Search results for 'back focus' - page 2381
EV compensation
To get back to the beginning (ie: the OP's question): 1. When I started using my K-x I thought that it would be best to set it to spot or centre-weighted metering. Then wondered why snaps of a white dog looked too dark overall! On average, my K-x seems to underexpose slightly on 'evaluative' set...
Posted by OldTaffy on 17/07/2012 - 15:19
External Microphone...
I am looking to upgrade my current microphone for video. It is a basic but does the job quite well, however the wire is damaged from storing in my camera bag, also when I use the camera through the viewfinder when the mic is attached (as I like to switch from Video to stills) it dents my head and i...
Posted by beakynet on 20/07/2012 - 16:04
External Microphone...
I dub using the recorded audio track, but there's a stereo line out socket on it so I'd guess you could connect it to the camera with a 3.5mm to 3.5mm cable. I've not tried it but if I can borrow such a cable I'll give it a go and report back.
Posted by SkyRider on 21/07/2012 - 20:51
External Microphone...
I bought a hotshoe stereo mic by Polaroid - from Amazon I think. Good value, about £40, light and it has two angle settings, 90 and 120 degrees. It comes with a soft case and a foam cover for windy conditions. Connection is straight into K7s mic input, a small 'stereo jack', and it screws tightly on...
Posted by McGregNi on 21/07/2012 - 22:23
Just had a thought
Because we used to focus manually! Therefore when the image was in focus, it was ... err ... in focus!
Posted by greynolds999 on 23/07/2012 - 13:21
Just had a thought
And that's still true. What has been added is the opportunity to pixel-peep, which means that we now attribute focusing errors to the technology rather than user error. Sometimes adjustment may be helpful, especially with independed lenses, but generally it isn't. I have never adjusted a lens. I ...
Posted by johnriley on 23/07/2012 - 14:06
Just had a thought
Film is also easier to focus on because the light-sensitive layer is thicker than the surface of an electronic sensor. Plus film is not as sharp as digital and peeping at very fine detail (at least at 35mm) was far less common, because it was harder to do (loupe or large print). So slight focusi...
Posted by Jonathan-Mac on 23/07/2012 - 15:00
Just had a thought
Some camera tests would comment on the accuracy of collimation, but usually that was just limited to a terse "the point of focus was correct" so it wasn't seen as a major issue. Film flatness was more of an issue, particularly when film was left in the camera and would gain a "kink" in the transp...
Posted by johnriley on 23/07/2012 - 15:06
Just had a thought
John is right about film flatness. I recall from selling cameras in the Seventies 126 and 110 cartridge film was useless because of the lack of control over film flatness under the pressure plate. Good 35mm cameras controlled the film better by efficient clutches and good pressure plates. As to t...
Posted by wvbarnes on 23/07/2012 - 18:35
Just had a thought
I agree with much of the above. Contax used a vacuum pressure plate supposedly to minimise film flatness issues. The LX has a longer pressure plate than most Pentax cameras (and longer film guides). I had a 20x30 inch poster from Kodachrome 25 printed. The detail was amazing but showed up limitat...
Posted by johnha on 23/07/2012 - 23:32
Just had a thought
For anyone who is interested, I used the method I described in the other thread at https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/rolls-royce-special-edition-36076/p-0 to photo a ruler before and after AF adjustment. These are the crops - the image should be viewed at full size: The camera was t...
Posted by MrB on 24/07/2012 - 20:45
Just had a thought
Interesting Philip. I'm not suggesting this isn't valid, but I do have some thoughts about it. I'm wondering about the fact that if correctly focused there should be more DOF behind the focus point than in front. I wonder if some users are tring to make it equal both sides. The second thought is ...
Posted by johnriley on 24/07/2012 - 20:51
Just had a thought
Hi, I agree with John. I recall the rough rule of thumb always was two thirds behind against one third in front, varying with the aperture used of course. i'm sure that's not changed in the digital era. My maths is terrible but you can Google or Wikipedia all this hyperfocal stuff for fancy...
Posted by wvbarnes on 24/07/2012 - 21:04
Just had a thought
Interesting. I've just looked at the DOF tables in my Pentax book and to be honest they are sometimes quite mysterious at very close distances, where even for prime lenses focal length can change as we focus. Goodness knows what strange effects happen with some zoom designs. The principles remain...
Posted by johnriley on 24/07/2012 - 21:37
Just had a thought
I'd never heard about all this messing with per lens settings until internet forums started on it. I still say if you buy a lens and its wonky send it back. if it's an old one then fair enough BUT then surely you rely on manual focus. Just becuase you enver heard of it doesn't mean it's a real issu...
Posted by Smeggypants on 26/07/2012 - 06:07
Just had a thought
Don't forget that live view will have it's own DOF :shock: Focussing an an 85mm f/1.4 at f/1.4 will be easy. Try a 28mm at say f/8 it will probably look in focus no matter where the focus scale is. :shock:
Posted by Algernon on 26/07/2012 - 07:51
Just had a thought
Don't forget that live view will have it's own DOF :shock: Focussing an an 85mm f/1.4 at f/1.4 will be easy. Well indeed the inability of the regular focus screen at wider apertures than F/2.8 to show teh correct DOF does make manul focus difficult and live view is a way to get aroudn this. I alwa...
Posted by Smeggypants on 26/07/2012 - 08:02
Just had a thought
Could be an old lens or a mirror lens or a lens that suffers from bad focus shift. A lot of zooms are f/5.6 or f/6.3 :wink:
Posted by Algernon on 26/07/2012 - 08:16
Printing tips, when buying in prints
Stupid time :) OK I'm printing bigger e.g. A3, A2 and sending away for prints. How do I get the best results? I've slaved over my RAW development, looked at every inch of the print and finally I upload it to a printer and then what? How do I ensure that what I get back matches my sent im...
Posted by dougf8 on 25/07/2012 - 11:41
Printing tips, when buying in prints
If 4000x3000 gets you 13" x 10", and you print at A2, all that will happen is your print will be a bit less than 300 pixels to each inch. *Personally* I wouldn't worry too much about the output dropping to about 200 pixels per inch, because you tend to back off in any case. YMMV. You can end up c...
Posted by Pentaxophile on 31/07/2012 - 18:48
