ChrisA

Joined: 4th January 2007

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

ChrisA
Pentaxophile wrote:
As an aside, the 81% factor I mentioned above is the factor which you need to resize K3 files to get them down to 16mp... hopefully this might save someone some time if they want to have a quick go at this
Interestingly enough (or maybe not!!), it's closer to 82%, but not only that, the aspect ratio of the K-5 and K-3 sensors are not exactly the same.

The K-5 is 4928 x 3264, 1.5098. Whereas
the K-3 is 6016 x 4000, 1.504.

Well I thought it was mildly interesting anyway...

Sorry, I'll get my coat..

Comment by ChrisA posted on The new standard of performance - K3 shoot. at 28/10/2013 - 16:52

ChrisA
DrOrloff wrote:
I think too close to call is the outcome for all practical purposes.
Cheers. That'll be good enough for me to bite if everything else is as it should be.

Comment by ChrisA posted on The new standard of performance - K3 shoot. at 28/10/2013 - 16:14

ChrisA
DrOrloff wrote:
ChrisA wrote:
Doc, just following on from Pentaxophile's comment, if you have a sec, please could you post the K-3 one again, but after reducing the original raw file to 16 MP with no other changes?
No I don't see how I could do that. The above are just unresized 800 pixels width.
Sorry, I was writing lazily...

I meant, open the raw file in PS or LR, then resize the whole image to pixel dimensions the same as the K-5's (that's what I meant by 16 MP, but I accept it wasn't clear!), allowing it to do whatever resampling it does.

And then chop out a suitable 800px wide bit of what's left, for comparison with the K-5 unresized one you posted earlier.

Noise in images that have been reduced in size is usually less than at full size, so I was just wondering how that would compare.

I could do it myself, I just thought that since you already had the images to hand, and I'd need to do the whole lot for the comparison to be worth anything.

Comment by ChrisA posted on The new standard of performance - K3 shoot. at 28/10/2013 - 14:01

ChrisA
Doc, just following on from Pentaxophile's comment, if you have a sec, please could you post the K-3 one again, but after reducing the original raw file to 16 MP with no other changes?

Comment by ChrisA posted on The new standard of performance - K3 shoot. at 28/10/2013 - 11:46

ChrisA
QuestionableCarrot wrote:
Continuous AF
Most impressed then. I was expecting you to say that you prefocused, to be honest.

Whatever you do, don't sell that lens (unless it's to me, obviously!).

Comment by ChrisA posted on Motorcycling Shots at 27/10/2013 - 21:25

ChrisA
Very nice.

How did you actually focus? AF-C/S, or did you prefocus on a point?

Comment by ChrisA posted on Motorcycling Shots at 27/10/2013 - 15:30

ChrisA
MattyH wrote:
...and now in the latter stages of 2013, things are changing in the photo world, and moving fast and leaving Pentax behind
I think this is actually wrong. It was true a few years ago, but it seems to me now that Pentax is catching up, rather than falling further behind.

If this continues, then all the reasons others have given for sticking with Pentax (ergonomics, build quality) make it more and more sensible to do so.

If the K-3 is all it stacks up to be, there'll be no reason to jump ship at all AFAICS.

Comment by ChrisA posted on Why do we stay with Pentax? at 27/10/2013 - 15:16

ChrisA
LennyBloke wrote:
Hotshoe Grip & bracket SOLD
And received, many thanks.

Comment by ChrisA posted on FS: Various Pentax accessories (mainly older) at 27/10/2013 - 10:23

ChrisA
If the mark on the images is in the same place every time, it will be muck of some description on the sensor for sure.

Options are:

- Blow it off with a rocket blower. This causes as much trouble as it solves, lots of folk here find that it can easily introduce more muck.

- If it's dust or a hair, gently remove it with an Arctic Butterfly. Expensive, but highly rated by folk here, including me.

- If it's something stuck (pollen tends to stick), a wet clean will be needed. Kits can be bought online, and it's not as scary a process as some people would have you believe.

Be a little careful using the term 'sensor stain'. There was a problem with early batches of K-5 cameras where there was an actual defect with the sensor. This became known as the 'sensor stain' problem. Ancient history now, but referring to sensor stains does tend to risk confusion!

Comment by ChrisA posted on Sensor at 25/10/2013 - 10:43

ChrisA
Gwyn wrote:
Just happy to share them. No comments needed.
Hard luck - haven't looked through them all but the ones I've seen are really nice.

Comment by ChrisA posted on Another pointless thread at 24/10/2013 - 10:47

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo