Re: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
Undoubtably. Some time ago I took some pictures with the *ist D and the F717, and I was really disappointed by the softness of the *ist D compared to the sharpness of the F717 :-) However, some of you will recall for sure how much (and how alone) I complained for the *ist D softness here in PDML some months ago. Then I got tired of repeating myself again and again (and bothering you so much on that subject). Nevertheless, the *ist D keeps taking soft pictures. So, why the hell did I buy an *ist D at the end? I must be crazy, or masochist. Yes, enough a plausible explanation. Dario Bonazza (owning so many Pentax lenses and being so much stuck to Pentax for daring to buy a Canon) - Original Message - From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 9:05 PM Subject: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > Speaking of SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm: > http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4934830.html > > This is not really as sharp as the shots made with my SONY DSC F717, > published last week: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4784879.html > > Jens Bladt > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt >
Re: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
What is your flow like? When I first started, I used the *istD with jpg best, so I had to jack up the sharpen, saturation, and contrast settings to avoid a PS fixup afterwards. I was not happy with the results, so I switched to RAW. But the Pentax convertor was a pain, and the only way to get 16 files was in TIFF, another pain. Just recently I purchased an upgrade to my PS, the new PhotoShop-CS (creative suite or version 8). This is a much better tool, and I have noticed that not only is the final result sharper, but the colors are truer also. But the best part is the fact that it can import Pentax RAW directly, without going through the crappy Pentax convertor. rg Dario Bonazza wrote: Undoubtably. Some time ago I took some pictures with the *ist D and the F717, and I was really disappointed by the softness of the *ist D compared to the sharpness of the F717 :-) However, some of you will recall for sure how much (and how alone) I complained for the *ist D softness here in PDML some months ago. Then I got tired of repeating myself again and again (and bothering you so much on that subject). Nevertheless, the *ist D keeps taking soft pictures. So, why the hell did I buy an *ist D at the end? I must be crazy, or masochist. Yes, enough a plausible explanation. Dario Bonazza (owning so many Pentax lenses and being so much stuck to Pentax for daring to buy a Canon) - Original Message - From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 9:05 PM Subject: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm Speaking of SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4934830.html This is not really as sharp as the shots made with my SONY DSC F717, published last week: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4784879.html Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Re: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm
I'm used to shoot best quality jpegs, and then crop (when necessary), color balance (when necessary), add some proper USM (always) and so on. I understand the Photoshop CS plugin works better than any RAW converter (standalone or plugin) using the damn Pentax algorithm, but is it possible that buying Photo$hop 8 is the only way for getting acceptable RAW conversion? However, yesterday I took some pictures with the DA 16-45 in Verona, and I'm pleased with the results. Good sharpness in direct sunlight (1/250 f11 ISO200 and all the Saints in Heaven helping the lens performance) and great nighttime results (slow speeds f/4.5 800 ISO). Dario Bonazza (not so unhappy with the *ist D ;-) - Original Message - From: "Gonz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 10:00 PM Subject: Re: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > What is your flow like? When I first started, I used the *istD with jpg > best, so I had to jack up the sharpen, saturation, and contrast settings > to avoid a PS fixup afterwards. I was not happy with the results, so I > switched to RAW. But the Pentax convertor was a pain, and the only way > to get 16 files was in TIFF, another pain. Just recently I purchased an > upgrade to my PS, the new PhotoShop-CS (creative suite or version 8). > This is a much better tool, and I have noticed that not only is the > final result sharper, but the colors are truer also. But the best part > is the fact that it can import Pentax RAW directly, without going > through the crappy Pentax convertor. > > rg > > > Dario Bonazza wrote: > > >Undoubtably. Some time ago I took some pictures with the *ist D and the > >F717, and I was really disappointed by the softness of the *ist D compared > >to the sharpness of the F717 :-) > > > >However, some of you will recall for sure how much (and how alone) I > >complained for the *ist D softness here in PDML some months ago. Then I got > >tired of repeating myself again and again (and bothering you so much on that > >subject). Nevertheless, the *ist D keeps taking soft pictures. > > > >So, why the hell did I buy an *ist D at the end? I must be crazy, or > >masochist. Yes, enough a plausible explanation. > > > >Dario Bonazza > >(owning so many Pentax lenses and being so much stuck to Pentax for daring > >to buy a Canon) > > > >- Original Message - > >From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 9:05 PM > >Subject: PAW: Pentax Samba 2004, shot with SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm > > > > > >>Speaking of SMC F 4-5.6/70-210mm: > >>http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4934830.html > >> > >>This is not really as sharp as the shots made with my SONY DSC F717, > >>published last week: http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4784879.html > >> > >>Jens Bladt > >>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
