, but I do not think it is viable now. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Fw: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
Quoting David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]: So I take it your not a fan aft the 35mm full frame DSLR concept. I am not. Or maybe this whole Canon propaganda just started p**ng me off. I came from 6x7 (Pentacon Six) and see nothing special in 135 format, except maybe balance of speed and quality for sport photographers and habit of many, many photographers. But habits can be challenged and sport photographers do not really care that much for image quality :-P B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
Quoting Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'm afraid that your argument is purely speculative, there is no proof as yet that any Pentax 35mm lenses perform poorly on FF sensors. The whole thread is purely speculative ;-P I'm not saying never, but currently Pentax seems to be heading in different direction. We will see. As for now, I'm buying both FA and DA lenses, depending on my immediate needs. And for those interested in best quality and high resolution, I'd suggest searching in ebay for 67 and 645 Pentax lenses - prices will soar later this year. And it is much less speculative prediction than the whole FF thingy. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
Digital Image Studio wrote: On 03/01/07, Bronek Kozicki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And for those interested in best quality and high resolution, I'd suggest searching in ebay for 67 and 645 Pentax lenses - prices will soar later this year. And it is much less speculative prediction than the whole FF thingy. This assumes that the new company of which Pentax cameras is a but a small part will carry the P645D to production. Now that's speculation. you seem to forgot that the new Hoya Pentax company will launch in October -- I'd be surprised if 645D does not go to market before this date, and I'd be shocked if it is pulled back with no good reason other than merger. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
P. J. Alling wrote: There is nothing that makes 24x36mm sweet spot except for Canon's marketing strategy and the huge supply of very good to brilliant existing lenses designed for that format. the point I was trying to make is that alghough these lenses loose their angle of view, they also seem to work better on APS than on FF B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Fw: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
P. J. Alling wrote: Your arguments are known. Your conclusions are suspect, and your mother dresses you funny. she does not ;-P and I'm not going to argue with you other points, as they might be true indeed. The fact is I'm just losing patience seeing discussion that could end up like whinning when Pentax will finally release full frame camera?!. There is no full frame to start with, it's just 135 format called by a different name invented by Canon marketing. And we, Pentax users, have some excellent digital lenses to enjoy that no other system has, now move on. By the way welcome to the list. thank you B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Occupations
I'm a software developer in investment bank based in London. Moved here from Poland 2 years ago with wife and son, my second son was born here (but that does not grant him British nationality, for those curious). I'm also member of C++ panel in BSI and a Microsoft MVP. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Fw: Full frame vs APS-C was: Re: PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D
Digital Image Studio wrote: factor relative to FF 35mm ;-) keyword underscored. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: A bit more about K10D, please read.
Gonz wrote: Download the latest camera RAW plugin from adobe, I had the same problem with the K100D. it won't change things a yota, because current (latest) Camera Raw plugin, version 3.6, does not support K10D (directly) and one has to use DNG files. The issue that Boris is seeing is result of Camera Raw not having profile of K10D. Explanation why this profile (or actually two) is needed can be found here http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/21351-1.html B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Sd Cards
Peter Loveday wrote: It also really makes me wonder why they do these silly incremental changes... 2G isn't enough? Lets revise the spec... but we'll only allow 32G, no one will ever need more than that why not just allow for umpteen terabytes and be done with it (at least for a few years :), if you're introducing a whole new (semi-incompatible) way of addressing the card. Although I do not know answer for this question, I have some exposure to standarization processes. My guess would be that there is some overhead depending on maximum (not actual) card capacity, like: - address lenght that has to be comunicated between card and IO device, (which consumes bandwidth and space on card) - size of table of entries on the card (which consumes space on card) - complexity of additional logic that has to be implemented on card (which costs money) and vendors working on this standard tried to strike balance betweeen useability (eg. capacity, speed) and mentioned overhead. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Sd Cards
Quoting Charles Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thinking of buying the Pentax K10D but would like some clarification about SD cards. Is the maximum card in the K10 D only 2 gig or is it possible to use a 4 gig card. you can use SDHC (High Capacity) card, as I understand not all 4GB cards are compliant with SDHC standard (because it is relatively new). Futhermore, SDHC are, at this time, significantly slower than SD cards. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Official Full Frame Pentax Rumor (was Re: Dpreview's D200 jpeg overall conclusion: same problem different attitude?)
Quoting Patrick Genovese [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I don't think that pentax will go down that route any time soon because... neither me, and I completly agree with your reasoning. Actually, I was going to write something similar, but you saved me the trouble ;) B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Official Full Frame Pentax Rumor - Technical Limitations of K Mount?
Quoting Tom Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Im kinda' new here, but one of the things I picked up in passing is that the K-mount might be fundamentally incompatible with a full-frame DSLR? Or did I miss something? If I didnt, please explain to me what the issue is, as I was under the impression that if you put a sensor the size of a 35mm frame in the same place in reference to the lens as a 35mm frame of lens, it would all work out just peachy. only if light from lens is perpendiular to sensor. If it is not, as is the case with most wide-angle lenses, light is partialy lost. You can actually see this in Canon 5D (search for vignetting). In other words : it will work only with long lenses. This is also why Leica has choosen crop 1.3 (for price this high, they could surely afford 24x36mm sensor). Also, to accommodate shake reduction, imagining circle must be several mm bigger than sensor size. This is also why (I believe) some DA lenses actually work on 36mm (film) cameras without strong vignetting. Why not? I hope not, as I am hoping that the bigger sensor will give the quantum physicists more to I do not know what quantum physicists have to do with it, but 48x36mm sensor is twice as big as 24x36mm, thus they shouldn't have reasons to complain . Even though it is actualy cropped (by factor 1.3), from 645. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: k10d pop photo/ luminous landscape vs dpreview
dick graham wrote: All of you who are disappointed in the k10d because of the dpreview report I'd say to any and all of these who are disappointed in *camera* because of its very subjective *review* : there are plenty of JPEGs around - look at them, judge for yourself, trust your good photographical taste. Do not let someone's spolied taste corrupt your judgment. If you still have doubts, compare details visible on these two pictures: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD200/Samples/Compared/Studio/d200_iso0100.JPG http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PentaxK10D/Samples/Compared/Studio/k10d_iso0100.jpg B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D review online
Jens Bladt wrote: The K10D certainly isn't doing very well in comparison to others, like Sony, Nikon, Canon. I wonder why? because reviewer does not like its JPEG output - it does not have the same contrasty look as Canons or Nikon JPEGs. As simple as that. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: First K10D Post: Trying to Stay Calm
Paul Stenquist wrote: ACR works fine with K10D images as long as their saved as DNG format. there is subtle difference between being able to read and being able to render as intended by camera manufacturer. Sure, ACR can read DNG files from K10D, but seeing results I'm not convinced it renders them properly. That's why I suggested using PPL; alternatively RAW could be developed in camera - very nice feature, BTW :-) I know, both are not workflow friendly as I use ACR myself, but they would provide point of reference in situations like this. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PESO-- Hell's Furnace
Quoting Mike Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]: A wood chip burner at a lumber mill. It was cold. Probably -25C, plus a windchill dropping the temp to about -35C. I took three exposures before I couldn't take it anymore. Pentax DS w/FA77, 10 second exposure at f/9.5, ISO 200. DS is tough one, isn't it? Great picture, well worth the effort. B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D image quality
Quoting Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Funny, a year ago it seemed a number of people here were of the opinion that a 10MP wasn't that big of a jump in resolution and one would not see a big increase in picture quality. I guess that's changed now that Pentax has a higher MP camera on the market. I think that's because Pentax made an effort to exploit sensor resolution to maximume, eg. no noise reduction in camera, very weak anti-aliasing filter etc. Surely, when you put some very sharp lens on such camera, difference becomes visible. This was not the case in some 10Mpx cameras from other vendors (they do not have Limited lenses to start with) B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: First K10D Post: Trying to Stay Calm
Joseph Tainter wrote: Here is my first posted K10D image. It is very qd with no processing except for Auto Levels. I was just giving shake reduction a first try. Boy did I get a nasty surprise: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036message=21099553 Please, help me out here, gang. What should I conclude from this I hope you still have these RAWs? Process them with PPL. ACR is not calibrated to K10D yet, I guess this where all these extra colors are coming from. Besides, you did not push EV in processing, did you? B. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: First K10D Post: Trying to Stay Calm
Joseph Tainter wrote: Here is my first posted K10D image. It is very qd with no processing except for Auto Levels. ^^^ I only now noticed - here is culprit. Do not use ACR autolevels. Just say no. If you want auto look, shoot JPEG (or even better - RAW+ ). And another thing: in Pentax DLSRs , white balance should be set before shot even if you use RAW. And because these cameras have rather poor auto white balance, you better select it manually in menu. B. PS. hello there, maybe it's time to introduce myself, after these few posts of mine? I'm shooting with ist DS almost 2 years, before with Pentacon Six (that was looong time ago). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Way OT: File conversion problem
Someone here confused Word with WordPerfect - these are entirely two different software products, from different vendors! Or actualy were, because I believe WordPerfect has not had upgrades for a looong time. B. Quoting Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]: No, Microsoft Word v1.0 was released first on Macintosh in 1985. Godfrey On Nov 29, 2006, at 5:24 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: Word obviously predates the Mac but I don't think it predates the Apple //. However, the most popular word processor on the early Apples was Quark's Word Juggler. In the early years, it required the installation of a special chip on the mother board, but it really worked great. I used it for six or seven years. I still wouldn't mind writing with it. It did everything I ever needed to do for manuscript production. Paul On Nov 29, 2006, at 6:13 PM, Bob W wrote: Word pre-dates (I won't write 'predates'...) Apple doesn't it? I think the original version was developed for the Star. -- Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Shell Sent: 29 November 2006 21:12 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Way OT: File conversion problem Word is from Office X. I haven't a clue what version of WordPerfect these people use, but probably latest version. Bob On Nov 29, 2006, at 2:58 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: What version of Wordperfect, what version of Word? Bob Shell wrote: I'm on a Mac running OS 10.4.8 . Someone sent me some documents I need to work with, but they sent them in WordPerfect format. I need to convert them to something I can read and search. It would seem obvious that someone ought to make a WordPerfect to Word converter for Mac, but so far I haven't turned one up in my Google searches. Anyone here know of a way to do this? Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
