RE: Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO
On 12 Aug 2004 at 5:32, John Power wrote: > Wow, I am really sorry to hear about that. For me you just ended the > discussion of "to skylight or not to skylight," when walking with a camera. John > Power Racehorse in the desert. Metal hoods rule :-) They've saved my glASS more than once. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO
Wow, I am really sorry to hear about that. For me you just ended the discussion of "to skylight or not to skylight," when walking with a camera. John Power Racehorse in the desert. -Original Message- From: Jerome Reyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 11:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO I went hiking this morning with the ist-D and the DA 16-45mm lens. I Slipped. Fell. With No filter. No hood. Lens met Rock. Photographer howled in frustration. End of Story. Ouch. Not sure what to do now. It's not ~quite~ a crack, but definitely more than a scratch (actually, 2 or 3). From preliminary tests, the nicks show up on the photos at about F11 or less. In most photos, I'm betting that I'll be able to fix it via editing... but to have to do that each time will be a pain. It was also the first trip out with the lens too... which makes this stink even more. It also left me wondering how costly (if even possible) it would be to replace just a front element via Pentax Colorado. Any experience with this, anyone? I suppose I'll give them a ring today or tomorrow. Lastly, here are a couple of photos from the hike this morning. I'm still having difficulty exposing for waterfalls, and haven't gotten it down just yet. Balancing btwn making the scene bright enough [usually pretty dark in the woods] and not making the water highlights too blown out seems to be an art that continues to elude me. Any suggestions would be appreciated. http://exposedfilm.net/bras2683.htm http://exposedfilm.net/bras2679.htm Comments appreciated as always. Best regards, - jerome
Re: Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO
Jerome, my 16-45 doesn't have a threaded hood. it is a bayonet mount. it's also flimsy plastic adequate for shading but not for very much protection. are you talking about the hood that came with the lens? Herb... - Original Message - From: "Jerome Reyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 6:03 PM Subject: Re: Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO > Whats worse, is that simply using the hood would have avoided this > accident... but here's the thing: I don't know if it's just my sample or > not, but the hood to the DA 16-45mm simply will not STAY ON. I swear, the > diameter of the threads on the hood seem to be just a hair or two larger > than those in the lens. If I put the two together, the doggone thing will > quite literary come aloose if I shake the lens for 5 seconds.
Re: Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO
Jerome's images are good shots. i take the lazy way out, i bought a set of plugins that do the blending for me. although converting RAW at different exposures works, i find that if i just have one exposure, then the Photoshop CS Shadows and Highlights adjustment on the 16-bit image works better. while you are doing the RAW conversion in Photoshop CS, note that decreasing exposure by between 0.5 and 0.7 stops usually results in recoverable headroom that isn't available from a straight conversion. you will have look at the far right of the histogram as you adjust exposure downwards to see if the spike at the edge goes away or not. if it does, you have real headroom to play with. if the spike always remains at the right no matter how much you subtract exposure, you have truly burned out highlights and nothing can bring them back. if you don't have Photoshop CS or you have more than one image file, then the blending works better. i use Reindeer Graphics Optipix for my blending. you can also do it with a pressure sensitive tablet and various layer techniques such as layer masks to do the blending. personally, i find that the plugins do a good enough job i haven't yet resorted to doing it completely by hand. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jerome Reyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 3:18 PM Subject: Re: Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO > The shots look marvelous - you are pretty close. Herb talks about > sandwiching exposures together to get a larger range. I have just > begun to play with that concept. First couple of attempts were based > on a RAW image that was converted twice - once darker and once > lighter. Then blending them together. > > Perhaps Herb will chime in with more details on how he does it.
Re: Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004, Jerome Reyes wrote: > Oh, certainly! I know it would have. And yes, I know that such filters are > a whole lot less expensive than new lenses (or front elements). So, yep, > get in line and you can kick me in the butt right after I kick myself > first. Whats worse, is that simply using the hood would have avoided this > accident... but here's the thing: I don't know if it's just my sample or > not, but the hood to the DA 16-45mm simply will not STAY ON. Get them to fix it while they fix the front element of your lens. My DA 16-45 hood has no problem staying in place. alex
Re: Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO
Bruce, You and J.Tainter both an excellent point with the following: > Based on the scarcity of this > lens, I wonder if Pentax Colorado would have > any front elements available? I guess I didn't even think about that. We'll see. > So here is a big question - If you had put a > UV/protective filter over the lens, do you think that > it would have saved the front element Oh, certainly! I know it would have. And yes, I know that such filters are a whole lot less expensive than new lenses (or front elements). So, yep, get in line and you can kick me in the butt right after I kick myself first. Whats worse, is that simply using the hood would have avoided this accident... but here's the thing: I don't know if it's just my sample or not, but the hood to the DA 16-45mm simply will not STAY ON. I swear, the diameter of the threads on the hood seem to be just a hair or two larger than those in the lens. If I put the two together, the doggone thing will quite literary come aloose if I shake the lens for 5 seconds. So instead of the hood being on my lens (where it wound consequently end up on the forest floor in 10 minutes of hiking or less)... it's probable somewhere at home, under my bed perhaps... snickering at me and my cracked lens. Oh well. Anyhow, > The shots look marvelous - you are pretty close. Thanks... and I appreciate the pretty close comment. And, in all honesty, that's been the frustrating part. I feel as if I've been stuck in the same place (the same rung on the photo ladder) for a very long time. I'm starting to think that I won't be able to reach that next rung without some help. Photo class? seminar? Another hike to a mountain top with Mark Roberts? Or just taking more photos, and more photos, and more... I haven't a clue where it'll come from... but I often feel like I've leveled out, and (quite honestly) it stinks since I'm nowhere near as decent as I'd like to be with this photo stuff. I know that Mark Cassino (who I always credit with getting me started down this slippery slope) has spent a decent amount of time in photo classes and the sorts despite what I consider his elevated status as a worthy photog... and he has mentioned on numerous occasions of how worthwhile such experiences continue to be for him. And so, I'm thinking the same. we'll see. But in the meantime... that "next step up" continues to elude me. > Herb talks about sandwiching exposures together to > get a larger range. once darker and once > lighter. Then blending them together.I have just > begun to play with that concept. I've actually tried that before. Both of the following photos are a product if such tactics: (especially the second). http://exposedfilm.net/jonesrun016.htm http://exposedfilm.net/doyle005.htm ... but to have to do that each time... I couldn't imagine. But again, I'm struggling as to what else I can do ~in camera~ to solve such issues. > Perhaps Herb will chime in with more details on how he does it. I'd be quite curious! Thanks again for your comments, Bruce. - jerome _ Jerome D. Coombs-Reyes, Ph.D. Norfolk State University, Math Dept. http://exposedfilm.net
Re: Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO
Hello Jerome, So sorry to hear about the accident. Based on the scarcity of this lens, I wonder if Pentax Colorado would have any front elements available? I suspect not - would have to order from Japan. So here is a big question - If you had put a UV/protective filter over the lens, do you think that it would have saved the front element or just broken and gotten through anyway? The shots look marvelous - you are pretty close. Herb talks about sandwiching exposures together to get a larger range. I have just begun to play with that concept. First couple of attempts were based on a RAW image that was converted twice - once darker and once lighter. Then blending them together. Perhaps Herb will chime in with more details on how he does it. -- Best regards, Bruce Wednesday, August 11, 2004, 11:34:06 AM, you wrote: JR> I went hiking this morning with the ist-D and the DA 16-45mm lens. I JR> Slipped. Fell. With No filter. No hood. Lens met Rock. Photographer howled JR> in frustration. End of Story. JR> Ouch. Not sure what to do now. It's not ~quite~ a crack, but definitely JR> more than a scratch (actually, 2 or 3). From preliminary tests, the nicks JR> show up on the photos at about F11 or less. In most photos, I'm betting JR> that I'll be able to fix it via editing... but to have to do that each JR> time will be a pain. It was also the first trip out with the lens too... JR> which makes this stink even more. JR> It also left me wondering how costly (if even possible) it would be to JR> replace just a front element via Pentax Colorado. Any experience with JR> this, anyone? I suppose I'll give them a ring today or tomorrow. JR> Lastly, here are a couple of photos from the hike this morning. I'm still JR> having difficulty exposing for waterfalls, and haven't gotten it down just JR> yet. Balancing btwn making the scene bright enough [usually pretty dark in JR> the woods] and not making the water highlights too blown out seems to be JR> an art that continues to elude me. Any suggestions would be appreciated. JR> http://exposedfilm.net/bras2683.htm JR> http://exposedfilm.net/bras2679.htm JR> Comments appreciated as always. Best regards, JR> - jerome
Re: Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO
Sympathies, Jerome. Your best bet is probably to contact Pentax about replacing the front element. Please let us know what they say. It will be interesting to see if Pentax has parts for the DA 16-45 since they do not actually have the lens itself. Joe
Cracked Lens, exposure question, and a PESO
I went hiking this morning with the ist-D and the DA 16-45mm lens. I Slipped. Fell. With No filter. No hood. Lens met Rock. Photographer howled in frustration. End of Story. Ouch. Not sure what to do now. It's not ~quite~ a crack, but definitely more than a scratch (actually, 2 or 3). From preliminary tests, the nicks show up on the photos at about F11 or less. In most photos, I'm betting that I'll be able to fix it via editing... but to have to do that each time will be a pain. It was also the first trip out with the lens too... which makes this stink even more. It also left me wondering how costly (if even possible) it would be to replace just a front element via Pentax Colorado. Any experience with this, anyone? I suppose I'll give them a ring today or tomorrow. Lastly, here are a couple of photos from the hike this morning. I'm still having difficulty exposing for waterfalls, and haven't gotten it down just yet. Balancing btwn making the scene bright enough [usually pretty dark in the woods] and not making the water highlights too blown out seems to be an art that continues to elude me. Any suggestions would be appreciated. http://exposedfilm.net/bras2683.htm http://exposedfilm.net/bras2679.htm Comments appreciated as always. Best regards, - jerome
