Re: Heipi kickstarter, thoughts?

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

It's interesting, yes. 

In my opinion, too complicated. That three-part center column means six more 
points of failure (all the hinges and sliding bits) and potential instability. 
(Hmm: In wind, that three part center column may indeed seem to have more 
structural rigidity, but note that it triples the sail area of the column at 
the top of the tripod… I wonder what that does to stability in heavy wind.) 
That and the 'traditional' style ball head adds bulk and weight, again at the 
top of the tripod, never mind seems kinda awkward in use. 

The spec'ced weight capacity is a bit absurd. First off, I have yet to see ONE 
vendor's weight spec that actually stood up to failure testing. Secondly, the 
notion of putting 50 lbs of gear onto a lightweight travel tripod is … um … 
silly? What, save two pounds on a tripod so I can carry 30 more pounds of gear? 
I don't understand. My "travel kit" rarely weighs 9 lbs, including the bag I 
carry it in AND the tripod. Why would I need 50 lbs of carrying capacity? If 
the Heipi really does have a 50 lb carrying capacity, well, I'd recommend they 
cut that in half and save 30% on the weight of the tripod and head. If I need a 
tripod to hold up an anchor, well, I have that set of legs in the back of the 
closet… I'll winch it out again someday. :)

Looking at it objectively, the Heipei is a round-leg tripod with a tricky 
mini-pod that doubles as a center column. The minipod-column makes it look like 
the PD Travel Tripod, but it is just a superficial resemblence.

Note: I've used and been delighted by the PD Travel Tripod since it was first 
released. It has not failed me no matter what I wanted to do with it. It fits 
into my travel rollaway easily, along with its accessories (spikes, tools, 
alternative column head platform) along with my clothes and other gear. It 
handles my Hasselblads as easily as my cell phone, or Minox submini, and 
everything in between for that matter. I can configure it to be a more limited 
(and extremely sturdy) short tripod for low angle use, and use my standard 
heads on it with the alternative head column platform if I so choose. And PD 
has proven to be a very easy company to work with if/when I need a part or 
accessory … that's why I use their straps, bags, and other paraphenalia too. 
It's a bit pricier than the Heipei, but it is also a local-to-me company (SF, 
USA based): I can get to their main store in SF in 45 minutes if I need a 
part... 

Lots of choices, lots of compromises. All of them have a reason for their 
existence. :)

G
—
Old photographer to newbie: "You can spend $800 to get a decent tripod and 
head. 
Or you can spend $1500 to get the same decent tripod and head. The difference 
is that
the $1500 one meant buying a couple of crappy $200-300 tripods before you came 
to your 
senses and bought the good one."


> On Nov 15, 2022, at 12:13 PM, Daniel J. Matyola  wrote:
> 
> Looks interesting.
> 
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 2:09 PM Larry Colen  wrote:
> 
>> I stumbled on this, just as it is ending.   I’m intrigued, they seem to
>> have looked at the Peak Design, and improved on the concept.
>> 
>> 
>> https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/heipi/most-lightweight-and-compact-3-in-1-travel-tripod
>> 
>> This guy rather likes the Heipi
>> 
>> https://theslantedlens.com/2022/peak-design-vs-heipi-which-travel-tripod-is-the-best/
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Heipi kickstarter, thoughts?

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Looks interesting.

Dan Matyola
*https://tinyurl.com/DJM-Pentax-Gallery
*



On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 2:09 PM Larry Colen  wrote:

> I stumbled on this, just as it is ending.   I’m intrigued, they seem to
> have looked at the Peak Design, and improved on the concept.
>
>
> https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/heipi/most-lightweight-and-compact-3-in-1-travel-tripod
>
> This guy rather likes the Heipi
>
> https://theslantedlens.com/2022/peak-design-vs-heipi-which-travel-tripod-is-the-best/
>
>
> --
> Larry Colen
> l...@red4est.com.   sent from Mirkwood
>
>
> --
> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Heipi kickstarter, thoughts?

[Larry Colen]

I stumbled on this, just as it is ending.   I’m intrigued, they seem to have 
looked at the Peak Design, and improved on the concept.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/heipi/most-lightweight-and-compact-3-in-1-travel-tripod

This guy rather likes the Heipi
https://theslantedlens.com/2022/peak-design-vs-heipi-which-travel-tripod-is-the-best/


--
Larry Colen
l...@red4est.com.   sent from Mirkwood


--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT: useful thoughts from the great David Hurn

[Paul Stenquist]

I agree with John. I simply ignore the buttons I don’t need but am thankful for 
those that allow me to immediately move my focus point, switch to continuous 
focus or dial in exposure comp. I do agree with Hurn’s desire for brighter 
bigger viewfinders. And like him I bemoan the time it would take to digitize 
the tens of thousands of pics I shot on film.

Paul

> On May 24, 2021, at 4:20 PM, John Francis  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 05:55:15PM +, Bob Pdml wrote:
>> Especially his final comment about buttons
>> 
>> https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=share_sheet
> 
> I find having a bunch of buttons I don't need is far, far less annoying
> than not having a button that provides some functionality I really like.
> 
> As not everybody wants the same kind of thing, I'll put up with a camera
> with buttons I never use (which, in my case, probably includes anything
> related to video) if it makes the camera attractive to manufacturers.
> 
> Programmable buttons are also a way to reduce button overpopulation.
> --
> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT: useful thoughts from the great David Hurn

[Bob Pdml]

That’s the best I can do I’m afraid.

> On 24 May 2021, at 22:40, Paul Sorenson  wrote:
> 
> No joy...still needs me to log in or create and account
> 
>> On 5/24/2021 1:28 PM, Bob Pdml wrote:
>> Is this any better?
>> 
>> https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=copy_link
>> 
>> On 24 May 2021, at 19:19, Paul Sorenson  wrote:
>> 
>> Instagram wants me to log in...
>> 
>> On 5/24/2021 12:55 PM, Bob Pdml wrote:
>> Especially his final comment about buttons
>> 
>> https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=share_sheet
>> --
>> 
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT: useful thoughts from the great David Hurn

[Paul Sorenson]

No joy...still needs me to log in or create and account

On 5/24/2021 1:28 PM, Bob Pdml wrote:

Is this any better?

https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=copy_link

On 24 May 2021, at 19:19, Paul Sorenson  wrote:

Instagram wants me to log in...

On 5/24/2021 12:55 PM, Bob Pdml wrote:
Especially his final comment about buttons

https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=share_sheet
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

--
Paul Sorenson
Studio1941

Sooner or later "different" scares people.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.


--
Paul Sorenson
Studio1941

Sooner or later "different" scares people.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT: useful thoughts from the great David Hurn

[John Francis]

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 05:55:15PM +, Bob Pdml wrote:
> Especially his final comment about buttons
> 
> https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=share_sheet

I find having a bunch of buttons I don't need is far, far less annoying
than not having a button that provides some functionality I really like.

As not everybody wants the same kind of thing, I'll put up with a camera
with buttons I never use (which, in my case, probably includes anything
related to video) if it makes the camera attractive to manufacturers.

Programmable buttons are also a way to reduce button overpopulation.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT: useful thoughts from the great David Hurn

[ann sanfedele]

love what he said and that particular photo too.

ann

On 5/24/2021 2:28 PM, Bob Pdml wrote:

Is this any better?

https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=copy_link

On 24 May 2021, at 19:19, Paul Sorenson  wrote:

Instagram wants me to log in...

On 5/24/2021 12:55 PM, Bob Pdml wrote:
Especially his final comment about buttons

https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=share_sheet
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

--
Paul Sorenson
Studio1941

Sooner or later "different" scares people.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.


--
ann sanfedele photography
https://annsan.smugmug.com
https://www.cafepress.com/+ann-sanfedele+gifts
https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/annsan
https://www.createphotocalendars.com/Shop/annsanfedelecalendarsandbooks
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT: useful thoughts from the great David Hurn

[Bob Pdml]

Is this any better?

https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=copy_link

On 24 May 2021, at 19:19, Paul Sorenson  wrote:

Instagram wants me to log in...

On 5/24/2021 12:55 PM, Bob Pdml wrote:
Especially his final comment about buttons

https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=share_sheet
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

--
Paul Sorenson
Studio1941

Sooner or later "different" scares people.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT: useful thoughts from the great David Hurn

[Paul Sorenson]

Instagram wants me to log in...

On 5/24/2021 12:55 PM, Bob Pdml wrote:

Especially his final comment about buttons

https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=share_sheet
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.


--
Paul Sorenson
Studio1941

Sooner or later "different" scares people.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

OT: useful thoughts from the great David Hurn

[Bob Pdml]

Especially his final comment about buttons

https://www.instagram.com/p/CPQjaSMj3mK/?utm_medium=share_sheet
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Thoughts on 50th...

[John]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVSRm80WzZk

On 7/22/2019 01:06:46, Alan C wrote:
My late uncle told me of a strange occurrence on the family farm back in 1936. 
The family were the proud owners of a spanking new Jaguar SS. While he was 
polishing the beast late on a balmy Saturday afternoon ready for its weekly trip 
to Church, a small green, box shaped car came trundling down the dirt farm road. 
The driver seemed very disorientated & had obviously lost his way. After giving 
him directions to get back to the main road, he asked if he could look under the 
bonnet. He had never seen anything like it before - front wheel drive with a 
small transverse Cooper engine. The visitor admired the gleaming Jaguar & said 
he was busy restoring a 1938 model. My uncle asked how that could be seeing it 
was only 1936. The visitor did not answer - he thanked my uncle, climbed into 
his car and drove off, disappearing into the dusk. My uncle said he slept very 
uneasily that night. Early on the Sunday morning he walked out of the house & 
noticed the tyre tread pattern of the visitor,s car in the sand. It was a 
pattern he had never seen before. He decided to follow it up the road but after 
about 200yds it became fainter & simply disappeared. He then walked the other 
direction & found exactly the same thing. In 1960 I became the proud owner of a 
Mini-Cooper!


Alan C

On 21-Jul-19 11:07 PM, Bob Pdml wrote:

On 21 Jul 2019, at 16:29, Mark Roberts  wrote:

Steve Cottrell wrote:

If Skynet exists in the future, I'm sure they'll be paying you a little 
visit a few years ago

That's it! We know Skynet won't ever exist in the future because they
haven't visited us in the past.

What a relief!


maybe they will have visited us in some past yet to come...









--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Alan C]

My late uncle told me of a strange occurrence on the family farm back in 
1936. The family were the proud owners of a spanking new Jaguar SS. 
While he was polishing the beast late on a balmy Saturday afternoon 
ready for its weekly trip to Church, a small green, box shaped car came 
trundling down the dirt farm road. The driver seemed very disorientated 
& had obviously lost his way. After giving him directions to get back to 
the main road, he asked if he could look under the bonnet. He had never 
seen anything like it before - front wheel drive with a small transverse 
Cooper engine. The visitor admired the gleaming Jaguar & said he was 
busy restoring a 1938 model. My uncle asked how that could be seeing it 
was only 1936. The visitor did not answer - he thanked my uncle, climbed 
into his car and drove off, disappearing into the dusk. My uncle said he 
slept very uneasily that night. Early on the Sunday morning he walked 
out of the house & noticed the tyre tread pattern of the visitor,s car 
in the sand. It was a pattern he had never seen before. He decided to 
follow it up the road but after about 200yds it became fainter & simply 
disappeared. He then walked the other direction & found exactly the same 
thing. In 1960 I became the proud owner of a Mini-Cooper!


Alan C

On 21-Jul-19 11:07 PM, Bob Pdml wrote:

On 21 Jul 2019, at 16:29, Mark Roberts  wrote:

Steve Cottrell wrote:


If Skynet exists in the future, I'm sure they'll be paying you a little visit a 
few years ago

That's it! We know Skynet won't ever exist in the future because they
haven't visited us in the past.

What a relief!


maybe they will have visited us in some past yet to come...






--
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Thank you. 

The Earth's Moon is larger than Pluto, which—until it was demoted recently—was 
considered a "planet"..
;-)

Of course, it's more as a figure of speech as I used the word, rather than a 
precise statement of fact.

G
—
Such are the arguments of wizards that they generally end up where they began.

> On Jul 20, 2019, at 12:46 PM, Daniel J. Matyola  wrote:
> 
> I agree with everything you said, Godfrey, except, of course, the moon is
> not really "another planet.'  That does not in any measure diminish the
> achievement or what it has meant.
> 
> 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.

Re: Thoughts on 50th...

[William Robb]

On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 3:06 PM Bob Pdml  wrote:

>
> > On 21 Jul 2019, at 20:42, William Robb 
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On 21/7/19, Alan C, discombobulated, unleashed:
> >>
> >>> AI. There is no such thing. Machines only react to mountains of info in
> >>> their databases. They are incapable of original thought. The problems
> >>> with driverless cars occur when situations not in their databases are
> >>> encountered. At best, machines & robots are nothing more than super
> >> slaves.
> >>
> >
> > The problem with driverless cars is going to come to a head when a car
> has
> > to make a decision about who lives and who dies.
> > Either way, it’s a no win for the manufacturer and programmer of the
> > vehicle.
> >
> >
>
> https://theconversation.com/driverless-cars-once-theyre-on-the-road-human-drivers-should-be-banned-118293


Nice pap piece, but all it is doing is forwarding an agenda with a
narrative.

Put two people darting out into traffic with no way for the vehicle to
respond until someone is going to be hit. The car has to choose one or the
other to die.
Either way, especially if this happens in the USA, the company that built
the car, and the people who writhe the software that told the car which
choice to make, is going to face a pretty heavy lawsuit.

Frankly, it scares me that we are preparing to put machines into that
position. Who should live and who should die being decided by an algorithm.
The machine acting as God.


>
-- 
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Goodbye and thanks for all the fish.

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola


On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 5:02 PM Bob Pdml  wrote:

> https://tinyurl.com/y6mkb3ut
>
>
> https://lightroom.adobe.com/shares/00f4c7321374431ea848517ce1613814/albums/775e41e7fe91462d820fd3ba97d4cc07/assets/b162bb4ac7564d6ea31f8a468fdb09d4
>
> > On 20 Jul 2019, at 18:20, Godfrey DiGiorgi 
> wrote:
> >
> > And today is the day, 50 years on, that Mankind first touched another
> planet. All of us, together. OMG! The whole world watched in awe and
> wonder, and was uplifted by that fact.
> >
> > All the problems of the world were then as well as now, as well as for
> all the generations of history before and since. That will always be. And
> the true sadness of the Apollo missions, despite all that pushing to do
> this and creating all the technology and good stuff that it spawned which
> helps human beings live longer, be more productive, and look at the world
> and the stars around them with new insights, is that it ended and we
> haven't gone back or further yet.
> >
> > But, g*n it, we managed to do something incredible. We did something
> worth writing in the history of our species that no other species we know
> has done. And all the naysayers and querulous ambivalents in the world can
> moan and whine and whinge about whether we should have or not, but it
> doesn't matter at all: We managed to do it, and it was good, and it is
> amazing, and it brought all of us worldwide together for one shining moment
> of joy and wonder.
> >
> > If that's not worth whatever it cost, then nothing is.
> >
> >
> --
> 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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Bob Pdml]

> On 21 Jul 2019, at 16:29, Mark Roberts  wrote:
> 
> Steve Cottrell wrote:
> 
>> If Skynet exists in the future, I'm sure they'll be paying you a little 
>> visit a few years ago
> 
> That's it! We know Skynet won't ever exist in the future because they
> haven't visited us in the past.
> 
> What a relief!
> 

maybe they will have visited us in some past yet to come...



-- 
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Bob Pdml]

> On 21 Jul 2019, at 20:42, William Robb  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 21/7/19, Alan C, discombobulated, unleashed:
>> 
>>> AI. There is no such thing. Machines only react to mountains of info in
>>> their databases. They are incapable of original thought. The problems
>>> with driverless cars occur when situations not in their databases are
>>> encountered. At best, machines & robots are nothing more than super
>> slaves.
>> 
> 
> The problem with driverless cars is going to come to a head when a car has
> to make a decision about who lives and who dies.
> Either way, it’s a no win for the manufacturer and programmer of the
> vehicle.
> 
> 
https://theconversation.com/driverless-cars-once-theyre-on-the-road-human-drivers-should-be-banned-118293


-- 
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Bob Pdml]

https://tinyurl.com/y6mkb3ut

https://lightroom.adobe.com/shares/00f4c7321374431ea848517ce1613814/albums/775e41e7fe91462d820fd3ba97d4cc07/assets/b162bb4ac7564d6ea31f8a468fdb09d4

> On 20 Jul 2019, at 18:20, Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
> 
> And today is the day, 50 years on, that Mankind first touched another planet. 
> All of us, together. OMG! The whole world watched in awe and wonder, and was 
> uplifted by that fact.
> 
> All the problems of the world were then as well as now, as well as for all 
> the generations of history before and since. That will always be. And the 
> true sadness of the Apollo missions, despite all that pushing to do this and 
> creating all the technology and good stuff that it spawned which helps human 
> beings live longer, be more productive, and look at the world and the stars 
> around them with new insights, is that it ended and we haven't gone back or 
> further yet.
> 
> But, g*n it, we managed to do something incredible. We did something 
> worth writing in the history of our species that no other species we know has 
> done. And all the naysayers and querulous ambivalents in the world can moan 
> and whine and whinge about whether we should have or not, but it doesn't 
> matter at all: We managed to do it, and it was good, and it is amazing, and 
> it brought all of us worldwide together for one shining moment of joy and 
> wonder.
> 
> If that's not worth whatever it cost, then nothing is.
> 
> 
-- 
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[William Robb]

On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 5:59 AM Steve Cottrell  wrote:

> On 21/7/19, Alan C, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >AI. There is no such thing. Machines only react to mountains of info in
> >their databases. They are incapable of original thought. The problems
> >with driverless cars occur when situations not in their databases are
> >encountered. At best, machines & robots are nothing more than super
> slaves.
>
> Be interesting to see if this stands the test of time.
>
> If Skynet exists in the future, I'm sure they'll be paying you a little
> visit a few years ago


The problem with driverless cars is going to come to a head when a car has
to make a decision about who lives and who dies.
Either way, it’s a no win for the manufacturer and programmer of the
vehicle.

Bill
-- 
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Paul Stenquist]

Skynet visited me in the past, Two guys in dark suits knocked on my door. 
Apparently, it’s in serious financial trouble in the future, so they’ve adopted 
the Jehova’s Witnesses business model and are seeking donations.

Paul

> On Jul 21, 2019, at 11:29 AM, Mark Roberts  wrote:
> 
> Steve Cottrell wrote:
> 
>> If Skynet exists in the future, I'm sure they'll be paying you a little 
>> visit a few years ago
> 
> That's it! We know Skynet won't ever exist in the future because they
> haven't visited us in the past.
> 
> What a relief!
> 
> -- 
> 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.


-- 
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Steve Cottrell]

On 21/7/19, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:

>That's it! We know Skynet won't ever exist in the future because they
>haven't visited us in the past

Or we could just be in a recuring loop between those two points.

-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__UK Shoot / Edit and
||  (O)  |Live Broadcast News
--
_



-- 
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Mark Roberts]

Steve Cottrell wrote:

>If Skynet exists in the future, I'm sure they'll be paying you a little visit 
>a few years ago

That's it! We know Skynet won't ever exist in the future because they
haven't visited us in the past.

What a relief!
 
-- 
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Steve Cottrell]

On 21/7/19, Alan C, discombobulated, unleashed:

>AI. There is no such thing. Machines only react to mountains of info in 
>their databases. They are incapable of original thought. The problems 
>with driverless cars occur when situations not in their databases are 
>encountered. At best, machines & robots are nothing more than super slaves.

Be interesting to see if this stands the test of time.

If Skynet exists in the future, I'm sure they'll be paying you a little visit a 
few years ago



-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__UK Shoot / Edit and
||  (O)  |Live Broadcast News
--
_



-- 
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Alan C]

Well put, Godfrey. Man will eventually go further. He will need to do a 
lot to save mother earth too. Too many people, too few resources. We 
can't be far from the tipping point.


AI. There is no such thing. Machines only react to mountains of info in 
their databases. They are incapable of original thought. The problems 
with driverless cars occur when situations not in their databases are 
encountered. At best, machines & robots are nothing more than super slaves.


Alan C


On 20-Jul-19 08:56 PM, Jos de Fotograaf wrote:

Right Godfrey,

maybe the last really  great thing we did before our role in evolution 
will be taken over by AI / Robotics.

I would give a few years of my life for a glance in the future.

Greetz, Jos van der Hijden

On 7/20/2019 7:20 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
And today is the day, 50 years on, that Mankind first touched another 
planet. All of us, together. OMG! The whole world watched in awe and 
wonder, and was uplifted by that fact.


All the problems of the world were then as well as now, as well as 
for all the generations of history before and since. That will always 
be. And the true sadness of the Apollo missions, despite all that 
pushing to do this and creating all the technology and good stuff 
that it spawned which helps human beings live longer, be more 
productive, and look at the world and the stars around them with new 
insights, is that it ended and we haven't gone back or further yet.


But, g*n it, we managed to do something incredible. We did 
something worth writing in the history of our species that no other 
species we know has done. And all the naysayers and querulous 
ambivalents in the world can moan and whine and whinge about whether 
we should have or not, but it doesn't matter at all: We managed to do 
it, and it was good, and it is amazing, and it brought all of us 
worldwide together for one shining moment of joy and wonder.


If that's not worth whatever it cost, then nothing is.

G
—
No matter where you go, there you are.






--
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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Stan Halpin]

A neighbor of mine in Kansas City had worked as a programmer for a NASA 
contractor. He suggested a software patch (a backdoor) to allow control of 
shuttle operations onboard. Boss said “Not in the specs. Work it on your own 
time if you like.” So he did. And Apollo 13 redirect back home became possible 
because of his code. I am sure there are thousands of other stories of 
too-seldom acknowledged bits of engineering creativity and foresight.

Some place I have the B negs of the shots I took of the landing. (From my tv 
screen.)

Stan

Sent from my iPad

> On Jul 20, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Daniel J. Matyola  wrote:
> 
> I agree with everything you said, Godfrey, except, of course, the moon is
> not really "another planet.'  That does not in any measure diminish the
> achievement or what it has meant.
> 
> Dan Matyola
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 1:21 PM Godfrey DiGiorgi 
> wrote:
> 
>> And today is the day, 50 years on, that Mankind first touched another
>> planet. All of us, together. OMG! The whole world watched in awe and
>> wonder, and was uplifted by that fact.
>> 
>> All the problems of the world were then as well as now, as well as for all
>> the generations of history before and since. That will always be. And the
>> true sadness of the Apollo missions, despite all that pushing to do this
>> and creating all the technology and good stuff that it spawned which helps
>> human beings live longer, be more productive, and look at the world and the
>> stars around them with new insights, is that it ended and we haven't gone
>> back or further yet.
>> 
>> But, g*n it, we managed to do something incredible. We did something
>> worth writing in the history of our species that no other species we know
>> has done. And all the naysayers and querulous ambivalents in the world can
>> moan and whine and whinge about whether we should have or not, but it
>> doesn't matter at all: We managed to do it, and it was good, and it is
>> amazing, and it brought all of us worldwide together for one shining moment
>> of joy and wonder.
>> 
>> If that's not worth whatever it cost, then nothing is.
>> 
>> G
>> —
>> No matter where you go, there you are.
>> --
>> 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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Daniel J. Matyola]

I agree with everything you said, Godfrey, except, of course, the moon is
not really "another planet.'  That does not in any measure diminish the
achievement or what it has meant.

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola


On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 1:21 PM Godfrey DiGiorgi 
wrote:

> And today is the day, 50 years on, that Mankind first touched another
> planet. All of us, together. OMG! The whole world watched in awe and
> wonder, and was uplifted by that fact.
>
> All the problems of the world were then as well as now, as well as for all
> the generations of history before and since. That will always be. And the
> true sadness of the Apollo missions, despite all that pushing to do this
> and creating all the technology and good stuff that it spawned which helps
> human beings live longer, be more productive, and look at the world and the
> stars around them with new insights, is that it ended and we haven't gone
> back or further yet.
>
> But, g*n it, we managed to do something incredible. We did something
> worth writing in the history of our species that no other species we know
> has done. And all the naysayers and querulous ambivalents in the world can
> moan and whine and whinge about whether we should have or not, but it
> doesn't matter at all: We managed to do it, and it was good, and it is
> amazing, and it brought all of us worldwide together for one shining moment
> of joy and wonder.
>
> If that's not worth whatever it cost, then nothing is.
>
> G
> —
> No matter where you go, there you are.
> --
> 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: Thoughts on 50th...

[Jos de Fotograaf]

Right Godfrey,

maybe the last really  great thing we did before our role in evolution 
will be taken over by AI / Robotics.

I would give a few years of my life for a glance in the future.

Greetz, Jos van der Hijden

On 7/20/2019 7:20 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

And today is the day, 50 years on, that Mankind first touched another planet. 
All of us, together. OMG! The whole world watched in awe and wonder, and was 
uplifted by that fact.

All the problems of the world were then as well as now, as well as for all the 
generations of history before and since. That will always be. And the true 
sadness of the Apollo missions, despite all that pushing to do this and 
creating all the technology and good stuff that it spawned which helps human 
beings live longer, be more productive, and look at the world and the stars 
around them with new insights, is that it ended and we haven't gone back or 
further yet.

But, g*n it, we managed to do something incredible. We did something worth 
writing in the history of our species that no other species we know has done. 
And all the naysayers and querulous ambivalents in the world can moan and whine 
and whinge about whether we should have or not, but it doesn't matter at all: 
We managed to do it, and it was good, and it is amazing, and it brought all of 
us worldwide together for one shining moment of joy and wonder.

If that's not worth whatever it cost, then nothing is.

G
—
No matter where you go, there you are.



--
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.

Thoughts on 50th...

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

And today is the day, 50 years on, that Mankind first touched another planet. 
All of us, together. OMG! The whole world watched in awe and wonder, and was 
uplifted by that fact.

All the problems of the world were then as well as now, as well as for all the 
generations of history before and since. That will always be. And the true 
sadness of the Apollo missions, despite all that pushing to do this and 
creating all the technology and good stuff that it spawned which helps human 
beings live longer, be more productive, and look at the world and the stars 
around them with new insights, is that it ended and we haven't gone back or 
further yet.

But, g*n it, we managed to do something incredible. We did something worth 
writing in the history of our species that no other species we know has done. 
And all the naysayers and querulous ambivalents in the world can moan and whine 
and whinge about whether we should have or not, but it doesn't matter at all: 
We managed to do it, and it was good, and it is amazing, and it brought all of 
us worldwide together for one shining moment of joy and wonder.

If that's not worth whatever it cost, then nothing is.

G
—
No matter where you go, there you are. 
-- 
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: thoughts on the K-1 vs K-3

[Mark Roberts]

For my trek through Yorkshire on the Pennine Way next month I'm going
to be taking the K-1 (over the K-5) mainly because of the GPS tagging.
I never thought I'd use it but it's amazing how wrong I was. It's
absolutely brilliant when traveling. Hell, even close to home it's
easy to forget where I took a particular shot if there's no
identifying landmark in the shot.
 
-- 
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: thoughts on the K-1 vs K-3

[Alan C]

Fortunately I'll never have to make such stressful decisions.

Alan C

-Original Message- 
From: Henk Terhell

Sent: 14 April, 2018 5:14 PM
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: thoughts on the K-1 vs K-3

For me there is also always the dilemma going for a walk: do I take the
K-1 or the K-5. Weight/size versus quality.
The K-5 with the DA 21/3.2 limited is so conveniently small and fits
well under a coat in cold weather, though I see people thinking  I am
growing a belly.
Once I decide to take the K-1 the question comes up whether the ND grad
filter should go along, but that implies also the tripod, so I'll take a
backpack with more lenses...

Never do I put APS lenses on the K-1 following Northrup's advice on YT
as there is no gain in pixels.
With both cameras I am frequently struggling on focusing so that is not
an issue for me.

Henk

Op 2018-04-14 om 10:09 schreef Larry Colen:
I've noticed that lately that when I'm grabbing a camera to have with me 
when I go out, I've been a lot less picky about whether I grab my K-1 or 
K-3.  Ignoring price, if you happen to have both lying around, there are a 
lot of ways in which the K-1 is a better camera than the K-3, and a few 
that the K-3 is better than the K-1. If size, weight and fps don't 
tremendously matter, then the K-1 is a pretty damn nice APS camera in crop 
mode. It doesn't have the resolution in APS of the K-3, nor the frame 
rate, but the focus is better, and its focus points cover much more of the 
APS frame.


In challenging light, or challenging focus conditions, the K-1 does 
better, not hugely but noticeably so, than the K-3. However, in decent 
light and for that matter even some pretty lousy light, walking around 
taking pictures, I can think of very few cases (if any) where I'd look at 
the final image and be able to tell whether I shot it with the K-3 and 
16-50 or the K-1 and the 28-75.


To be sure, there are lots of times that to get a particular shot, I 
really need the larger sensor in the K-1, those are usually night time 
wide angle shots.  Also, when I'm photographing musicians and don't want 
to get great shots of microphones with blurry musicians in the background, 
the K-1 far outshines the K-3. But I've recently been surprised to realize 
how often, for basic shooting, it really doesn't matter to me which camera 
I grab.


I will note that I haven't gotten to the point of grabbing the K-1 and APS 
only lenses like the 18-250.





--
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. 



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
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: thoughts on the K-1 vs K-3

[Henk Terhell]

For me there is also always the dilemma going for a walk: do I take the 
K-1 or the K-5. Weight/size versus quality.
The K-5 with the DA 21/3.2 limited is so conveniently small and fits 
well under a coat in cold weather, though I see people thinking  I am 
growing a belly.
Once I decide to take the K-1 the question comes up whether the ND grad 
filter should go along, but that implies also the tripod, so I'll take a 
backpack with more lenses...


Never do I put APS lenses on the K-1 following Northrup's advice on YT 
as there is no gain in pixels.
With both cameras I am frequently struggling on focusing so that is not 
an issue for me.


Henk

Op 2018-04-14 om 10:09 schreef Larry Colen:
I've noticed that lately that when I'm grabbing a camera to have with 
me when I go out, I've been a lot less picky about whether I grab my 
K-1 or K-3.  Ignoring price, if you happen to have both lying around, 
there are a lot of ways in which the K-1 is a better camera than the 
K-3, and a few that the K-3 is better than the K-1. If size, weight 
and fps don't tremendously matter, then the K-1 is a pretty damn nice 
APS camera in crop mode. It doesn't have the resolution in APS of the 
K-3, nor the frame rate, but the focus is better, and its focus points 
cover much more of the APS frame.


In challenging light, or challenging focus conditions, the K-1 does 
better, not hugely but noticeably so, than the K-3. However, in decent 
light and for that matter even some pretty lousy light, walking around 
taking pictures, I can think of very few cases (if any) where I'd look 
at the final image and be able to tell whether I shot it with the K-3 
and 16-50 or the K-1 and the 28-75.


To be sure, there are lots of times that to get a particular shot, I 
really need the larger sensor in the K-1, those are usually night time 
wide angle shots.  Also, when I'm photographing musicians and don't 
want to get great shots of microphones with blurry musicians in the 
background, the K-1 far outshines the K-3. But I've recently been 
surprised to realize how often, for basic shooting, it really doesn't 
matter to me which camera I grab.


I will note that I haven't gotten to the point of grabbing the K-1 and 
APS only lenses like the 18-250.





--
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.

thoughts on the K-1 vs K-3

[Larry Colen]

I've noticed that lately that when I'm grabbing a camera to have with me 
when I go out, I've been a lot less picky about whether I grab my K-1 or 
K-3.  Ignoring price, if you happen to have both lying around, there are 
a lot of ways in which the K-1 is a better camera than the K-3, and a 
few that the K-3 is better than the K-1. If size, weight and fps don't 
tremendously matter, then the K-1 is a pretty damn nice APS camera in 
crop mode. It doesn't have the resolution in APS of the K-3, nor the 
frame rate, but the focus is better, and its focus points cover much 
more of the APS frame.


In challenging light, or challenging focus conditions, the K-1 does 
better, not hugely but noticeably so, than the K-3. However, in decent 
light and for that matter even some pretty lousy light, walking around 
taking pictures, I can think of very few cases (if any) where I'd look 
at the final image and be able to tell whether I shot it with the K-3 
and 16-50 or the K-1 and the 28-75.


To be sure, there are lots of times that to get a particular shot, I 
really need the larger sensor in the K-1, those are usually night time 
wide angle shots.  Also, when I'm photographing musicians and don't want 
to get great shots of microphones with blurry musicians in the 
background, the K-1 far outshines the K-3. But I've recently been 
surprised to realize how often, for basic shooting, it really doesn't 
matter to me which camera I grab.


I will note that I haven't gotten to the point of grabbing the K-1 and 
APS only lenses like the 18-250.


--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 18, 2017, at 6:35 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:
> 
> JPEGs (for example) have 8 bits (coincidentally a bit and a stop each 
> represent a doubling, or power of two), which is a ratio of 1-256. What that 
> means is if you map the range of the sensor onto the JPEG, then it takes 16 
> times as much change in brightness (contrast) with a 14 bit sensor to make 
> the same change in 8 bits as it does with a 10 bit sensor.
> 
> If you do an HDR in lightroom with two images shot 6-8 stops apart of a scene 
> with a lot of dynamic range, and you process it without the auto exposure the 
> resultant image will look very flat and low contrast.

Thanks Larry. But I’m as much in the dark as ever.
 
> It's something that kind of takes some playing around and experimentation to 
> get a good feel for.

Yep. And likely before that a good deal of instruction.

> You could go to one of you photos that you've already processed in lightroom. 
> Press 'D' to get into the develop module, go to the history on the left, 
> click on "import photo", and that will have all of the settings zeroed out. 
> Then hit (command or control)-single quote to make your virtual copy, and 
> that virtual copy is starting out fresh.

Thanks for this. I’ll check it out.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"What is man without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone, 
men would die from a great loneliness of spirit." 

- Chief Seattle






-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 22, 2017, at 12:32 AM, P. J. Alling  wrote:
> 
> The Fuji shot was at ISO 400 and both Pentax shots were at ISO 3200.  The 
> fact that one of them looks essentially as good as the Fuji is what's really 
> amazing.

Thanks for pointing that out, Peter.

> Though based on that Fuji shot, I'd say that the 27 f2.8 deserves it's 
> reputation.  It is essentially Fugi's version of the SMC-P FA 43mm limited 
> for their APS-C sensor cameras.  Probably sharper wide open than the Pentax.

And it’s cheap—I got mine new for just over $200.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"What does it mean...that the world is so beautiful?" 

- Mary Oliver 










-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[P. J. Alling]

The Fuji shot was at ISO 400 and both Pentax shots were at ISO 3200.  
The fact that one of them looks essentially as good as the Fuji is 
what's really amazing.


Though based on that Fuji shot, I'd say that the 27 f2.8 deserves it's 
reputation.  It is essentially Fugi's version of the SMC-P FA 43mm 
limited for their APS-C sensor cameras.  Probably sharper wide open than 
the Pentax.



On 12/18/2017 1:49 PM, Eric Weir wrote:

A few images from the graduation ceremony I spoke about.

One with Pentax K-5/50-200/4-5.6 that was improved by editing:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/eeweir/38427160774/in/album-72157661729844657/

One that was not:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/eeweir/38254902955/in/album-72157661729844657/

One with Fuji X-M1/27/2.8. This one was edited too, but except for cropping I 
could easily used it as shot.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/eeweir/39105762872/in/album-72157661729844657/

As has been pointed out, not a fair comparison. Nevertheless….

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"Our world is a human world."

- Hilary Putnam








--
America wasn't founded so that we could all be better.
America was founded so we could all be anything we damn well please.
- P.J. O'Rourke


--
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Featherstone]

On 19 December 2017 at 00:16, Eric Weir  wrote:
> Pretty good guesses, Eric. They’re instructive. And I agree I’m not being 
> fair, though I didn’t know that before the earlier comments on this thread. 
> Just one demurrer: not all the Fuji shots were outdoors in the sun.

OK fair enough. I was assuming too much from that one photo.


-- 
Eric

-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 18, 2017, at 6:35 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:
> 
> Eric Weir wrote:
>>> On Dec 17, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Note that the greater the dynamic range a camera has, the less apparent 
>>> contrast there will be in the unedited file.
>> 
>> You’re gonna have to explain that, Larry. To my naive, uninformed, ignorant 
>> mind it strikes me as counterintuitive. More than a little. But just my 
>> naive, uninformed, ignorant mind.
> 
> By the way, a significant portion of my upper division classes in college 
> were on digital signal processing. A lot of my professional life has been in 
> computer controls, where we digitize real world data and work with that. As 
> such, there are a lot of things that I don't even have to think about like 
> converting number of bits to an equivalent analog range, so if I mention 
> something as if it is obvious, and it's not, don't hesitate to ask.
> 
> In short
> The K-5 dynamic range at base ISO is basically 14 stops (each bit or stop is 
> a power of two), that means that it has a range of 1 to 2^14, or about 16,000 
> between the least amount that it can register and the brightest that it can 
> register (for each color channel).
> 
> If you have a camera with only 10 stops of dynamic then that is only a ratio 
> of 1,024.
> 
> JPEGs (for example) have 8 bits (coincidentally a bit and a stop each 
> represent a doubling, or power of two), which is a ratio of 1-256. What that 
> means is if you map the range of the sensor onto the JPEG, then it takes 16 
> times as much change in brightness (contrast) with a 14 bit sensor to make 
> the same change in 8 bits as it does with a 10 bit sensor.
> 
> If you do an HDR in lightroom with two images shot 6-8 stops apart of a scene 
> with a lot of dynamic range, and you process it without the auto exposure the 
> resultant image will look very flat and low contrast.
> 
> It's something that kind of takes some playing around and experimentation to 
> get a good feel for.
> 
> As to the raw conversion engine, it doesn't really matter what is running 
> under lightroom, the fact that you do your processing in lightroom is what I 
> was asking about.
> 
> One nice thing about lightroom is that it doesn't make any changes to the raw 
> file. It stores a set of steps (a recipe, if you will) for the raw conversion 
> engine, to apply to the raw file to get your final product.  When you make a 
> virtual copy, it just starts off with all of the settings at whatever point 
> you make the virtual copy and you can adjust them at that point.
> 
> You could go to one of you photos that you've already processed in lightroom. 
> Press 'D' to get into the develop module, go to the history on the left, 
> click on "import photo", and that will have all of the settings zeroed out. 
> Then hit (command or control)-single quote to make your virtual copy, and 
> that virtual copy is starting out fresh.

Thanks, Larry. I’m gonna have to study this. I’ll get back to you—with 
appreciations or further questions.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"Imagining the other is a powerful antidote to fanaticism and hatred." 

- Amos Oz


-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 18, 2017, at 4:42 PM, Jan van Wijk  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 12:21:15 -0500 Eric Weir wrote:
>> 
>> A question: Since the RAW file is not changed by edits, is it possible to 
>> keep an edit while doing a second one of the same RAW file?  
> 
> Yes, just create a 'Virtual Copy' of the image (you can make several if you 
> wish)
> and work on the copy. Each copy has its own set of 'adjustments made to it'
> but share the same (unchanged) RAW data.
> 
> You can also use this to create different aspect ratios or crops for example 
> ...
> 
> The function you are looking for is on the context-menu for a thumbnail or on 
> the
> image when opened in the Library or Develop module and is called 'Create 
> Virtual Copy'
> (You get the context menu with a right mouse button click, or Ctrl+Click on 
> macOS)

Thanks Jan.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

“...we are a form of invitation to others and to otherness..."

- David Whyte


-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 18, 2017, at 2:39 PM, Eric Featherstone  
> wrote:
> 
> I'm not an expert but when I looked at "One that was not" my first
> thought was camera shake. I would have thought that a focal length of
> 87mm @ 1/125 second would have been ok but it looks shaky to me.
> 
> Oddly the "One that was improved by editing" has no camera shake even
> at a fl of 225mm @ 1/125 s, which is where I would expect shake to
> start to come into play. So clearly you can hold it steady.
> 
> And then when I saw the Fuji shot my first thought was "Hey, come on,
> you're not being fair at all" :-)
> The Pentax shots were indoors in dull dim light, the Fuji outside in
> bright sunlight; of course the Fuji shot will pop more.
> That's in addition to what people have said about pro lens vs
> consumer, and short lens vs long etc.
> 
> But that's just my guesses.

Pretty good guesses, Eric. They’re instructive. And I agree I’m not being fair, 
though I didn’t know that before the earlier comments on this thread. Just one 
demurrer: not all the Fuji shots were outdoors in the sun. 

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"The invincible shield of caring Is a weapon 
sent from the sky against being dead." 

- Tao Te Ching 67


-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Larry Colen]

Eric Weir wrote:

On Dec 17, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:

Note that the greater the dynamic range a camera has, the less apparent 
contrast there will be in the unedited file.


You’re gonna have to explain that, Larry. To my naive, uninformed, ignorant 
mind it strikes me as counterintuitive. More than a little. But just my naive, 
uninformed, ignorant mind.


By the way, a significant portion of my upper division classes in 
college were on digital signal processing. A lot of my professional life 
has been in computer controls, where we digitize real world data and 
work with that. As such, there are a lot of things that I don't even 
have to think about like converting number of bits to an equivalent 
analog range, so if I mention something as if it is obvious, and it's 
not, don't hesitate to ask.


In short
The K-5 dynamic range at base ISO is basically 14 stops (each bit or 
stop is a power of two), that means that it has a range of 1 to 2^14, or 
about 16,000 between the least amount that it can register and the 
brightest that it can register (for each color channel).


If you have a camera with only 10 stops of dynamic then that is only a 
ratio of 1,024.


JPEGs (for example) have 8 bits (coincidentally a bit and a stop each 
represent a doubling, or power of two), which is a ratio of 1-256. What 
that means is if you map the range of the sensor onto the JPEG, then it 
takes 16 times as much change in brightness (contrast) with a 14 bit 
sensor to make the same change in 8 bits as it does with a 10 bit sensor.


If you do an HDR in lightroom with two images shot 6-8 stops apart of a 
scene with a lot of dynamic range, and you process it without the auto 
exposure the resultant image will look very flat and low contrast.


It's something that kind of takes some playing around and 
experimentation to get a good feel for.


As to the raw conversion engine, it doesn't really matter what is 
running under lightroom, the fact that you do your processing in 
lightroom is what I was asking about.


One nice thing about lightroom is that it doesn't make any changes to 
the raw file. It stores a set of steps (a recipe, if you will) for the 
raw conversion engine, to apply to the raw file to get your final 
product.  When you make a virtual copy, it just starts off with all of 
the settings at whatever point you make the virtual copy and you can 
adjust them at that point.


You could go to one of you photos that you've already processed in 
lightroom. Press 'D' to get into the develop module, go to the history 
on the left, click on "import photo", and that will have all of the 
settings zeroed out. Then hit (command or control)-single quote to make 
your virtual copy, and that virtual copy is starting out fresh.


--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Jan van Wijk]

Hi Eric,

On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 12:21:15 -0500 Eric Weir wrote:
>
>A question: Since the RAW file is not changed by edits, is it possible to keep 
>an edit while doing a second one of the same RAW file?  

Yes, just create a 'Virtual Copy' of the image (you can make several if you 
wish)
and work on the copy. Each copy has its own set of 'adjustments made to it'
but share the same (unchanged) RAW data.

You can also use this to create different aspect ratios or crops for example ...

The function you are looking for is on the context-menu for a thumbnail or on 
the
image when opened in the Library or Develop module and is called 'Create 
Virtual Copy'
(You get the context menu with a right mouse button click, or Ctrl+Click on 
macOS)

Regards, JvW



--
Jan van Wijk;   http://www.dfsee.com
Flickr : jvw_pentax


-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Featherstone]

On 18 December 2017 at 18:49, Eric Weir  wrote:
>
> A few images from the graduation ceremony I spoke about.
>
> One with Pentax K-5/50-200/4-5.6 that was improved by editing:
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/eeweir/38427160774/in/album-72157661729844657/
>
> One that was not:
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/eeweir/38254902955/in/album-72157661729844657/
>
> One with Fuji X-M1/27/2.8. This one was edited too, but except for cropping I 
> could easily used it as shot.
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/eeweir/39105762872/in/album-72157661729844657/
>
> As has been pointed out, not a fair comparison. Nevertheless….

I'm not an expert but when I looked at "One that was not" my first
thought was camera shake. I would have thought that a focal length of
87mm @ 1/125 second would have been ok but it looks shaky to me.

Oddly the "One that was improved by editing" has no camera shake even
at a fl of 225mm @ 1/125 s, which is where I would expect shake to
start to come into play. So clearly you can hold it steady.

And then when I saw the Fuji shot my first thought was "Hey, come on,
you're not being fair at all" :-)
The Pentax shots were indoors in dull dim light, the Fuji outside in
bright sunlight; of course the Fuji shot will pop more.
That's in addition to what people have said about pro lens vs
consumer, and short lens vs long etc.

But that's just my guesses.

-- 
Eric

-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

A few images from the graduation ceremony I spoke about.

One with Pentax K-5/50-200/4-5.6 that was improved by editing:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/eeweir/38427160774/in/album-72157661729844657/

One that was not:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/eeweir/38254902955/in/album-72157661729844657/

One with Fuji X-M1/27/2.8. This one was edited too, but except for cropping I 
could easily used it as shot.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/eeweir/39105762872/in/album-72157661729844657/

As has been pointed out, not a fair comparison. Nevertheless….

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"Our world is a human world." 

- Hilary Putnam






-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 18, 2017, at 12:52 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> 
> I’m sure you can do a second edit of your RSE (RAW) file.

I’m checking up on virtual copies in Lightroom, which Larry brought to my 
attention in an earlier post in this thread. I think a virtual copy of an edit 
gives you a copy of the edit. But I assume that can be reset and reedited.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"What does it mean...that the world is so beautiful?" 

- Mary Oliver 










-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Paul Stenquist]

RAW, not RSE. Typing on a phone doesn’t work well for we fat fingered fellows,

Paul

> On Dec 18, 2017, at 12:52 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> 
> I’m sure you can do a second edit of your RSE file. I don’t use Lightroom; I 
> work solely in photoshop and retain all my RAW files. If I want to start from 
> scratch with a second edit, I just open the Raw in ARC and click on default 
> conversion. That takes me back to step one. I can then do a new conversion 
> and assign the finished product a different file name.
> 
> Paul
> 
>> On Dec 18, 2017, at 12:21 PM, Eric Weir  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Dec 14, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
>>> 
>>> You need to do some homework. You can start here: 
>>> http://www.instructables.com/id/A-Complete-Beginners-Guide-to-Raw-Files-And-Raw-Pr/
>> 
>> Thanks again, Paul, for this and the other site/page you sent links to. Most 
>> of what’s discussed are things I’ve been using/doing. For the most part I’m 
>> familiar/comfortable with the effects achieved, but have had little sense of 
>> what the labels mean, what the actual underlying processes are. A few of the 
>> sliders I‘d never touched before, e.g., clarity, vibrance, saturation.
>> 
>> I note that tastes are involved, that what makes for improvement and 
>> worsening is a personal matter, but also from discussions here that there is 
>> often significant agreement about what is lacking. 
>> 
>> Uncertain now that Lightroom does use Adobe Camera Raw.
>> 
>> I’ll keep going back to these articles for a while to check and firm up my 
>> understanding. 
>> 
>> One thing that remains obscure that the articles didn’t address is the 
>> histogram. 
>> 
>> A question: Since the RAW file is not changed by edits, is it possible to 
>> keep an edit while doing a second one of the same RAW file?  
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Eric Weir
>> Decatur, GA  USA
>> eew...@bellsouth.net
>> 
>> "What does it mean...that the world is so beautiful?" 
>> 
>> - Mary Oliver 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Paul Stenquist]

I’m sure you can do a second edit of your RSE file. I don’t use Lightroom; I 
work solely in photoshop and retain all my RAW files. If I want to start from 
scratch with a second edit, I just open the Raw in ARC and click on default 
conversion. That takes me back to step one. I can then do a new conversion and 
assign the finished product a different file name.

Paul

> On Dec 18, 2017, at 12:21 PM, Eric Weir  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Dec 14, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
>> 
>> You need to do some homework. You can start here: 
>> http://www.instructables.com/id/A-Complete-Beginners-Guide-to-Raw-Files-And-Raw-Pr/
> 
> Thanks again, Paul, for this and the other site/page you sent links to. Most 
> of what’s discussed are things I’ve been using/doing. For the most part I’m 
> familiar/comfortable with the effects achieved, but have had little sense of 
> what the labels mean, what the actual underlying processes are. A few of the 
> sliders I‘d never touched before, e.g., clarity, vibrance, saturation.
> 
> I note that tastes are involved, that what makes for improvement and 
> worsening is a personal matter, but also from discussions here that there is 
> often significant agreement about what is lacking. 
> 
> Uncertain now that Lightroom does use Adobe Camera Raw.
> 
> I’ll keep going back to these articles for a while to check and firm up my 
> understanding. 
> 
> One thing that remains obscure that the articles didn’t address is the 
> histogram. 
> 
> A question: Since the RAW file is not changed by edits, is it possible to 
> keep an edit while doing a second one of the same RAW file?  
> 
> 
> --
> Eric Weir
> Decatur, GA  USA
> eew...@bellsouth.net
> 
> "What does it mean...that the world is so beautiful?" 
> 
> - Mary Oliver 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> 
> You need to do some homework. You can start here: 
> http://www.instructables.com/id/A-Complete-Beginners-Guide-to-Raw-Files-And-Raw-Pr/

Thanks again, Paul, for this and the other site/page you sent links to. Most of 
what’s discussed are things I’ve been using/doing. For the most part I’m 
familiar/comfortable with the effects achieved, but have had little sense of 
what the labels mean, what the actual underlying processes are. A few of the 
sliders I‘d never touched before, e.g., clarity, vibrance, saturation.

I note that tastes are involved, that what makes for improvement and worsening 
is a personal matter, but also from discussions here that there is often 
significant agreement about what is lacking. 

Uncertain now that Lightroom does use Adobe Camera Raw.

I’ll keep going back to these articles for a while to check and firm up my 
understanding. 

One thing that remains obscure that the articles didn’t address is the 
histogram. 

A question: Since the RAW file is not changed by edits, is it possible to keep 
an edit while doing a second one of the same RAW file?  


--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"What does it mean...that the world is so beautiful?" 

- Mary Oliver 










-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 17, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:
> 
> Note that the greater the dynamic range a camera has, the less apparent 
> contrast there will be in the unedited file.

You’re gonna have to explain that, Larry. To my naive, uninformed, ignorant 
mind it strikes me as counterintuitive. More than a little. But just my naive, 
uninformed, ignorant mind. 

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"Imagining the other is a powerful antidote to fanaticism and hatred." 

- Amos Oz


-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 17, 2017, at 4:00 PM, P. J. Alling  wrote:
> 
> Actually the K-5 isn't that much older.  It was introduced in 2010 and 
> discontinued officially 2013 about a year after the K-5II and K-5IIs were 
> released.
> 
> There wasn't a lot of "improvement" in APS-C sensors from the K-5 until the 
> release of 24mp Cameras like the K-3 were released at the end of 2013, (which 
> includes the Nikon 3xxx, 5xxx and 7xxx which all received pretty much the 
> same sensor).
> 
> The K-5 sensor when tested by DxO remained at the top of APS-C sensors for a 
> number or years, and even beat out FF and even a couple of Medium format 
> sensors.
> 
> The Fuji X-Trans sensors were also in the class that DxO put near the top of 
> the heap.
> 
> One can take exception to what makes a sensor good, and DxO may be testing 
> some of the wrong things but they are consistent for comparison purposes.

Thanks, P.J. (Is it Peter? I got it wrong once, was admonished, and have been 
shy since.) The information in this and your earlier post has been especially 
instructive/helpful.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net 

(I)t is important that awake people be awake... the darkness around us is deep.

- William Stafford


-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[P. J. Alling]

Actually the K-5 isn't that much older.  It was introduced in 2010 and 
discontinued officially 2013 about a year after the K-5II and K-5IIs 
were released.


There wasn't a lot of "improvement" in APS-C sensors from the K-5 until 
the release of 24mp Cameras like the K-3 were released at the end of 
2013, (which includes the Nikon 3xxx, 5xxx and 7xxx which all received 
pretty much the same sensor).


The K-5 sensor when tested by DxO remained at the top of APS-C sensors 
for a number or years, and even beat out FF and even a couple of Medium 
format sensors.


The Fuji X-Trans sensors were also in the class that DxO put near the 
top of the heap.


One can take exception to what makes a sensor good, and DxO may be 
testing some of the wrong things but they are consistent for comparison 
purposes.



On 12/17/2017 5:47 AM, Eric Weir wrote:

On Dec 16, 2017, at 10:08 PM, P. J. Alling  wrote:

So is the Fuji X-M1, released in 2013 IIRC.

Yes, but it was no longer in production when I bought mine about two years ago. 
I was fortunate to find a new one. I see the K-5 is about ten years older.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"What is man without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone,
men would die from a great loneliness of spirit."

- Chief Seattle








--
America wasn't founded so that we could all be better.
America was founded so we could all be anything we damn well please.
- P.J. O'Rourke


--
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Larry Colen]

Eric Weir wrote:


Finally you don't mention if you're shooting RAW or Jpeg.   Pentax out of 
camera Jpeg files are not the best.  If you're shooting RAW; with a little more 
sharpening and contrast adjustment to the Pentax images you shouldn't see any 
marked difference between either camera given roughly equivalent lenses.


Thanks, P.J. All that helps. And yes, it’s the 27mm/2.8 that I have. I misspoke.

I shoot RAW. When I wrote I was comparing unedited RAW images in Lightroom.


Note that the greater the dynamic range a camera has, the less apparent 
contrast there will be in the unedited file. The only thing that really 
matters is the quality of the final image as presented.




Wondering what the opinion here would be of the Pentax DA 35/2.4 would be. It’s 
my only autofocus Pentax prime. I thought images made with it might make for a 
fairer comparison with my Fuji setup.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"What is man without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone,
men would die from a great loneliness of spirit."

- Chief Seattle








--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 16, 2017, at 10:13 PM, P. J. Alling  wrote:
> 
> I'm a bit late to this but, there are two things that stand out.
> 1. The K-5 has an AA filter, so the images will require a bit of judicious 
> sharpening to equal the sharpness of images from the X-Trans sensor in the 
> Fuji as it doesn't need an AA filter and doesn't have one due to it's more or 
> less, non repetitive,  the color lens pattern.
> 
> 2. You're comparing a prime lens to a consumer zoom.  Now, modern zoom lenses 
> can often meet or exceed image quality standards set by older prime lenses 
> but, usually I find that even my SMCP-A 24mm f2.8 seems to perform better 
> than even modern zooms, though maybe not quite as sharp as the SMCP-FA 20-35 
> f4.0, which is an amazing little zoom.
> 
> I don't know which 28mm you have, unless you actually have the Fuji 27mm f2.8 
> pancake lens, which if you do, is hardly being fair to the Pentax camera and 
> lens combination.  It's reputed to be one of the very best inexpensive lenses 
> in the Fuji system, while the Pentax Zoom is pretty good but not even close 
> to being the best.   Even the Pentax A 28mm f2.8 should produce better 
> quality images.
> 
> Finally you don't mention if you're shooting RAW or Jpeg.   Pentax out of 
> camera Jpeg files are not the best.  If you're shooting RAW; with a little 
> more sharpening and contrast adjustment to the Pentax images you shouldn't 
> see any marked difference between either camera given roughly equivalent 
> lenses.

Thanks, P.J. All that helps. And yes, it’s the 27mm/2.8 that I have. I 
misspoke. 

I shoot RAW. When I wrote I was comparing unedited RAW images in Lightroom.

Wondering what the opinion here would be of the Pentax DA 35/2.4 would be. It’s 
my only autofocus Pentax prime. I thought images made with it might make for a 
fairer comparison with my Fuji setup.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"What is man without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone, 
men would die from a great loneliness of spirit." 

- Chief Seattle






-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 16, 2017, at 10:08 PM, P. J. Alling  wrote:
> 
> So is the Fuji X-M1, released in 2013 IIRC.

Yes, but it was no longer in production when I bought mine about two years ago. 
I was fortunate to find a new one. I see the K-5 is about ten years older.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"What is man without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone, 
men would die from a great loneliness of spirit." 

- Chief Seattle






-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[P. J. Alling]

Are you sure about that?

On 12/15/2017 9:03 PM, l...@red4est.com wrote:

It occurs to me that you could also look at the photos other people get with 
Pentax gear as an example of what it is capable of.  for example, there are at 
least a couple of moderately competent photographers on the PDML.


--
America wasn't founded so that we could all be better.
America was founded so we could all be anything we damn well please.
- P.J. O'Rourke


--
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[P. J. Alling]

I'm a bit late to this but, there are two things that stand out.
1. The K-5 has an AA filter, so the images will require a bit of 
judicious sharpening to equal the sharpness of images from the X-Trans 
sensor in the Fuji as it doesn't need an AA filter and doesn't have one 
due to it's more or less, non repetitive,  the color lens pattern.


2. You're comparing a prime lens to a consumer zoom.  Now, modern zoom 
lenses can often meet or exceed image quality standards set by older 
prime lenses but, usually I find that even my SMCP-A 24mm f2.8 seems to 
perform better than even modern zooms, though maybe not quite as sharp 
as the SMCP-FA 20-35 f4.0, which is an amazing little zoom.


I don't know which 28mm you have, unless you actually have the Fuji 27mm 
f2.8 pancake lens, which if you do, is hardly being fair to the Pentax 
camera and lens combination.  It's reputed to be one of the very best 
inexpensive lenses in the Fuji system, while the Pentax Zoom is pretty 
good but not even close to being the best.   Even the Pentax A 28mm f2.8 
should produce better quality images.


Finally you don't mention if you're shooting RAW or Jpeg.   Pentax out 
of camera Jpeg files are not the best.  If you're shooting RAW; with a 
little more sharpening and contrast adjustment to the Pentax images you 
shouldn't see any marked difference between either camera given roughly 
equivalent lenses.


On 12/13/2017 6:48 PM, Eric Weir wrote:

At one time I would not have considered any equipment other than Pentax. A 
little over two years ago I bought a Fuji X-Q1 compact to take with me on a 
trip to Italy that was going to include a week on bicycles. I was impressed 
with the images I got with it. Also never would have considered a camera—other 
than a compact—without a view finder. I ended up getting myself a Fuji X-M1 
mirrorless and a 28 mm lens. Since doing so I’ve become comfortable with not 
having a viewfinder. The LCD screen gives me the same information I’d get in a 
viewfinder. My only complaint is that it’s sometimes difficult to read the 
screen in bright sunlight.

Yesterday I took my Pentax K-5 with the DA 4-5.6 50-200 zoom and the Fuji X-M1 
with the 28mm lens with me to the graduation ceremony. I used the Pentax during 
the ceremony to get shots of my subject from a distance and the Fuji for closer 
range shots of her and her family interacting with others after the ceremony. 
Not the first time I’ve noticed it, but I was just really impressed with the 
difference in the images I got. Those from the Fuji are markedly sharper and 
“livelier,” those from the Pentax duller in comparison.

Maybe I just don’t know how to use the Pentax?

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"You keep on learning and learning, and pretty soon
you learn something no one has learned before."

- Richard Feynman




--
America wasn't founded so that we could all be better.
America was founded so we could all be anything we damn well please.
- P.J. O'Rourke


--
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[P. J. Alling]

So is the Fuji X-M1, released in 2013 IIRC.


On 12/13/2017 7:44 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:

It could be a matter of in camera processing if you were shooting jpegs. Even 
when shooting RAW the default settings of your converter can
Make a huge difference. The only fair comparison is between expert renderings 
of each. A half dozen years ago I was shooting for Harris Publications with a 
K5. The art directors marveled at how sharp and detailed my images were and 
wanted to know what kind of camera I was using. I suspect the difference was in 
the rendering— and the glass. I was shooting with the DA* 60-250 and DA* 16-50. 
Both are superb lenses. Of course the K5 is now old technology.
Paul


On Dec 13, 2017, at 6:48 PM, Eric Weir  wrote:


At one time I would not have considered any equipment other than Pentax. A 
little over two years ago I bought a Fuji X-Q1 compact to take with me on a 
trip to Italy that was going to include a week on bicycles. I was impressed 
with the images I got with it. Also never would have considered a camera—other 
than a compact—without a view finder. I ended up getting myself a Fuji X-M1 
mirrorless and a 28 mm lens. Since doing so I’ve become comfortable with not 
having a viewfinder. The LCD screen gives me the same information I’d get in a 
viewfinder. My only complaint is that it’s sometimes difficult to read the 
screen in bright sunlight.

Yesterday I took my Pentax K-5 with the DA 4-5.6 50-200 zoom and the Fuji X-M1 
with the 28mm lens with me to the graduation ceremony. I used the Pentax during 
the ceremony to get shots of my subject from a distance and the Fuji for closer 
range shots of her and her family interacting with others after the ceremony. 
Not the first time I’ve noticed it, but I was just really impressed with the 
difference in the images I got. Those from the Fuji are markedly sharper and 
“livelier,” those from the Pentax duller in comparison.

Maybe I just don’t know how to use the Pentax?

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"You keep on learning and learning, and pretty soon
you learn something no one has learned before."

- Richard Feynman


--
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.


--
America wasn't founded so that we could all be better.
America was founded so we could all be anything we damn well please.
- P.J. O'Rourke


--
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[John Francis]

On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 12:54:32PM +, Steve Cottrell wrote:
> On 15/12/17, l...@red4est.com, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> > there are at least a couple of moderately competent photographers on
> >the PDML.
> 
> MARK.

That's one ...

Who's your vote for the second?

-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Steve Cottrell]

On 15/12/17, l...@red4est.com, discombobulated, unleashed:

> there are at least a couple of moderately competent photographers on
>the PDML.

MARK.

-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__UK Shoot / Edit and
||  (O)  |Live Broadcast News
--
_



-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[lrc]

It occurs to me that you could also look at the photos other people get with 
Pentax gear as an example of what it is capable of.  for example, there are at 
least a couple of moderately competent photographers on the PDML.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 15, 2017, at 1:31 PM, Boris Liberman  wrote:
> 
> Eric, if I may add my two cents here.
> 
> The 28mm is wider that 50-200, so by projecting more (wider angle of view)
> on the same sensor size (Fuji and Pentax have both sensors of very similar
> size) - you get an impression of sharper picture. The "livelieness" of the
> picture is too subjective a term to be able to reason about it.
> 
> I have gone similar path - Pentax K-5 is my so far the last Pentax camera
> I've been using. Then I bought into Ricoh GXR system that takes Leica
> primes natively and bought two Zeiss primes for it. Then I had to move to
> Olympus m43 system due to my personal problem.
> 
> I've recently registered with 500px and so in order to choose what to post,
> I am looking through great many of my photos over all those years, starting
> with *istD and ending with Olympus EM-1. What seems to me now is that all
> those changes in what I was thinking of as "right" picture or "right"
> rendering is an acquired and variable taste. At one time I thought that
> K10D was all I needed. Then I really liked K-5. Then I "realized" that
> Ricoh GXR was supreme. Then for a period of time I really preferred
> Olympus... Now I seem to be back to Ricoh.
> 
> I think, that all these tools give different results and as time goes by my
> own sense of what's aesthetically pleasing changes. So, it seems you're
> started on your way. I can only wish you godspeed and all the enjoyment you
> can have on the go.
> 
> No offense here, but Pentax is not a religion. It is just a tool, albeit
> very capable and nice tool, but there are other tools out there and so
> there is no reason not to learn about them and be able to use them to your
> maximal advantage.

Your two-cents are appreciated, Boris. Even before raising the subject here I 
was aware that my experience with the 50-200 lens is not an ideal basis on 
which to evaluate the brand overall. In fact I may not have a lens that would 
give a fair assessment. As I said in my response to Larry, I’ll stay open to 
the possibility that I’ve been unfair to Pentax. But my experience with my 
minimal Fuji setup has been what it has been. I understand also that my comment 
about the “liveliness” of the images I get with the Fuji equipment is 
subjective—really more than subjective; more reflection of my lack of knowledge 
and vocabulary for talking about what I’m experiencing. My favorite Pentax 
setup was a *stD with an A 28/2.8 lens.

Appreciate your comment that our equipment preferences are to a large degree an 
acquired taste with a significant aesthetic dimension. 

Regards,
--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net 

(I)t is important that awake people be awake... the darkness around us is deep.

- William Stafford


-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Boris Liberman]

Eric, if I may add my two cents here.

The 28mm is wider that 50-200, so by projecting more (wider angle of view)
on the same sensor size (Fuji and Pentax have both sensors of very similar
size) - you get an impression of sharper picture. The "livelieness" of the
picture is too subjective a term to be able to reason about it.

I have gone similar path - Pentax K-5 is my so far the last Pentax camera
I've been using. Then I bought into Ricoh GXR system that takes Leica
primes natively and bought two Zeiss primes for it. Then I had to move to
Olympus m43 system due to my personal problem.

I've recently registered with 500px and so in order to choose what to post,
I am looking through great many of my photos over all those years, starting
with *istD and ending with Olympus EM-1. What seems to me now is that all
those changes in what I was thinking of as "right" picture or "right"
rendering is an acquired and variable taste. At one time I thought that
K10D was all I needed. Then I really liked K-5. Then I "realized" that
Ricoh GXR was supreme. Then for a period of time I really preferred
Olympus... Now I seem to be back to Ricoh.

I think, that all these tools give different results and as time goes by my
own sense of what's aesthetically pleasing changes. So, it seems you're
started on your way. I can only wish you godspeed and all the enjoyment you
can have on the go.

No offense here, but Pentax is not a religion. It is just a tool, albeit
very capable and nice tool, but there are other tools out there and so
there is no reason not to learn about them and be able to use them to your
maximal advantage.

Just my pixels... Back to lurking mode.

Boris



On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Eric Weir  wrote:

>
> At one time I would not have considered any equipment other than Pentax. A
> little over two years ago I bought a Fuji X-Q1 compact to take with me on a
> trip to Italy that was going to include a week on bicycles. I was impressed
> with the images I got with it. Also never would have considered a
> camera—other than a compact—without a view finder. I ended up getting
> myself a Fuji X-M1 mirrorless and a 28 mm lens. Since doing so I’ve become
> comfortable with not having a viewfinder. The LCD screen gives me the same
> information I’d get in a viewfinder. My only complaint is that it’s
> sometimes difficult to read the screen in bright sunlight.
>
> Yesterday I took my Pentax K-5 with the DA 4-5.6 50-200 zoom and the Fuji
> X-M1 with the 28mm lens with me to the graduation ceremony. I used the
> Pentax during the ceremony to get shots of my subject from a distance and
> the Fuji for closer range shots of her and her family interacting with
> others after the ceremony. Not the first time I’ve noticed it, but I was
> just really impressed with the difference in the images I got. Those from
> the Fuji are markedly sharper and “livelier,” those from the Pentax duller
> in comparison.
>
> Maybe I just don’t know how to use the Pentax?
>
> 
> --
> Eric Weir
> Decatur, GA  USA
> eew...@bellsouth.net
>
> "You keep on learning and learning, and pretty soon
> you learn something no one has learned before."
>
> - Richard Feynman
>
>
> --
> 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.




-- 
Boris
-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[David J Brooks]

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Eric Weir  wrote:
>
>
>> On Dec 15, 2017, at 7:24 AM, David J Brooks  wrote:
>>
>> May not be what you're looking for but when i first got my Fuji X30 i
>> shot it in B and loved the detail and sharpness of it. Later i
>> started shooting raw+jpg(the B's) and found the coloured shots to be
>> low in saturation like my fall colours compared to my Pentax or Nikons
>> and the colour lacked any sharpness to them even in post process, so
>> i'm not sure its me, settings or camera. so i decided to stay with
>> dslr for now.
>
> Thanks, David. As I’ve said before, I’m the rankest beginner here. i’m hard 
> put to say what it is about the the Fuji’s that I’ve liked beyond the, 
> amazing to me, sharpness. I’ll keep what you say about color in mind, and try 
> to become more specific about my evaluations and fairer in my comparisons of 
> Fuji and Pentax.
>
> --


i need to pull the camera out and double/triple check my settings. It
could be that the jpeg B set up is interferring woith the colour set
up but it should not in raw if i understand raw in the first place.:-)

Dave
> Eric Weir
> Decatur, GA  USA
> eew...@bellsouth.net
>
> “...we are a form of invitation to others and to otherness..."
>
> - David Whyte
>
>
> --
> 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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 15, 2017, at 7:24 AM, David J Brooks  wrote:
> 
> May not be what you're looking for but when i first got my Fuji X30 i
> shot it in B and loved the detail and sharpness of it. Later i
> started shooting raw+jpg(the B's) and found the coloured shots to be
> low in saturation like my fall colours compared to my Pentax or Nikons
> and the colour lacked any sharpness to them even in post process, so
> i'm not sure its me, settings or camera. so i decided to stay with
> dslr for now.

Thanks, David. As I’ve said before, I’m the rankest beginner here. i’m hard put 
to say what it is about the the Fuji’s that I’ve liked beyond the, amazing to 
me, sharpness. I’ll keep what you say about color in mind, and try to become 
more specific about my evaluations and fairer in my comparisons of Fuji and 
Pentax.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

“...we are a form of invitation to others and to otherness..."

- David Whyte


-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[David J Brooks]

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 8:31 PM, Eric Weir  wrote:

> Overall, apart from that, I’ll try to work toward a fair comparison of the 
> two cameras, e.g., using a lens on the Pentax that’s closer in quality to the 
> Fuji lens. Probably my best Pentax lens is the DA 4/16-45. I also have an A 
> 2.8/28 with which I used to get good photos, but I’ve been using autofocus 
> exclusively the last few years that I’m not sure I’d know how to use it 
> anymore.
>
> -
May not be what you're looking for but when i first got my Fuji X30 i
shot it in B and loved the detail and sharpness of it. Later i
started shooting raw+jpg(the B's) and found the coloured shots to be
low in saturation like my fall colours compared to my Pentax or Nikons
and the colour lacked any sharpness to them even in post process, so
i'm not sure its me, settings or camera. so i decided to stay with
dslr for now.

Dave




> Eric Weir
> Decatur, GA  USA
> eew...@bellsouth.net
>
> "What does it mean...that the world is so beautiful?"
>
> - Mary Oliver
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 1:20 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:
> 
> Eric Weir wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks, Paul. I skimmed the article and will read it more carefully shortly.
>> 
>> Some things I gather from the skim: Since I use Lightroom, I guess the 
>> answer to what converter I use is Adobe Camera Raw. And it appears that what 
>> the article is about is what I’ve learned, by trial and error, with a lot of 
>> help from folks here, to do when I edit RAW files in Lightroom. But I will 
>> read the article carefully. I see it covers some things about which I’ve 
>> been a little fuzzy when I’m editing files.
> 
> I'll be interested to see if and how things change for you. It would be 
> interesting for you to take both cameras out, take several photos in 
> different conditions, using both cameras, then using the virtual copy feature 
> of lightroom show us how the images between the two cameras compare both how 
> you're processing them now, then make virtual copies and process those 
> virtual copies using what you learn.

Hmm, to do that I’d have to hold off reading the articles Paul suggested while 
I created and did the initial processing on comparable images created lenses 
that closer in quality on the two cameras. I could go ahead and process the 
images from the graduation ceremony created with the Pentax, then read the 
stuff Paul recommended, create virtual copies of a sample image or two, edit 
them insight of what I learned, and then compare the initial edit with the 
second edit. 

Overall, apart from that, I’ll try to work toward a fair comparison of the two 
cameras, e.g., using a lens on the Pentax that’s closer in quality to the Fuji 
lens. Probably my best Pentax lens is the DA 4/16-45. I also have an A 2.8/28 
with which I used to get good photos, but I’ve been using autofocus exclusively 
the last few years that I’m not sure I’d know how to use it anymore.   

-
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"What does it mean...that the world is so beautiful?" 

- Mary Oliver 










-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Henk Terhell]

And the fact that Eric is comparing sharpness of a 28 mm lens with a 
50-200. Most cheap telelenses tend to be somewhat soft at the long end.
A combination of the Pentax K5 with the FA28/2.8 AL gives good results 
in my experience, even though this lens is not designed for digital.


Henk

Op 2017-12-14 om 19:52 schreef Paul Stenquist:

The apparent difference is probably due in part to the lenses. The DA 50-200 is 
just okay at best.

Paul





--
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Paul Stenquist]

The apparent difference is probably due in part to the lenses. The DA 50-200 is 
just okay at best.

Paul

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 1:20 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Eric Weir wrote:
>>> On Dec 14, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
>>> 
>>> You need to do some homework. You can start here: 
>>> http://www.instructables.com/id/A-Complete-Beginners-Guide-to-Raw-Files-And-Raw-Pr/
>> 
>> Thanks, Paul. I skimmed the article and will read it more carefully shortly.
>> 
>> Some things I gather from the skim: Since I use Lightroom, I guess the 
>> answer to what converter I use is Adobe Camera Raw. And it appears that what 
>> the article is about is what I’ve learned, by trial and error, with a lot of 
>> help from folks here, to do when I edit RAW files in Lightroom. But I will 
>> read the article carefully. I see it covers some things about which I’ve 
>> been a little fuzzy when I’m editing files.
> 
> I'll be interested to see if and how things change for you. It would be 
> interesting for you to take both cameras out, take several photos in 
> different conditions, using both cameras, then using the virtual copy feature 
> of lightroom show us how the images between the two cameras compare both how 
> you're processing them now, then make virtual copies and process those 
> virtual copies using what you learn.
> 
> I'm not at all clear how different sensors can have the effect you describe, 
> it might have something to do with the transmissive properties of the bayer 
> filter in the Pentax and the Fuji equivalent.
> 
> -- 
> Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Larry Colen]

Eric Weir wrote:

On Dec 14, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:

You need to do some homework. You can start here: 
http://www.instructables.com/id/A-Complete-Beginners-Guide-to-Raw-Files-And-Raw-Pr/


Thanks, Paul. I skimmed the article and will read it more carefully shortly.

Some things I gather from the skim: Since I use Lightroom, I guess the answer 
to what converter I use is Adobe Camera Raw. And it appears that what the 
article is about is what I’ve learned, by trial and error, with a lot of help 
from folks here, to do when I edit RAW files in Lightroom. But I will read the 
article carefully. I see it covers some things about which I’ve been a little 
fuzzy when I’m editing files.


I'll be interested to see if and how things change for you. It would be 
interesting for you to take both cameras out, take several photos in 
different conditions, using both cameras, then using the virtual copy 
feature of lightroom show us how the images between the two cameras 
compare both how you're processing them now, then make virtual copies 
and process those virtual copies using what you learn.


I'm not at all clear how different sensors can have the effect you 
describe, it might have something to do with the transmissive properties 
of the bayer filter in the Pentax and the Fuji equivalent.


--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 10:06 AM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> 
> After completing the basic tutorial, go here: 
> http://www.geofflawrence.com/photoshop_raw.html

Thanks again, Paul. Another quick skim suggests this will be instructive, too.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

“...we are a form of invitation to others and to otherness..."

- David Whyte


-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> 
> You need to do some homework. You can start here: 
> http://www.instructables.com/id/A-Complete-Beginners-Guide-to-Raw-Files-And-Raw-Pr/

Thanks, Paul. I skimmed the article and will read it more carefully shortly. 

Some things I gather from the skim: Since I use Lightroom, I guess the answer 
to what converter I use is Adobe Camera Raw. And it appears that what the 
article is about is what I’ve learned, by trial and error, with a lot of help 
from folks here, to do when I edit RAW files in Lightroom. But I will read the 
article carefully. I see it covers some things about which I’ve been a little 
fuzzy when I’m editing files.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"You keep on learning and learning, and pretty soon
you learn something no one has learned before." 

- Richard Feynman


-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Paul Stenquist]

After completing the basic tutorial, go here: 
http://www.geofflawrence.com/photoshop_raw.html

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 7:38 AM, Eric Weir  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Dec 13, 2017, at 7:44 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
>> 
>> It could be a matter of in camera processing if you were shooting jpegs. 
>> Even when shooting RAW the default settings of your converter can 
>> Make a huge difference. The only fair comparison is between expert 
>> renderings of each.
> 
>> On Dec 14, 2017, at 3:05 AM, Larry Colen  wrote:
>> 
>> Without knowing anything about your workflow, it's hard to make a judgement. 
>> What raw converter are you using?
> 
> I shoot RAW. I don’t know what a RAW converter is. Converting RAW files to 
> JPEGs? I have no idea where/how the settings involved might be changed or on 
> what basis one would make changes. I export JPEGs from Lightroom, oblivious 
> of the process involved.. 
> 
> --
> Eric Weir
> Decatur, GA  USA
> eew...@bellsouth.net
> 
> "The invincible shield of caring Is a weapon 
> sent from the sky against being dead." 
> 
> - Tao Te Ching 67
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Paul Stenquist]

You need to do some homework. You can start here: 
http://www.instructables.com/id/A-Complete-Beginners-Guide-to-Raw-Files-And-Raw-Pr/

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 7:38 AM, Eric Weir  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Dec 13, 2017, at 7:44 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
>> 
>> It could be a matter of in camera processing if you were shooting jpegs. 
>> Even when shooting RAW the default settings of your converter can 
>> Make a huge difference. The only fair comparison is between expert 
>> renderings of each.
> 
>> On Dec 14, 2017, at 3:05 AM, Larry Colen  wrote:
>> 
>> Without knowing anything about your workflow, it's hard to make a judgement. 
>> What raw converter are you using?
> 
> I shoot RAW. I don’t know what a RAW converter is. Converting RAW files to 
> JPEGs? I have no idea where/how the settings involved might be changed or on 
> what basis one would make changes. I export JPEGs from Lightroom, oblivious 
> of the process involved.. 
> 
> --
> Eric Weir
> Decatur, GA  USA
> eew...@bellsouth.net
> 
> "The invincible shield of caring Is a weapon 
> sent from the sky against being dead." 
> 
> - Tao Te Ching 67
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

> On Dec 13, 2017, at 7:44 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> 
> It could be a matter of in camera processing if you were shooting jpegs. Even 
> when shooting RAW the default settings of your converter can 
> Make a huge difference. The only fair comparison is between expert renderings 
> of each.

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 3:05 AM, Larry Colen  wrote:
> 
> Without knowing anything about your workflow, it's hard to make a judgement. 
> What raw converter are you using?

I shoot RAW. I don’t know what a RAW converter is. Converting RAW files to 
JPEGs? I have no idea where/how the settings involved might be changed or on 
what basis one would make changes. I export JPEGs from Lightroom, oblivious of 
the process involved.. 

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"The invincible shield of caring Is a weapon 
sent from the sky against being dead." 

- Tao Te Ching 67


-- 
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Larry Colen]

Eric Weir wrote:

At one time I would not have considered any equipment other than Pentax. A 
little over two years ago I bought a Fuji X-Q1 compact to take with me on a 
trip to Italy that was going to include a week on bicycles. I was impressed 
with the images I got with it. Also never would have considered a camera—other 
than a compact—without a view finder. I ended up getting myself a Fuji X-M1 
mirrorless and a 28 mm lens. Since doing so I’ve become comfortable with not 
having a viewfinder. The LCD screen gives me the same information I’d get in a 
viewfinder. My only complaint is that it’s sometimes difficult to read the 
screen in bright sunlight.

Yesterday I took my Pentax K-5 with the DA 4-5.6 50-200 zoom and the Fuji X-M1 
with the 28mm lens with me to the graduation ceremony. I used the Pentax during 
the ceremony to get shots of my subject from a distance and the Fuji for closer 
range shots of her and her family interacting with others after the ceremony. 
Not the first time I’ve noticed it, but I was just really impressed with the 
difference in the images I got. Those from the Fuji are markedly sharper and 
“livelier,” those from the Pentax duller in comparison.

Maybe I just don’t know how to use the Pentax?


Without knowing anything about your workflow, it's hard to make a 
judgement. What raw converter are you using?




--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Paul Stenquist]

And the DA 50-:200, while adequate, is not a stellar performer.

Paul

> On Dec 13, 2017, at 7:44 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> 
> It could be a matter of in camera processing if you were shooting jpegs. Even 
> when shooting RAW the default settings of your converter can 
> Make a huge difference. The only fair comparison is between expert renderings 
> of each. A half dozen years ago I was shooting for Harris Publications with a 
> K5. The art directors marveled at how sharp and detailed my images were and 
> wanted to know what kind of camera I was using. I suspect the difference was 
> in the rendering— and the glass. I was shooting with the DA* 60-250 and DA* 
> 16-50. Both are superb lenses. Of course the K5 is now old technology.
> Paul
> 
>> On Dec 13, 2017, at 6:48 PM, Eric Weir  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> At one time I would not have considered any equipment other than Pentax. A 
>> little over two years ago I bought a Fuji X-Q1 compact to take with me on a 
>> trip to Italy that was going to include a week on bicycles. I was impressed 
>> with the images I got with it. Also never would have considered a 
>> camera—other than a compact—without a view finder. I ended up getting myself 
>> a Fuji X-M1 mirrorless and a 28 mm lens. Since doing so I’ve become 
>> comfortable with not having a viewfinder. The LCD screen gives me the same 
>> information I’d get in a viewfinder. My only complaint is that it’s 
>> sometimes difficult to read the screen in bright sunlight.
>> 
>> Yesterday I took my Pentax K-5 with the DA 4-5.6 50-200 zoom and the Fuji 
>> X-M1 with the 28mm lens with me to the graduation ceremony. I used the 
>> Pentax during the ceremony to get shots of my subject from a distance and 
>> the Fuji for closer range shots of her and her family interacting with 
>> others after the ceremony. Not the first time I’ve noticed it, but I was 
>> just really impressed with the difference in the images I got. Those from 
>> the Fuji are markedly sharper and “livelier,” those from the Pentax duller 
>> in comparison. 
>> 
>> Maybe I just don’t know how to use the Pentax?  
>> 
>> --
>> Eric Weir
>> Decatur, GA  USA
>> eew...@bellsouth.net
>> 
>> "You keep on learning and learning, and pretty soon
>> you learn something no one has learned before." 
>> 
>> - Richard Feynman
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 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: Second thoughts about Pentax

[Paul Stenquist]

It could be a matter of in camera processing if you were shooting jpegs. Even 
when shooting RAW the default settings of your converter can 
Make a huge difference. The only fair comparison is between expert renderings 
of each. A half dozen years ago I was shooting for Harris Publications with a 
K5. The art directors marveled at how sharp and detailed my images were and 
wanted to know what kind of camera I was using. I suspect the difference was in 
the rendering— and the glass. I was shooting with the DA* 60-250 and DA* 16-50. 
Both are superb lenses. Of course the K5 is now old technology.
Paul

> On Dec 13, 2017, at 6:48 PM, Eric Weir  wrote:
> 
> 
> At one time I would not have considered any equipment other than Pentax. A 
> little over two years ago I bought a Fuji X-Q1 compact to take with me on a 
> trip to Italy that was going to include a week on bicycles. I was impressed 
> with the images I got with it. Also never would have considered a 
> camera—other than a compact—without a view finder. I ended up getting myself 
> a Fuji X-M1 mirrorless and a 28 mm lens. Since doing so I’ve become 
> comfortable with not having a viewfinder. The LCD screen gives me the same 
> information I’d get in a viewfinder. My only complaint is that it’s sometimes 
> difficult to read the screen in bright sunlight.
> 
> Yesterday I took my Pentax K-5 with the DA 4-5.6 50-200 zoom and the Fuji 
> X-M1 with the 28mm lens with me to the graduation ceremony. I used the Pentax 
> during the ceremony to get shots of my subject from a distance and the Fuji 
> for closer range shots of her and her family interacting with others after 
> the ceremony. Not the first time I’ve noticed it, but I was just really 
> impressed with the difference in the images I got. Those from the Fuji are 
> markedly sharper and “livelier,” those from the Pentax duller in comparison. 
> 
> Maybe I just don’t know how to use the Pentax?  
> 
> --
> Eric Weir
> Decatur, GA  USA
> eew...@bellsouth.net
> 
> "You keep on learning and learning, and pretty soon
> you learn something no one has learned before." 
> 
> - Richard Feynman
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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.

Second thoughts about Pentax

[Eric Weir]

At one time I would not have considered any equipment other than Pentax. A 
little over two years ago I bought a Fuji X-Q1 compact to take with me on a 
trip to Italy that was going to include a week on bicycles. I was impressed 
with the images I got with it. Also never would have considered a camera—other 
than a compact—without a view finder. I ended up getting myself a Fuji X-M1 
mirrorless and a 28 mm lens. Since doing so I’ve become comfortable with not 
having a viewfinder. The LCD screen gives me the same information I’d get in a 
viewfinder. My only complaint is that it’s sometimes difficult to read the 
screen in bright sunlight.

Yesterday I took my Pentax K-5 with the DA 4-5.6 50-200 zoom and the Fuji X-M1 
with the 28mm lens with me to the graduation ceremony. I used the Pentax during 
the ceremony to get shots of my subject from a distance and the Fuji for closer 
range shots of her and her family interacting with others after the ceremony. 
Not the first time I’ve noticed it, but I was just really impressed with the 
difference in the images I got. Those from the Fuji are markedly sharper and 
“livelier,” those from the Pentax duller in comparison. 

Maybe I just don’t know how to use the Pentax?  

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"You keep on learning and learning, and pretty soon
you learn something no one has learned before." 

- Richard Feynman


-- 
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.

People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[Bipin Gupta]

I've been using Photoshop for donkey years, but stopped with the CS6
version for a couple of reasons:
a) Photography is my hobby and I am not into it for money. Also I have
this idiosyncrasy to own the very best of things like shoes- Bata,
Cameras - Pentax, Watch - Rolex & Omega, Cars - Infinity, Travel
Luggage - Samsonite & so on.
But I changed to a 4K Intel Core i7 laptop, and the fonts + modules
appeared miniscule and I could not read them. Adobe & Microsoft were
at loggerheads blaming each other so the problem remains unsolved.
RIP Photoshop CS6.
b) $ 10 a month may appear small, but I would rather own my own
software which resides on my own machine, not somewhere in the cloud.
Reason why I have not moved into a Gated Community where you pay a
monthly service + maintenance charge and listen to all the Rules they
make.
I rather have my own little house at the meeting point of 4-Roads -
what is called a unique corner site.
c) I have used a number of Software - Pentax's own PDCU5, Cyberlink
Photo Director, DxO Optics Pro, Lightroom + some more, but find LR CC
2015.12 with the NIK interface the friendliest, easiest & fast.
d) I am aware that Photoshop is the Studio Owner's and Pro Photogs
favorite, so they will have to go on using it in whatever way Adobe
hands it out to them - whether they have a choice or not.
Not for me, as I will move on to something else like Luminar, GIMP etc.

Thanks for reading.
Bipin
camp: Thornhill, Ontario.

-- 
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.

People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[Bipin Gupta]

I've been using Photoshop for donkey years, but stopped with the CS6
version for a couple of reasons:
a) Photography is my hobby and I am not into it for money. Also I have this
idiosyncrasy to own the very best of things like shoes- Bata, Cameras -
Pentax, Watch - Rolex & Omega, Cars - Infinity, Travel Luggage - Samsonite
& so on.
But I changed to a 4K Intel Core i7 laptop, and the fonts + modules
appeared miniscule and I could not read them. Adobe & Microsoft were at
loggerheads blaming each other so the problem remains unsolved.
RIP Photoshop CS6.
b) $ 10 a month may appear small, but I would rather own my own software
which resides on my own machine, not somewhere in the cloud.
Reason why I have not moved into a Gated Community where you pay a monthly
service + maintenance charge and listen to all the Rules they make.
I rather have my own little house at the meeting point of 4-Roads - what is
called a unique corner site.
c) I have used a number of Software - Pentax's own PDCU5, Cyberlink Photo
Director, DxO Optics Pro, Lightroom + some more, but find LR CC 2015.12
with the NIK interface the friendliest, easiest & fast.
d) I am aware that Photoshop is the Studio Owner's and Pro Photogs
favorite, so they will have to go on using it in whatever way Adobe hands
it out to them - whether they have a choice or not.
Not for me, as I will move on to something else like Luminar, GIMP etc.

Thanks for reading.
Bipin
camp: Thornhill, Ontario.
-- 
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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[Brian Walters]

Well, I'll add my 2 cents...

I used the CC Photographer's Plan when it first appeared and kept at it for
about 18 months. Prior to that I was using CS3. However, I found that I just
wasn't making use of CC's additional features over CS3 (other than occasional
use of the dehaze filter), so I cancelled the subscription and went back to CS3.
 CS3 handles raw DNGs from my K5 and, with the Metaraw plugin I can even open
raws from my Olympus OMDs.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/



> On 16 November 2017 at 08:47 Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and when I
> asked why she said:
> I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade and
> just about everyone I know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much refused
> to upgrade to Creative Cloud
> 
> Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just
> their rapacious business model?
> --
> Larry Colen
> l...@red4est.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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[John]

On 11/15/2017 16:47, Larry Colen wrote:

My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and when I 
asked why she said:
I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade and 
just about everyone I know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much refused 
to upgrade to Creative Cloud

Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just 
their rapacious business model?
--
Larry Colen
l...@red4est.com






I'd just like to add that I'm now looking at 32" (or larger) 4K monitors. Don't need one, 
but I'd like to have one, although my internal pressure hasn't built up to "gotta have 
it" levels.

So for now, I'm only "just lookin'".

--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[Paul Stenquist]

I’m an unemployed professional baseball player.


> On Nov 16, 2017, at 3:25 PM, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Nov 16, 2017, at 10:40 AM, P. J. Alling <webstertwenty...@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> I haven't used Photoshop CC but if you want to work for pay, in any part of 
>> the graphics, industry that's what you use.
> 
> Candice happens to be an unemployed professional graphic artist.  It’s 
> actually for her friend Brett who is just a 
> 
>> 
>> I'm still using Photoshop CS2.  I'm not an artist or illustrator, 
>> professional or otherwise. I'm an, occasionally good, photographer.  I don't 
>> need 90% of the features that Photoshop, even a version as ancient, as CS2 
>> provides.
> 
> I’ve got an old copy of photoshop that I got through a friend who works at 
> adobe. Every feature that I found myself needing in it has been rolled into 
> lightroom, so I can’t even remember when I last fired it up.
> 
>> 
>> There are a number of Photoshop competitors that appear to have almost the 
>> same features for less money or are available for outright purchase.   
>> Unless there is something you /need/ that only the latest version of 
>> Photoshop has, which seems unlikely for a Photographer, there's no need to 
>> upgrade.
>> 
>> The current business model that Adobe is following is good for most 
>> professionals, it's also very, very good for Adobe who seem to be minting 
>> money at the moment.  It's not so good for the average photographer, who 
>> needs to upgrade occasionally as hardware improves and those improvements 
>> are happening with much less frequency.
> 
> It’s good for professionals that use photoshop. It’s less good for folks who 
> just use Lightroom.  I don’t know of a single feature in Lightroom CC I need 
> that isn’t in LR6.  For that matter, there are serious issues with the cool 
> new features in LR6 that makes them much less useful than they could be.  The 
> subscription cost is about the same as the cost of upgrading every year, with 
> the added cost of losing the ability to edit photos if I stop upgrading.   
> Yes, in theory, I could always fall back to LR6, until they change the 
> processing engine.  
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 11/15/2017 4:47 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>>> My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and 
>>> when I asked why she said:
>>> I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade 
>>> and just about everyone I know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much 
>>> refused to upgrade to Creative Cloud
>>> 
>>> Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just 
>>> their rapacious business model?
>>> --
>>> Larry Colen
>>> l...@red4est.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> America wasn't founded so that we could all be better.
>> America was founded so we could all be anything we damn well please.
>>   - P.J. O'Rourke
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[Larry Colen]

> On Nov 16, 2017, at 10:40 AM, P. J. Alling <webstertwenty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I haven't used Photoshop CC but if you want to work for pay, in any part of 
> the graphics, industry that's what you use.

Candice happens to be an unemployed professional graphic artist.  It’s actually 
for her friend Brett who is just a 
 
> 
> I'm still using Photoshop CS2.  I'm not an artist or illustrator, 
> professional or otherwise. I'm an, occasionally good, photographer.  I don't 
> need 90% of the features that Photoshop, even a version as ancient, as CS2 
> provides.

I’ve got an old copy of photoshop that I got through a friend who works at 
adobe. Every feature that I found myself needing in it has been rolled into 
lightroom, so I can’t even remember when I last fired it up.

> 
> There are a number of Photoshop competitors that appear to have almost the 
> same features for less money or are available for outright purchase.   Unless 
> there is something you /need/ that only the latest version of Photoshop has, 
> which seems unlikely for a Photographer, there's no need to upgrade.
> 
> The current business model that Adobe is following is good for most 
> professionals, it's also very, very good for Adobe who seem to be minting 
> money at the moment.  It's not so good for the average photographer, who 
> needs to upgrade occasionally as hardware improves and those improvements are 
> happening with much less frequency.

It’s good for professionals that use photoshop. It’s less good for folks who 
just use Lightroom.  I don’t know of a single feature in Lightroom CC I need 
that isn’t in LR6.  For that matter, there are serious issues with the cool new 
features in LR6 that makes them much less useful than they could be.  The 
subscription cost is about the same as the cost of upgrading every year, with 
the added cost of losing the ability to edit photos if I stop upgrading.   Yes, 
in theory, I could always fall back to LR6, until they change the processing 
engine.  


> 
> 
> 
> On 11/15/2017 4:47 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>> My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and when 
>> I asked why she said:
>> I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade 
>> and just about everyone I know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much 
>> refused to upgrade to Creative Cloud
>> 
>> Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just 
>> their rapacious business model?
>> --
>> Larry Colen
>> l...@red4est.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> America wasn't founded so that we could all be better.
> America was founded so we could all be anything we damn well please.
>- P.J. O'Rourke
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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




-- 
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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[Doug Brewer]

I use it. I don't use it as much as I use Lightroom, but I do sometimes 
slide it open if I determine I need something it offers that LR doesn't, 
and it works. The newest version is pretty snappy, even on my relatively 
old MBP, although I have to say I seldom work with excessively large files.


Editing photos rises to the level of meditative state for me, during 
which I immerse myself in the process and shut out the dark noise of the 
world for a while, and for that state I find it difficult to get too 
torqued up about ten bucks a month. Your mileage, of course, may vary.


On 11/15/17 4:47 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and when I 
asked why she said:
I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade and 
just about everyone I know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much refused 
to upgrade to Creative Cloud

Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just 
their rapacious business model?
--
Larry Colen
l...@red4est.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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[P. J. Alling]

I haven't used Photoshop CC but if you want to work for pay, in any part 
of the graphics, industry that's what you use.


I'm still using Photoshop CS2.  I'm not an artist or illustrator, 
professional or otherwise. I'm an, occasionally good, photographer.  I 
don't need 90% of the features that Photoshop, even a version as 
ancient, as CS2 provides.


There are a number of Photoshop competitors that appear to have almost 
the same features for less money or are available for outright 
purchase.   Unless there is something you /need/ that only the latest 
version of Photoshop has, which seems unlikely for a Photographer, 
there's no need to upgrade.


The current business model that Adobe is following is good for most 
professionals, it's also very, very good for Adobe who seem to be 
minting money at the moment.  It's not so good for the average 
photographer, who needs to upgrade occasionally as hardware improves and 
those improvements are happening with much less frequency.




On 11/15/2017 4:47 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and when I 
asked why she said:
I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade and 
just about everyone I know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much refused 
to upgrade to Creative Cloud

Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just 
their rapacious business model?
--
Larry Colen
l...@red4est.com






--
America wasn't founded so that we could all be better.
America was founded so we could all be anything we damn well please.
- P.J. O'Rourke


--
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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[John]

On 11/15/2017 16:47, Larry Colen wrote:

My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and when I 
asked why she said:
I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade and 
just about everyone I know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much refused 
to upgrade to Creative Cloud

Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just 
their rapacious business model?
--
Larry Colen
l...@red4est.com






I'm still using CS6 Extended;  seems to handle the K-1 DNG files with no 
trouble. I'll probably update my NIK filters if DXO brings out new ones (now 
that they bought NIK from Google).

--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[Zos Xavius]

Frankly its obvious that new development is only going to be on CC
from this point forward. Lightroom 6 was constantly behind the CC
version too, so that should say a lot about how much they care about
it. Adobe wanted to pull this move to subscription all along. It makes
sense if you regularly buy new versions of lightroom anyways. Frankly
I pirated versions 2-5, but now that they have the CC versions I can
just use my work copy legitimately. That said, if I had to pay the $10
a month I would gladly. I get way more than $10 a month of usefulness
out of both products. People love to praise capture one, but it is
basically twice as expensive and doesn't even have photoshop which I
feel is a necessity anyways. Frankly I still like lightroom. It
finally is playing nice again on my computer so I don't hate it like I
did a year ago. Of course upgrading to the PC equivalent of a Macbook
Pro didn't hurt either. Once you get your catalog file and previews on
an SSD and get your ram in the 16-32gb range it will run pretty well
even on an older computer with a fairly slow GPU. The ram and SSD are
the big things. An sandybridge or newer i5 or i7 doesn't hurt either.
It ran perfectly fine on my older crap Acer i5@2.5ghz when I stuck
16gb of ram in the machine. On 8gb it was pretty painful, especially
when the OS was running off of a slow HD drive. I also have a 200k
image catalog in lightroom. When I make a new catalog for small
projects with just a few thousand images it is really fast. So unless
your catalog isn't really huge, you can probably get away with even
less of a machine. The big thing was just getting enough ram so you
aren't swapping. LR alone can eat up 4-5GB of RAM pretty easily. If
you stitch panoramas I've seen it use up to 20GB or so pretty easily.
So its not really efficient in terms of ram usage for panorama
creation.  It does make a fully RAW panorama though which is really,
really cool if you think about it.

-- 
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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[Zos Xavius]

Didn't mean to quote John there btw either. Just a general reply. :)

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Zos Xavius <zosxav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> CC has come quite a ways since version 5. Just being able to do
> panoramas and hdr in lightroom alone is pretty huge. For $10 a month
> with photoshop its really not a bad deal at all considering what you
> get. Photoshop CC is pretty nice too. The new CC Classic has a lot of
> performance improvements and I can say it definitely feels a bit
> snappier than the older version. Dehaze comes in pretty handy too,
> especially if you landscape. With a light touch it does actually work
> pretty well.
>
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 6:08 PM, John Coyle <jco...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> I've had the CC version since it was launched, and have had absolutely no 
>> issues with it.  I moved
>> up to it from PS Elements, and before then had CS3, so there was a 
>> significant improvement in
>> functionality.  The advantage of having new features and improvements 
>> available immediately at no
>> additional cost is a definite plus.
>> I must say I don't consider the cost to be rapacious - for me, with just PS 
>> and Bridge, it's only
>> A$13 a month!  I neither like nor want Lightroom, but I could add that again 
>> with no increase in the
>> cost, I believe.
>>
>> My 2c worth
>>
>>
>> John in Brisbane
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Larry Colen
>> Sent: Thursday, 16 November 2017 7:48 AM
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net>; Candice Montgomery 
>> <ccmo...@pacbell.net>
>> Subject: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop
>>
>> My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and when 
>> I asked why she said:
>> I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade 
>> and just about everyone I
>> know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much refused to upgrade to 
>> Creative Cloud
>>
>> Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just 
>> their rapacious business
>> model?
>> --
>> Larry Colen
>> l...@red4est.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.

-- 
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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[Zos Xavius]

CC has come quite a ways since version 5. Just being able to do
panoramas and hdr in lightroom alone is pretty huge. For $10 a month
with photoshop its really not a bad deal at all considering what you
get. Photoshop CC is pretty nice too. The new CC Classic has a lot of
performance improvements and I can say it definitely feels a bit
snappier than the older version. Dehaze comes in pretty handy too,
especially if you landscape. With a light touch it does actually work
pretty well.

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 6:08 PM, John Coyle <jco...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> I've had the CC version since it was launched, and have had absolutely no 
> issues with it.  I moved
> up to it from PS Elements, and before then had CS3, so there was a 
> significant improvement in
> functionality.  The advantage of having new features and improvements 
> available immediately at no
> additional cost is a definite plus.
> I must say I don't consider the cost to be rapacious - for me, with just PS 
> and Bridge, it's only
> A$13 a month!  I neither like nor want Lightroom, but I could add that again 
> with no increase in the
> cost, I believe.
>
> My 2c worth
>
>
> John in Brisbane
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Larry Colen
> Sent: Thursday, 16 November 2017 7:48 AM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net>; Candice Montgomery 
> <ccmo...@pacbell.net>
> Subject: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop
>
> My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and when 
> I asked why she said:
> I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade 
> and just about everyone I
> know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much refused to upgrade to 
> Creative Cloud
>
> Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just 
> their rapacious business
> model?
> --
> Larry Colen
> l...@red4est.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.

-- 
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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[John Coyle]

I've had the CC version since it was launched, and have had absolutely no 
issues with it.  I moved
up to it from PS Elements, and before then had CS3, so there was a significant 
improvement in
functionality.  The advantage of having new features and improvements available 
immediately at no
additional cost is a definite plus.
I must say I don't consider the cost to be rapacious - for me, with just PS and 
Bridge, it's only
A$13 a month!  I neither like nor want Lightroom, but I could add that again 
with no increase in the
cost, I believe.

My 2c worth


John in Brisbane



-Original Message-
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Larry Colen
Sent: Thursday, 16 November 2017 7:48 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net>; Candice Montgomery 
<ccmo...@pacbell.net>
Subject: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and when I 
asked why she said:
I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade and 
just about everyone I
know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much refused to upgrade to Creative 
Cloud

Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just 
their rapacious business
model?
--
Larry Colen
l...@red4est.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: People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[DagT]

I use PS CC (now 2018). 

It works OK, and especially after I got the K-1 and the kamera and lens 
profiles were updated pretty fast. Too often a camera upgrade earlier meant an 
updated PS too, so if you change cameras (too) often the price of the CC is not 
that much.

On the other hand I´m not an advanced PS user, so I can´t answer any 
complicated questions :-) 

DagT


> 15. nov. 2017 kl. 22.47 skrev Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com>:
> 
> My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and when 
> I asked why she said:
> I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade 
> and just about everyone I know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much 
> refused to upgrade to Creative Cloud
> 
> Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just 
> their rapacious business model?
> --
> Larry Colen
> l...@red4est.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.

People's thoughts on Adobe CC photoshop

[Larry Colen]

My friend Candice ccmo...@pacbell.net  asked me about photoshop cc, and when I 
asked why she said:
I'm looking for reviews from people I know, because Brett wants to upgrade and 
just about everyone I know is still using CS5/CS6 and have pretty much refused 
to upgrade to Creative Cloud

Would anyone like to share their thoughts on how it works, rather than just 
their rapacious business model?
--
Larry Colen
l...@red4est.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: More thoughts on slide scanning: Hamrick VueScan

[Eric Weir]

> On Oct 30, 2017, at 1:25 PM, Bulent Celasun  wrote:
> 
> I use VueScan happily with Epson V500.
> I always scan a single image. Then the next...
> No auto numbering.

Thanks, Bulent. I may get around to “happily” with VueScan. Meantime I’m 
relying on Epson Scan. A bit less steep learning curve. 

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net 

(I)t is important that awake people be awake... the darkness around us is deep.

- William Stafford


-- 
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: More thoughts on slide scanning: Hamrick VueScan

[Bulent Celasun]

I use VueScan happily with Epson V500.
I always scan a single image. Then the next...
No auto numbering.

Bulent

-
http://patoloji.gen.tr
http://celasun.wordpress.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bc_the_path/
http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=2226822
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/bulentcelasun


2017-10-27 17:12 GMT+03:00 Eric Weir :
>
>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 3:55 PM, Mark Roberts  wrote:
>>
>> Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
>>
>>> I bought VueScan when I bought the Minolta Dimage scanner back in 2002 or 
>>> 2003. The Minolta software was offal and kept crashing on me. VueScan was a 
>>> bit of a pain to figure out, but it worked well ... and continues to work 
>>> well though umpteen revisions and who knows how many scanners 15 years 
>>> later.
>>>
>>> These latest versions are really quite easy to use compared to the older 
>>> ones. I run the Nikon and Epson scanners with it ... it always produces 
>>> good results!
>>
>> Yep, the latest user interface is really very good. And the ability to
>> use the same scanning software with many different scanners — even
>> different makes — simplifies things greatly.
>
> I have an Epson V500 flatbed. Bought it to scan a deceased brother’s photos, 
> but have yet to get around to it. I’ve used it mainly for scanning documents 
> and have always found the software awkward. Just never got the hang of it. 
> Might I fare better with VueScan?
>
> --
> Eric Weir
> Decatur, GA  USA
> eew...@bellsouth.net
>
> “Man has been a murderer forever.”
>
> - Peter Matthiessen.
>
>
> --
> 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: More thoughts on slide scanning: Hamrick VueScan

[Eric Weir]

> On Oct 27, 2017, at 10:12 AM, Eric Weir  wrote:
> 
>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 3:55 PM, Mark Roberts  wrote:
>> 
>> Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
>> 
>>> I bought VueScan when I bought the Minolta Dimage scanner back in 2002 or 
>>> 2003. The Minolta software was offal and kept crashing on me. VueScan was a 
>>> bit of a pain to figure out, but it worked well ... and continues to work 
>>> well though umpteen revisions and who knows how many scanners 15 years 
>>> later. 
>>> 
>>> These latest versions are really quite easy to use compared to the older 
>>> ones. I run the Nikon and Epson scanners with it ... it always produces 
>>> good results! 
>> 
>> Yep, the latest user interface is really very good. And the ability to
>> use the same scanning software with many different scanners — even
>> different makes — simplifies things greatly.
> 
> I have an Epson V500 flatbed. Bought it to scan a deceased brother’s photos, 
> but have yet to get around to it. I’ve used it mainly for scanning documents 
> and have always found the software awkward. Just never got the hang of it. 
> Might I fare better with VueScan?

After having success with Epson Scan with b images, and finding color images 
a little more difficult, I decided to check out VueScan on color film images. 
It’s clear that VueScan gives you a lot more control over the process, but that 
makes for a steep and long learning curve, at least for this photo tech idiot. 
Very, very mystifying. 

It’s also pretty quirky. After getting a little traction with “batch scanning,” 
i.e., scanning multiple images on film, batch processing suddenly disappeared. 
Even with batch processing selected, VueScan would only scan one image at a 
time. 

VueScan’s numbering of frames was incomprehensible. With two strips of film 
with four images on each, VueScan assigned number 1 to the second frame, 
counting from top left strip. I could not get it to give a number to the first 
frame. On the second strip the number 5 was assigned to two frames.

That was after I’d selected all eight frames—or at least I thought I’d selected 
them; I really have no idea. 

Certainly will not plunk down $90 for software I cannot be sue I’ll ever learn 
how to use.

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

"What is man without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone, 
men would die from a great loneliness of spirit." 

- Chief Seattle






-- 
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: More thoughts on slide scanning: Hamrick VueScan

[Eric Weir]

> On Oct 27, 2017, at 10:20 AM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> 
> In my experience, the Edson software is superior to Vuescan on Epson 
> flatness. But make sure you're using advanced mode, preview the scan and 
> tweak the histogram if necessary.

Thanks, Paul. I’ve been viewing videos on scanning with the Epson V500. I have 
a lot to learn about basic how-to stuff.The finer points will come later. But 
on your recommendation I’m sticking with the Epson software. 

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

“...we are a form of invitation to others and to otherness..."

- David Whyte


-- 
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: More thoughts on slide scanning: Hamrick VueScan

[Mark Roberts]

Eric Weir wrote:

>I have an Epson V500 flatbed. Bought it to scan a deceased brother’s photos, 
>but have yet to get around to it. I’ve used it mainly for scanning documents 
>and have always found the software awkward. Just never got the hang of it. 
>Might I fare better with VueScan?

I have an Epson V30 flatbed. I don't know how similar the software is
to that of your V500 but VueScan is VASTLY superior to what Epson
provided for the V30. Like comparing Microsof Paint to Adobe
Photoshop. (OK, that's a slight exaggeration, but still...)


 
-- 
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: More thoughts on slide scanning: Hamrick VueScan

[P. J. Alling]

When auto correct strikes it sometimes makes the message more intriguing.


On 10/27/2017 10:25 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:

Autocorrect strikes again. On Epson flatbeds.

Paul via phone


On Oct 27, 2017, at 10:20 AM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:

In my experience, the Edson software is superior to Vuescan on Epson flatness. 
But make sure you're using advanced mode, preview the scan and tweak the 
histogram if necessary.

Paul via phone


On Oct 27, 2017, at 10:12 AM, Eric Weir  wrote:



On Oct 25, 2017, at 3:55 PM, Mark Roberts  wrote:

Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:


I bought VueScan when I bought the Minolta Dimage scanner back in 2002 or 2003. 
The Minolta software was offal and kept crashing on me. VueScan was a bit of a 
pain to figure out, but it worked well ... and continues to work well though 
umpteen revisions and who knows how many scanners 15 years later.

These latest versions are really quite easy to use compared to the older ones. 
I run the Nikon and Epson scanners with it ... it always produces good results!

Yep, the latest user interface is really very good. And the ability to
use the same scanning software with many different scanners — even
different makes — simplifies things greatly.

I have an Epson V500 flatbed. Bought it to scan a deceased brother’s photos, 
but have yet to get around to it. I’ve used it mainly for scanning documents 
and have always found the software awkward. Just never got the hang of it. 
Might I fare better with VueScan?

--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA  USA
eew...@bellsouth.net

“Man has been a murderer forever.”

- Peter Matthiessen.


--
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.


--
America wasn't founded so that we could all be better.
America was founded so we could all be anything we damn well please.
- P.J. O'Rourke


--
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: More thoughts on slide scanning: Hamrick VueScan

[Paul Stenquist]

Autocorrect strikes again. On Epson flatbeds.

Paul via phone

> On Oct 27, 2017, at 10:20 AM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> 
> In my experience, the Edson software is superior to Vuescan on Epson 
> flatness. But make sure you're using advanced mode, preview the scan and 
> tweak the histogram if necessary.
> 
> Paul via phone
> 
>> On Oct 27, 2017, at 10:12 AM, Eric Weir  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 3:55 PM, Mark Roberts  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
>>> 
 I bought VueScan when I bought the Minolta Dimage scanner back in 2002 or 
 2003. The Minolta software was offal and kept crashing on me. VueScan was 
 a bit of a pain to figure out, but it worked well ... and continues to 
 work well though umpteen revisions and who knows how many scanners 15 
 years later. 
 
 These latest versions are really quite easy to use compared to the older 
 ones. I run the Nikon and Epson scanners with it ... it always produces 
 good results! 
>>> 
>>> Yep, the latest user interface is really very good. And the ability to
>>> use the same scanning software with many different scanners — even
>>> different makes — simplifies things greatly.
>> 
>> I have an Epson V500 flatbed. Bought it to scan a deceased brother’s photos, 
>> but have yet to get around to it. I’ve used it mainly for scanning documents 
>> and have always found the software awkward. Just never got the hang of it. 
>> Might I fare better with VueScan?
>> 
>> --
>> Eric Weir
>> Decatur, GA  USA
>> eew...@bellsouth.net
>> 
>> “Man has been a murderer forever.”
>> 
>> - Peter Matthiessen.
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 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.