All Forum Comments
Comment by Anvh posted on In-camera RAW file editing at 27/02/2010 - 19:41
Have a great time and take some photos for those that stay behind in the cold
Comment by Anvh posted on Back in a week or so at 27/02/2010 - 19:39
andrewk wrote:
I don't agree with WheresWaldo's comment about the split image being too large on the K3 screen. It looks fine to me.
Andrew
But photos don't say anything, the sky is darker with the K3 screen for example.Anvh wrote:
The Ec-B also seems to be pretty good
Yes, I saw that thread before ordering the K3. I read somewhere else that the K3 was the brightest of the screens - and that was one of the reasons for ordering it. If you see the Screen Comparison page here , the brown dress does look brighter for the K3 screen compared with the Ec-B.The Ec-B also seems to be pretty good
I don't agree with WheresWaldo's comment about the split image being too large on the K3 screen. It looks fine to me.
Andrew
WheresWaldo says he find the Ec-B slightly brighter but later on someone said he finds the k3 brighter so it seems they are both bright.
Like you said I think you would need to choice if you want the microprism or not in the viewfinder, I think I would prefer the smaller Ec-B myself as well.
I might get one for the K10D since I use manual quite a lot some help might be helpfull.
Comment by Anvh posted on K3 focusing screen - focusingscreen.com at 27/02/2010 - 09:56
Gwyn wrote:
Cheap ND grads may not be neutral at all. Some have a distinct magenta hue to them. This may not be a problem for sunsets but it is a pain for other skies. I learned this from personal experience.
That's indeed true the Cokin P series is a bit purple.Cheap ND grads may not be neutral at all. Some have a distinct magenta hue to them. This may not be a problem for sunsets but it is a pain for other skies. I learned this from personal experience.
The Cokin Z-pro is a lot better but also more expensive and you also have Hi-Tech (formatt) filters, I've heard good things about them but they are not cheap but you don't want to put cheap things in front of your expensive glass it will only degrade your photo, you might be better off with editing your photo digitally.
Comment by Anvh posted on Neutral density graduated filter at 27/02/2010 - 09:51
iceblinker wrote:
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/zooms/_optics/18-55f3.5-5.6.gif
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/zooms/_optics/18-55f3.5-5.6-ii.gif
The WR has the SP coating over the others so your not fully incorrect HG Hardgravity wrote:
Any of the standard 18-55 lenses would be worth having.
The only difference between the Mk1 and Mk2 models is an extra coating allowing better resolution on the larger sensors.
There is a difference with the elements, actually:Any of the standard 18-55 lenses would be worth having.
The only difference between the Mk1 and Mk2 models is an extra coating allowing better resolution on the larger sensors.
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/zooms/_optics/18-55f3.5-5.6.gif
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/zooms/_optics/18-55f3.5-5.6-ii.gif
Comment by Anvh posted on 18-55mm kit lens. at 27/02/2010 - 09:46
Welcome to the forum, according to Ned Bunnel from Pentax America; Red and Whites are sold most often (more then black) so I'm sure there are some users out there with a coloured one.
Comment by Anvh posted on Any Red K-x Users Out There? at 26/02/2010 - 16:15
Same here Martin, I think Andrew was using a 28mm but dialled in 43mm when asked for the focal length for the shake reduction.
It's an obvious mistake to fill in the equivalent focal length instead of the actual focal length.
Andrew probably knows what he has done, so let's await for his answer.
It's an obvious mistake to fill in the equivalent focal length instead of the actual focal length.
Andrew probably knows what he has done, so let's await for his answer.
Comment by Anvh posted on What’s your favorite focal length? at 26/02/2010 - 16:13
The Ec-B also seems to be pretty good.
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/camera-studio-accessories/73353-some-pentax-f...
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/camera-studio-accessories/73353-some-pentax-f...
Comment by Anvh posted on K3 focusing screen - focusingscreen.com at 26/02/2010 - 16:04
Malo1961 wrote:
@ Stefan,
There are some exif viewers who only show the focal length after correction for aps-c.
So the use of a true 28 mm would be shown as 42/43 mm. As does mine on the example of Andrews picture.
I know from previous experience the program PhotoMe shows both values.
And I haven't seen any reference in Andrews comment that suggests he dials in the wrong value. Just that he likes the field of view of a 43 MM the most. Pentax seems to agree with him,hence the 43 LTD.
BTW...my favourite focal length usually comes down to the FOV of 60-80 MM. Moderate tele so to speak.
my browser (opera 10.50) says: @ Stefan,
There are some exif viewers who only show the focal length after correction for aps-c.
So the use of a true 28 mm would be shown as 42/43 mm. As does mine on the example of Andrews picture.
I know from previous experience the program PhotoMe shows both values.
And I haven't seen any reference in Andrews comment that suggests he dials in the wrong value. Just that he likes the field of view of a 43 MM the most. Pentax seems to agree with him,hence the 43 LTD.
BTW...my favourite focal length usually comes down to the FOV of 60-80 MM. Moderate tele so to speak.
Lens focal length: 43
Focal length, 35 mm equivalent: 64
Photome:
Focal Length: 43 mm (equiv. 64 mm)
It could indeed be the 43mm LTD but Andrew didn't talk about that lens.
Since he said he like to use the 28mm that's the reason I said that, it would be a shame if he would use the SR wrongly since he takes such stunning photos.
Comment by Anvh posted on What’s your favorite focal length? at 26/02/2010 - 15:36
I thought you where already done with scanning, wow
All in all the quality of both scanners should be pretty equal.
ChrisA wrote:
Several years back I'd had a go with a mid-range Epson flat bed scanner, and the thing that completely put me off was all the dust and crap that inevitably got on the negs and ruined the scan, no matter how careful I was.
That alone is why I'd never go back to a non-dedicated scanner, especially if it didn't have the auto-scratch and spot removal (digital ICE on the Nikon scanners), which adds eons to the elapsed time if you want a decent result and have to do it manually.
yeah that's the major problem with a flatbed but the current ones and the ones also designed for film in mind have the software you talk about and the advantage is that you can use the flatbed for more things on the other hand if you don't need a flatbed and just need a scanner for photos a dictated one would be better.Several years back I'd had a go with a mid-range Epson flat bed scanner, and the thing that completely put me off was all the dust and crap that inevitably got on the negs and ruined the scan, no matter how careful I was.
That alone is why I'd never go back to a non-dedicated scanner, especially if it didn't have the auto-scratch and spot removal (digital ICE on the Nikon scanners), which adds eons to the elapsed time if you want a decent result and have to do it manually.
All in all the quality of both scanners should be pretty equal.
Comment by Anvh posted on Negative to jpeg HOW at 26/02/2010 - 15:26
I can't recommend editing in camera though, the screen is not 100% accurate and the editing options you've in the camera are limited and quite cruel compare to those on your PC.