Well well. That turned out to be quite a helpful suggestion - thanks.

I downloaded QuickGamma, from http://www.normankoren.com/QuickGammaV2EN.exe.

I think I probably need a new monitor, but at least I can see the difference now between the original and the version I've replaced it with on the competition thread.

Any better?

Hmm. Ok, thanks folks. I'll see what I can do. Might be a bit tricky, since I can't see what you're seeing.

Question regarding my barn-fire shot:

Not asking for opinions at all, obviously, but someone told me that the black areas of it on her monitor looked all greyish and grainy rather than black.

They're supposed to be black (there was no light at all except for the fire), and they look black on my monitor.

Could a few people let me know what they look like to them, please (by PM if you like - no need to clog up the thread.)

If this is a common experience I'll see if I can do a better version.

Thanks!

I don't know if there's a limit as such, not published anyway.

There seems to be something of a consensus that under 10V will be Ok.

One suggestion I would make though, is that you measure it yourself.

Not for a moment impugning the good intent of the contributors there, but there's no guarantee that the figures quoted on that web site were accurately measured, or accurately recorded - you wouldn't want to be the one that found out that there was a decimal point in the wrong place.

I measured a few guns recently. Three of the four came out well under 10V, so they're in use with the K10D. The other one, similar vintage, was well over 100V.

Thanks. I'd been wondering about the blue twigs too. I noticed them straight away, since I was looking at it a lot at high magnification today. Thought I'd wait and see what people thought about them though.

I wondered if the blue in the heron was reflecting in the wet twigs - but it's just a bit too intense for that. Maybe it's purple fringing, but blue not purple? But then not all the blue is right next to an overexposed highlight, so I'm not sure.

Thanks for your comments, and I totally agree that it's better less cropped. I got a bit carried away trying to see as much detail in the feathers as possible - there's lots more than you can see at 1000 pixels wide. Lesson learned, though, thanks Tim.

Better?

A couple from last night, just before and just after sunset. Taken with the '10 and the Pentax SMC-A 400mm







Critique appreciated.

Well use the green hexagon in the viewfinder to confirm that you're focused. Then you have the best of both worlds.

Do you think cycling through the focus points to get to the one you want is slower than manual focusing?

By the way, you are aware, aren't you, that the red dot doesn't tell you it's in focus. It only tells you which focus point it's using. It's the green hexagon at the bottom that confirms the focus. They often do appear at the same time, but it's only the green hexagon that's reliable, by all accounts.

Maybe it would be helpful in the longer term not to always assume first that it is.

Like he needs it...

It's an interesting point this. You can imagine someone using a compact next to him, and if it was on matrix metering, or whatever they call it, getting a perfectly good photo.

I'm starting to understand why the K100D has the scene modes - if they help to bridge the gap for people used only to compacts then it makes sense to have them.