Here's a direct comparison of 6x7 negs scanned on an epson 3200 flatbed and an
Imacon professional film scanner. The lens was the 300/4 and the stop was f32,
because a lot of depth of field was required here. There was some low lying fog
in the vicinity as well. So it's not the sharpest 6x7 neg
On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:50 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
A test snap of a friend ...
Olympus E-5, Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH
ISO 3200 @ f/4 @ 1/40 second.
Very impressive for ISO 3200 out of a small sensor.
--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
Really nice for 3200.
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 3:02 AM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:50 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
A test snap of a friend ...
Olympus E-5, Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH
ISO 3200 @ f/4 @ 1/40 second.
Very impressive for ISO 3200 out of a small
Good, but not stunning in terms of high ISO performance. Of course that's just
one sample, but I'd put it on a par with the K7 at 3200.
Paul
On Oct 22, 2010, at 12:50 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
A test snap of a friend ...
Olympus E-5, Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH
ISO 3200 @ f/4 @ 1/40 second
Good, but not stunning in terms of high ISO performance. Of course
that's just one sample, but I'd put it on a par with the K7 at 3200.
Wow, that bad, huh? :-p
--
Steve Desjardins
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Good, but not stunning in terms of high ISO performance. Of course
that's just one sample, but I'd put it on a par with the K7 at 3200.
If a few sample pics I saw tell the truth, the K-5 is roughly a couple stops
ahead of that. We'll see soon.
Dario
--
PDML Pentax
On 10/22/2010 2:43 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Good, but not stunning in terms of high ISO performance. Of course
that's just one sample, but I'd put it on a par with the K7 at 3200.
If a few sample pics I saw tell the truth, the K-5 is roughly a couple
stops ahead
Boris Liberman wrote:
On 10/22/2010 2:43 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Good, but not stunning in terms of high ISO performance. Of course
that's just one sample, but I'd put it on a par with the K7 at 3200.
If a few sample pics I saw tell the truth, the K-5 is roughly
--
From: paul stenquist
Subject: Re: OT: new camera ... ISO 3200 sample
Good, but not stunning in terms of high ISO performance. Of course that's
just one sample, but I'd put it on a par with the K7 at 3200.
I think that's called damning
On Oct 22, 2010, at 9:14 AM, William Robb wrote:
--
From: paul stenquist
Subject: Re: OT: new camera ... ISO 3200 sample
Good, but not stunning in terms of high ISO performance. Of course
that's just one sample, but I'd put it on a par
After shooting indoors with Fuji 800 for years and living with the grain,
Godfrey's photo looks spectacular at ISO 3200. For me, improvements in
resolution and noise reduction on digital in the past 6 years have been very
impressive.
Jeffery
On Oct 22, 2010, at 8:43 AM, P N Stenquist wrote
On Oct 22, 2010, at 8:43, P N Stenquist wrote:
On Oct 22, 2010, at 9:14 AM, William Robb wrote:
--
From: paul stenquist
Subject: Re: OT: new camera ... ISO 3200 sample
Good, but not stunning in terms of high ISO performance. Of course
: Re: OT: new camera ... ISO 3200 sample
Good, but not stunning in terms of high ISO performance. Of course that's
just one sample, but I'd put it on a par with the K7 at 3200.
I think that's called damning with faint praise.
William Robb
Well, that's not my intent. I'm perfectly happy
On 22 October 2010 10:06, Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com wrote:
[...] Of course, they don't think to look for the noise.
Oh silly people who have no idea how to look at photos. They were
probably looking at the subject, weren't they! The poor fools...
--M.
--
\/\/o/\/\ --
, at 8:43, P N Stenquist wrote:
On Oct 22, 2010, at 9:14 AM, William Robb wrote:
--
From: paul stenquist
Subject: Re: OT: new camera ... ISO 3200 sample
Good, but not stunning in terms of high ISO performance. Of course that's
just one sample
A test snap of a friend ...
Olympus E-5, Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH
ISO 3200 @ f/4 @ 1/40 second.
(downsized and sharpened for web, 925 pixels tall, 100K)
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/PA210099s.jpg
(original out of the camera JPEG, full size, 6.2 Mbytes, no
modifications at all)
http
It appears that you focused on the far eye. Otherwise quite impressive.
On 10/22/2010 12:50 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
A test snap of a friend ...
Olympus E-5, Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH
ISO 3200 @ f/4 @ 1/40 second.
(downsized and sharpened for web, 925 pixels tall, 100K)
http
.
On 10/22/2010 12:50 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
A test snap of a friend ...
Olympus E-5, Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH
ISO 3200 @ f/4 @ 1/40 second.
(downsized and sharpened for web, 925 pixels tall, 100K)
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/PA210099s.jpg
(original out of the camera JPEG, full size
On 1/21/2010 11:35 PM, frank theriault wrote:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 11:23 PM, Jack Davisjdavi...@yahoo.com wrote:
You can take your tongue out of your cheek now, Frank. ;-)
Seriously, it is just an ISO test shot..as you must know.
Thanks much!
Tongue not in cheek.
I liked it.
.
Comments?
Jack
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=453
DA 16~45, f/5.6, 1/500, ISO 3200, hand held, matrix metering.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=453
DA 16~45, f/5.6, 1/500, ISO 3200, hand held, matrix metering.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions
It was done as a test only. Yeah, appears to be quite a manageable image.
Thanks for commenting, Dave.
Jack
--- On Thu, 1/21/10, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote:
From: David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: PESO: 3200 Fireplace
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: Jack Davis jdavi...@yahoo.com
Subject: PESO: 3200 Fireplace
I haven't done a lot of high ISO shooting. Other than a couple quick tries
with the initial camera check out.
I'm ordinarily, a 100 or 200 ISO (w
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Jack Davis jdavi...@yahoo.com wrote:
I haven't done a lot of high ISO shooting. Other than a couple quick tries
with the initial camera check out.
I'm ordinarily, a 100 or 200 ISO (w/camera rest) type who rarely handle the
gritty look.
It's a gray damp
Thanks VERY, VERY much Ken! You can look for it to show up in the PPG
Collection. ;))
Proudly,
Jack
--- On Thu, 1/21/10, Ken Waller kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote:
From: Ken Waller kwal...@peoplepc.com
Subject: Re: 3200 Fireplace
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: Thursday
You can take your tongue out of your cheek now, Frank. ;-)
Seriously, it is just an ISO test shot..as you must know.
Thanks much!
Jack
--- On Thu, 1/21/10, frank theriault knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
From: frank theriault knarftheria...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: PESO: 3200 Fireplace
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 11:23 PM, Jack Davis jdavi...@yahoo.com wrote:
You can take your tongue out of your cheek now, Frank. ;-)
Seriously, it is just an ISO test shot..as you must know.
Thanks much!
Tongue not in cheek.
I liked it.
Really.
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois
I haven't shot a lot of low light pics with the K7, even though I'm
already up over 7000 frames. But I had occasion to do so today,
shooting in a rather dark barn on a farm. Exposure here is right out
of the camera no tweaking. Both pics are full frame. A bit of smart
sharpening on the
: K7D at ISO 3200
I haven't shot a lot of low light pics with the K7, even though I'm
already up over 7000 frames. But I had occasion to do so today,
shooting in a rather dark barn on a farm. Exposure here is right out
of the camera no tweaking. Both pics are full frame. A bit of smart
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On
Behalf Of
P N Stenquist
Sent: 10 October 2009 21:38
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: K7D at ISO 3200
I haven't shot a lot of low light pics with the K7, even though I'm
already up over 7000 frames. But I had
...@comcast.net
Subject: Re: K7D at ISO 3200
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: Saturday, October 10, 2009, 2:17 PM
OOooops
Here's the other one:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=9885282size=lg
Both are with the DA* 60-250 btw.
On Oct 10, 2009, at 4:42 PM, Chris Mitchell
- unless there's
something
you're not telling us about Grace
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On
Behalf Of
P N Stenquist
Sent: 10 October 2009 21:38
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: K7D at ISO 3200
I haven't shot a lot of low light
Looks, good, Paul. Thanks for posting! Cheers, Christine
- Original Message -
From: P N Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 3:37 PM
Subject: K7D at ISO 3200
I haven't shot a lot of low light pics with the K7
is stated above shot. Just an FYI.
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *no* noise reduction in lightroom
http://www.caguila.com/caguila/k73200iso/content/k7_test_photos_4_of_14__large.html
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *noise reduction in lightroom: luminance color
slider all the way to 100*
http://www.caguila.com
/aperture info is stated above shot. Just an FYI.
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *no* noise reduction in lightroom
http://www.caguila.com/caguila/k73200iso/content/k7_test_photos_4_of_14__large.html
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *noise reduction in lightroom: luminance color
slider all the way to 100*
http
pixels on the long end and fairly big files.
Shutter/aperture info is stated above shot. Just an FYI.
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *no* noise reduction in lightroom
http://www.caguila.com/caguila/k73200iso/content/k7_test_photos_4_of_14__large.html
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *noise reduction in lightroom
.
Shutter/aperture info is stated above shot. Just an FYI.
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *no* noise reduction in lightroom
http://www.caguila.com/caguila/k73200iso/content/k7_test_photos_4_of_14__large.html
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *noise reduction in lightroom: luminance color
slider all the way
and fairly big files.
Shutter/aperture info is stated above shot. Just an FYI.
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *no* noise reduction in lightroom
http://www.caguila.com/caguila/k73200iso/content/k7_test_photos_4_of_14__large.html
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *noise reduction in lightroom: luminance
color
slider
Yes, I think Bruce is right. Obviously, I didn't get a chance to, but it
would have been interesting to shoot in darker light. However, when I was
at GFM, I took a quick shot with the K7 @ 3200 one evening in the cafeteria,
which had quite dim light, and I remember being impressed--course
@ 3200 *no* noise reduction in lightroom
http://www.caguila.com/caguila/k73200iso/content/k7_test_photos_4_of_14__large.html
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *noise reduction in lightroom: luminance color
slider all the way to 100*
http://www.caguila.com/caguila/k73200iso/content
is stated above shot. Just an FYI.
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *no* noise reduction in lightroom
http://www.caguila.com/caguila/k73200iso/content/k7_test_photos_4_of_14__large.html
Straight jpeg @ 3200 *noise reduction in lightroom: luminance color
slider all the way to 100*
http://www.caguila.com
thought i'd share. It's a
pan 400 ilford developed as 3200 in micorphen (it turned out well - at
least i like it).
anyway, here's the link to the gallery, since i think these are some
of the nicer photos i've took lately
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tamoneki/sets/72157608332450752/
btw. i also
thought i'd share. It's a
pan 400 ilford developed as 3200 in micorphen (it turned out well - at
least i like it).
anyway, here's the link to the gallery, since i think these are some
of the nicer photos i've took lately
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tamoneki/sets/72157608332450752/
btw. i
pleasure looking at them.
Boris
Luka Knezevic-Strika wrote:
It's been a while since I shot bw film, so I thought i'd share. It's a
pan 400 ilford developed as 3200 in micorphen (it turned out well - at
least i like it).
anyway, here's the link to the gallery, since i think these are some
of the nicer
Incredible. God I miss film.
Evan
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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 one appeals to me a lot.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tamoneki/3008949761/in/set-72157608332450752/
Dave
On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 12:02 AM, Luka Knezevic-Strika
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's been a while since I shot bw film, so I thought i'd share. It's a
pan 400 ilford developed as 3200
pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 11:02 PM
Subject: GESO: 3200
It's been a while since I shot bw film, so I thought i'd share. It's a
pan 400 ilford developed as 3200 in micorphen (it turned out well - at
least i like it).
anyway, here's the link to the gallery, since i think
It's been a while since I shot bw film, so I thought i'd share. It's a
pan 400 ilford developed as 3200 in micorphen (it turned out well - at
least i like it).
anyway, here's the link to the gallery, since i think these are some
of the nicer photos i've took lately
http://www.flickr.com/photos
Those did turn out very nicely. A bit high contrast with little shadow
detail but not bad at all.
Luka Knezevic-Strika wrote:
It's been a while since I shot bw film, so I thought i'd share. It's a
pan 400 ilford developed as 3200 in micorphen (it turned out well - at
least i like it).
anyway
Revisited this pic today. I'm still very impressed with the high ISO
performance of the K20D. This was shot with the FA 50/1.4 at f2.8,
1/30th.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=7191694size=lg
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Hummm, indeed.
Its a bit noticable on the left side of the tiger, in the one leg and paw.
But, very impressive,.
Any noise reduction in PP applied Paul, or as is.
Dave
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Paul Stenquist
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Revisited this pic today. I'm still very impressed
The noise must to be very strong on your monitor for you to mistake a
lion for a tiger...
David J Brooks wrote:
Hummm, indeed.
Its a bit noticable on the left side of the tiger, in the one leg and paw.
But, very impressive,.
Any noise reduction in PP applied Paul, or as is.
Dave
On
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 1:51 PM, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The noise must to be very strong on your monitor for you to mistake a
lion for a tiger...
I panicked
Dave
David J Brooks wrote:
Hummm, indeed.
Its a bit noticable on the left side of the tiger, in the one leg
I'm impressed! May have to get me one of those. ;)
Jack
--- On Tue, 4/22/08, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PESO: ISO 3200
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net
Date: Tuesday, April 22, 2008, 9:26 AM
Revisited this pic today
ISO is impressive. Another sweet Grace shot too. Cheers, Christine
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 11:26 AM
Subject: PESO: ISO 3200
Revisited this pic today. I'm still very
No noise reduction in PP. High ISO noise reduction in camera is set
to Weak.
Paul
On Apr 22, 2008, at 12:44 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
Hummm, indeed.
Its a bit noticable on the left side of the tiger, in the one leg
and paw.
But, very impressive,.
Any noise reduction in PP applied Paul,
On 2/16/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am using my *ist D for recordings in low light.
I still want a camera, that can do nice images at ISO 3200-6400 - without
too much noice, naturally.
I can't alwasy use a flash, ypou know. A lot of pwople find a flash very
inctucive
David
Savage
Sendt: 16. februar 2007 15:33
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: ISO 1600 or 3200
On 2/16/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am using my *ist D for recordings in low light.
I still want a camera, that can do nice images at ISO 3200-6400 - without
too much noice
ISO 800 either...
G
On 2/16/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am using my *ist D for recordings in low light.
I still want a camera, that can do nice images at ISO 3200-6400 -
without
too much noice, naturally.
I can't alwasy use a flash, ypou know. A lot of pwople find a flash
I am using my *ist D for recordings in low light.
I still want a camera, that can do nice images at ISO 3200-6400 - without
too much noice, naturally.
I can't alwasy use a flash, ypou know. A lot of pwople find a flash very
inctucive. Photographing events like thiswith a flash is considerd very
On 06/02/07, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What has film got to do with the K10D's lack of ISO 3200?
I can appreciate that in certain situations the advantages of having ISO
3200 available outweigh it's disadvantages.
I've taken very usable printable ISO 1600/3200 shots
Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What has film got to do with the K10D's lack of ISO 3200?
I can appreciate that in certain situations the advantages of having
ISO
3200 available outweigh it's disadvantages.
I've taken very usable printable ISO 1600/3200 shots with the *istD
(after some
Sweet shot Paul.
I admit, I have got good results at 1600 with the K10D in decent
light. But in really poor light the shots I have are quite noisy.
Cheers,
Dave
On 2/6/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe you should have your camera checked out, David. I find that noise
at 1600
Thanks. Maybe they're underexposed a bit? This shot was taken in very
dim light. Just a bit of room tungsten lighting at night. But it's
right on with exposure. I think it was something like f2 @ 1/8th second.
On Feb 6, 2007, at 7:47 AM, David Savage wrote:
Sweet shot Paul.
I admit, I have
On 2/06/07 8:15 AM, Paul Stenquist, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This shot was taken in very dim light. Just a bit of room tungsten lighting at
night.
That's amazing Paul.
It looks as if it was under a full lighting. Perhaps you brightened it up a
bit. I see no appreciable noise for 1600.
BTW,
Oh the under exposed shots are terrible (the K10D is less forgiving
than the D when it comes to exposure IMO). But even the correctly
exposed frames have this streaky blue channel noise through it.
In the busy parts of the shot isn't so noticeable, but in the black
areas it stands out like a sore
Paul, I suggest each time you describe the way you took a shot you
insert a word steady somewhere ;-).
On 2/6/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. Maybe they're underexposed a bit? This shot was taken in very
dim light. Just a bit of room tungsten lighting at night. But it's
Yes, it's considerably brighter than the actual lighting. Quite a bit colder as
well. But it seemed to look good that way.
Paul
-- Original message --
From: K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2/06/07 8:15 AM, Paul Stenquist, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This shot
The blue channel streaking was reportedly fixed with the last firmware upgrade.
We shall see.
Paul
-- Original message --
From: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oh the under exposed shots are terrible (the K10D is less forgiving
than the D when it comes to
How about Shake Reduction? :-)
Paul
-- Original message --
From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul, I suggest each time you describe the way you took a shot you
insert a word steady somewhere ;-).
On 2/6/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, that would be in line with modern times...
On 2/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about Shake Reduction? :-)
Paul
-- Original message --
From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul, I suggest each time you describe the way you took a
On 07/02/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The blue channel streaking was reportedly fixed with the last firmware
upgrade. We shall see.
Not so I believe, the blue channel noise is a sensor product and we
are likely stuck with it. Whereas the problem that was fixed (solid
vertical
From: Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D @ ISO 3200
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 08:35:56 +1100
On 07/02/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The blue channel streaking
On 07/02/07, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder if this was the problem seen in my last moon shot with the *ist D
when noise reduction was turned on.
My apologies Tom, I shouldn't have said dark frame, I meant the
sensors masked dark reference pixels.
--
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE
From: Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D @ ISO 3200
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 09:11:52 +1100
On 07/02/07, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder if this was the problem seen in my
11
+45 23 43 85 77
Skype: jensbladt248
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Godfrey
DiGiorgi
Sendt: 5. februar 2007 22:27
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: K10D @ ISO 3200
Darned - I do lots of ISO 3200 shots. I don't like flash
Nice photo! I'd love to see an 11x14 print of that ... to see how
that film stands up to enlargement. A web rez derived from a scan
really tells almost nothing about the print you can make from it.
G
On Feb 6, 2007, at 2:38 PM, Jens Bladt wrote:
Good question, Godfrey. I shot 1600 ASA Fuji
presentation (Wondershare
Flash Slide Show Builder).
This is a *ist D ISO 3200 shot IIRC:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/39757593/in/photostream/
Regards
Jens Bladt
Nytarkort / Greeting Card:
http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html
http://www.jensbladt.dk
+45 56 63 77 11
+45 23 43 85
I made a 12 x 18 print from Fuji 1600. It was grainy of course, but
nice. The high speed Fuji color print film is rather good. Ditto
Kodak's Portra 800.
Paul
On Feb 6, 2007, at 6:01 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Nice photo! I'd love to see an 11x14 print of that ... to see how
that film
I was always disappointed in the quality of 35mm color work enlarged
to 11x or bigger unless I was shooting with ASA 100 film. That's why
I loved medium format so much for larger prints. 5x7 or 8x12 wasn't
as much of an issue.
G
On Feb 6, 2007, at 3:43 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
I made a
I certainly prefer MF enlargements for the most part, but sometimes
grain is cool. This is the Fuji 1600 shot that I printed at 12x18. It
was shot for a Toyota television commercial that included some
stills, but I liked it as a big print. I printed it on an Epson 1200,
and it hung in my
I have heard ther's a setting somewhere that will allow for exposing
according to ISO 3200.
I can't find anything in the manual. Is this true? How?
Regards
Jens
Jens Bladt
Nytarkort / Greeting Card:
http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html
--
No virus found in this outgoing message
The rumor has it that in the future Pentax will release a camera micro
code that will enable both ISO 50 and ISO 3200 'cause one of the beta
versions had it. Currently we're confined to 100-1600 range.
Cheers.
On 2/5/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have heard ther's a setting
Darned - I do lots of ISO 3200 shots. I don't like flash photography a lot.
Not pretty - and it disturbs the subject a lot. Sometimes so much, I cant
take pictures. I guess I could underexpose by one stop. If I shoot Raw)DGN
it's probably OK to brighten up later.
Thanks anywasy for answering
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: K10D @ ISO 3200
Darned - I do lots of ISO 3200 shots. I don't like flash photography a
lot.
Not pretty - and it disturbs the subject a lot. Sometimes so much, I
cant
take pictures. I guess I could underexpose by one stop. If I
Darned - I do lots of ISO 3200 shots. I don't like flash photography a
lot. Not pretty - and it disturbs the subject a lot. Sometimes so
much, I
cant take pictures. I guess I could underexpose by one stop. If I
shoot Raw)DGN
it's probably OK to brighten up later.
Whatever did you do
I'm looking forward only to the 50.
J
--- Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Darned - I do lots of ISO 3200 shots. I don't like flash
photography a
lot. Not pretty - and it disturbs the subject a lot. Sometimes so
much, I
cant take pictures. I guess I could underexpose
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 01:27:22PM -0800, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Darned - I do lots of ISO 3200 shots. I don't like flash photography a
lot. Not pretty - and it disturbs the subject a lot. Sometimes so
much, I
cant take pictures. I guess I could underexpose by one stop. If I
shoot
On Feb 5, 2007, at 2:28 PM, John Francis wrote:
Whatever did you do when you were shooting with 35mm film? Any color
film over ASA 800 is pretty much crap, and even ASA 400 is crap when
you get to an 11x14 inch print.
Portra 800 wasn't bad. And I certtainly wouldn't call Kodak's 400
At 06:27 AM 6/02/2007, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
From: Jens Bladt
Darned - I do lots of ISO 3200 shots. I don't like flash photography a
lot. Not pretty - and it disturbs the subject a lot. Sometimes so
much, I
cant take pictures. I guess I could underexpose by one stop. If I
shoot Raw
Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Epson 3200 scan:
Which Epson 3200 is this? The Perfection 3200 flatbed or the hapless
F-3200 4x5 film scanner?
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de
manual cameras and photo
Epson Perfection 3200 flatbed
Cheers,
Dave
On 1/6/07, Ralf R. Radermacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Epson 3200 scan:
Which Epson 3200 is this? The Perfection 3200 flatbed or the hapless
F-3200 4x5 film scanner?
Ralf
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Epson Perfection 3200 flatbed
I see. Had one of those for a few years and it took the introduction of
the V700 to make me part with it. In the menatime I had tried the 4870,
4990, and the Canon 9900 (?) and the improvement was just too marginal.
To make
The Epson 3200 scan:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2609820size=lg
No surprise, but mildly interesting perhaps.
Paul
A good result and as you say, not surprising, I'd be keen to see where
the Epson V700/750 fits in there.
--
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
It's the Perfection 3200 flatbed, which has served me very well. But
perhaps not as well as I once thought :-).
Paul
On Jan 6, 2007, at 5:11 AM, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:
Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Epson 3200 scan:
Which Epson 3200 is this? The Perfection 3200 flatbed
Thanks Ralf. I'll try that.
Paul
On Jan 6, 2007, at 5:57 AM, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:
David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Epson Perfection 3200 flatbed
I see. Had one of those for a few years and it took the introduction of
the V700 to make me part with it. In the menatime I had tried
Yes, I'd like to see how the new Epson performs on this as well. I
notice the Imacon was able to separate the green of the trees from the
blue fog while the Epson 3200 was not. Perhaps I can find someone
locally who owns the V700 or maybe a store will let me do a test scan.
Paul
On Jan 6, 2007
Quite a noticeable difference - beautiful morning light behind the
vehicles BTW.
I use an Epson 3200 for my medium format scans. I'm not surprised at the
difference - I found it to be iffy for high quality scans from slide
film, but then slide film is the most demanding for scanning.
I think
. Epson 3200
Here's a pic I rescanned on my friend's Imacon. I treated it somewhat
differently as well, both in terms of the crop and the rendering, but I
still think there's a distinct difference. Note the detail in the
background trtees.
The imacon scan:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo
Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
Here's a pic I rescanned on my friend's Imacon. I treated it somewhat
differently as well, both in terms of the crop and the rendering,
but I
still think there's a distinct difference. Note the detail in the
background trtees
1 - 100 of 249 matches
Mail list logo
