All Forum Comments
Comment by ChrisA posted on Two late evening shots. at 25/09/2010 - 23:36
It would be disappointing if it was only 11, I expect more from the community here.
We have yet to reach the stage where someone actually posts a K-5 shot.
Then half of those here assembled will be saying "wow great shot".
The other half will be worrying about whether they can do better.
'Twas ever thus..
We have yet to reach the stage where someone actually posts a K-5 shot.
Then half of those here assembled will be saying "wow great shot".
The other half will be worrying about whether they can do better.
'Twas ever thus..
Comment by ChrisA posted on K5, was it worth the wait? at 25/09/2010 - 23:05
Mike-P wrote:
I doubt very much I will buy a K-5 myself
Yeah yeah, just 'cos the airshow season is more or less over...I doubt very much I will buy a K-5 myself
Comment by ChrisA posted on Pentax K-5 Autofocus System at 22/09/2010 - 22:37
Mike-P wrote:
Light or Pro?ChrisA wrote:
What do you use for this Mike?
Photomatix.What do you use for this Mike?
Big difference in the price - are the Pro features important?
Comment by ChrisA posted on Official K-5 specs !!! at 22/09/2010 - 09:54
rparmar wrote:
Well, fair point.. I think in future, I need to be prepared to go the whole nine yards, in terms of bracketing every shot, and being prepared to HDR them together later on (apols to George for the verb "to HDR" )ChrisA wrote:
I've just come back from a week in the Lake District, and there was a lot of bright cloud about. In many cases, bracketing like crazy, it was impossible to get anywhere close to usable exposure for the hills without burning out great swathes of sky. It drove me nuts.
...I am curious though that you say you could not solve the problem even while "bracketing like crazy". I have found that there's little I cannot do with +/-3 EV bracketing. Digital makes all this so much easier.I've just come back from a week in the Lake District, and there was a lot of bright cloud about. In many cases, bracketing like crazy, it was impossible to get anywhere close to usable exposure for the hills without burning out great swathes of sky. It drove me nuts.
But I'm more a 'take photographs during a walk in the fells', than a 'lug a tripod up to a spot and wait for the light' kind of person, which does place a few limitations.
I hadn't realised that HDR apps were good enough to stitch together frames that weren't entirely coincident, though, so I may just leave the camera in 'bang off the whole bracket' mode next time.
Comment by ChrisA posted on Official K-5 specs !!! at 22/09/2010 - 09:46
Shaky wrote:
But the apparent lack of video mode autofocus is probably a dealbreaker for me.
What a shame; having evidently finally made real progress on the stills autofocus capability - as I suspected - Pentax have unfortunately been engaged in a battle otherwise long since ended.
Heavens to Murgatroyd, you drive a hard bargain, O Shaking One.But the apparent lack of video mode autofocus is probably a dealbreaker for me.
What a shame; having evidently finally made real progress on the stills autofocus capability - as I suspected - Pentax have unfortunately been engaged in a battle otherwise long since ended.
I reckon that's a bit harsh.
I still have my Sony DSC T-something or other for video...
... though I dare say I'll develop the ability to moan quite satisfactorily once I've had a K-5 for a while, and am getting into video a bit.
It won't be just yet though, so you'll have to carry the mantle for a bit.
Comment by ChrisA posted on K5, was it worth the wait? at 21/09/2010 - 20:58
johnriley wrote:
One interesting thing I picked up from the specs is that it looks like there is a switchable choice in the style of AF. We will choose between maximum accuracy, which is probably what we have now, and maximum speed, where presumably the camera won't mess about being too fussy.
The speed option may well appeal to some, especially if the DOF is more than enough to ensure a sharply focused image.
I noticed this too... but I do really, really hope they haven't used this as a shabby workaround.One interesting thing I picked up from the specs is that it looks like there is a switchable choice in the style of AF. We will choose between maximum accuracy, which is probably what we have now, and maximum speed, where presumably the camera won't mess about being too fussy.
The speed option may well appeal to some, especially if the DOF is more than enough to ensure a sharply focused image.
After all, switch the camera into "release without being in focus", and get reasonably close in MF, and you more or less achieve the same thing.
It's 2010 goddammit, I want sharp and fast!!
Comment by ChrisA posted on K5, was it worth the wait? at 21/09/2010 - 20:50
pentaxanne wrote:
heres an iso 12800 shot from the d7000
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rob-1/4993528427/
the k5 does lok very good. fare better than the k7
Interesting. Not only quite noisy, but on a quick look, less detail. Hardly a scientific comparison, but I'm a little reassured.heres an iso 12800 shot from the d7000
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rob-1/4993528427/
the k5 does lok very good. fare better than the k7
I was thinking that I've been quite happy with ISO 400 noise levels on the K10D, two stops below its maximum... so I was hoping that two stops below the K-5's max it would also be good.
Perhaps I should be thinking of 3 stops better than the K10D instead.
Comment by ChrisA posted on K5, was it worth the wait? at 21/09/2010 - 19:53
Here's another vote for the robins. Love the way you've not overdone the sharpening, so they keep their fluffiness.
Comment by ChrisA posted on Sunday morning stroll at 21/09/2010 - 19:02
Is that really good for ISO6400?
Am I just expecting too much?
Am I just expecting too much?
Comment by ChrisA posted on K5, was it worth the wait? at 21/09/2010 - 18:33
These, however, despite the delightful light in the first and the marvellous reflections and detail in the second, leave me slightly unconvinced.
The light is excellent in the first, yet it's hard to see it as more than a record shot, attractive though it is.
The reflections in the second are excellent too, but it's just a little too busy generally to have the impact I started to think it deserved.
I think in both cases, the subjects are a little too central, the themes just a little too predictable to convey real conviction.
Very nice, but... - if you know what I mean.
Sorry, but your previous postings have spoilt me a bit, I'm afraid