The degrading effect is significantly reduced by using layers. Also, 16 bits requires more memory to process - suddenly 1GB RAM won't cut it!

It is actually 72 pixles per inch and is the resolution that the camera takes the picture at. What it referes to is the size of the pixels and is most usefull for sixing an image for printing.

For example, a sheet of A4 is about 11 inches across, if you want enough pixles to print at 72 pixles per inch you would need a picture 72x11 pixles wide or 792 pixles.

I would not worry about it and it is used for calculation for printing, in this term, if printing a 10MPixle file on an 11inch wide sheet, you are getting 235 pixles per inch resolution!

Hope this makes some sense.

Stefan,

You are right that 8 bits equates to 256 colours, however the 8 bit refer to 8 bits per channel (Red, Green, Blue - RGB) which gives 256*256*256 colours. However, this is further complicated by the colour space you are working in (Adobe or RGB)

16 bit allows to to represent many more shades of colours, however printers still only work in 8 bit colour space!

So, if you are doing lots of editing, use 16 bits to retain shades during editing and thus retain best quality, however you will always be printing at 8 bits.

I have the Kata 3in1 20 too, it is a great bag, I got it because it can go over my left shoulder as a sling bag, which is more comfortable that the Slingshot which went over my right shoulder (which I broke years ago!).

When I am just carrying the camera and one lens, I leave my Kata at home and take the Think Tank bag! I have the Digital Holster 40 which I think would would fit the 60-250 (though I don't have the lens to check). The system is good and can be attached to the optional Pro Speed belt or Skin belt. Perhaps an alternative to think about?

I like to carry less kit to make me think more about what I am photographing.

I used to get Pro UV, now I get the Hoya "Protector". I believe that most sensors have a UV filter anyway.

I have had my DA* 16-50 for a month now and it is fast becomming my most used lens! I also have the DA* 50-135 and that is firmly remaining my favourite lens.

I do find that the 16-50 doesn't always focus right, then I just focus again and it seems to get it right. For me focus is fast enough.

The CA is a problem sometimes, however a recent AP article highlighted the significant technical problem of preventing CA on wide angle zooms. This is done by the coating and needs to be optimised for the balance of the lens, not just the wide end, hense this leads to CA on the wide settings. More superior coatings are being developed that may one day resolve this issue.

The horse was moving its head too much to effectively frame the background.

Yes, I have tried a crop, which I though was better, however I decided to post the origonal for comment. I also also decided that the shape of the back of the horse could add something to the picture, perhaps I was wrong in that though!

Took these at the weekend at a farm. Any comments appreciated.
1:


2:


3:

The one I tried appeard to be back focusing on my K10D @ F1.4, then again, so did the Sigma 30mm F1.4!

I agree with John, the FA 1.4 might be a better option. Then if you were a K20D owner, you could change focussing for each lens independently!

I always use the settings on camera (via Fn button). It is more convenient, especially when using wireless flash!

When using a two flash set up, then settings on the flash will only impact that flash, so useful for more advanced techniques and also manual flash settings.