A competition entry if ever I saw one!

Dan

It might be an idea to have a link to all the Pentax stuff, all the nikon etc. You know, linked selling. At the moment, someone comes along to look at lenses and doesn't necessarily see the bodies or cleaning kit, batteries etc. If there was a link to all the items from a particular manufacturer, customers are more likely to get something else while they're looking.

Perhaps logos down the left side? Below the specific links.

Dan

Long overdue I think, the old one looked a bit dated - this one is much better, well done.

Excellent price on the K20D + 16-45 by the way!

Dan

I can heartily recommend the K10D, and there are some amazing deals on them at the moment, like the 'telephoto bundle' deal at SRS Microsystems here, but you would have to be quick to get one, they're the last ever stock. Certainly, you won't get anything other than just the K20D body for your budget, so without knowing just what old lenses your husband has, it would be hard to recommend it.

I certainly intend keeping and using my K10D for a fair while yet, although you never know what's round the corner.

Dan

Well done all those who entered, I failed to - yes, just too chicken! A different assignment, and well judged by Lilly, so congratulations to her, and well done again to Dr. Mhuni!

Have to say I would have picked a completely different winner (wasn't even in the top three ), but that's what judging is all about - picking the one that fits the bill for you. Where would we be if we all liked the same things?

Dan

That point I was trying to put across was; the lack of contrast may make the images seem less sharp than they really are.

Sharpening is a fact of life with digital images, either when shooting jpeg, when the camera will apply some (if you set the camera to do no sharpening, you'll need to apply some in 'photoshop' or whatever you use), or when you're processing your RAW files. Sharpening is an artform in itself. I tend to be a bit slapdash, but I get results I'm happy with.

Dan

To be honest, clarity and sharpness are pretty much impossible to judge at this size. They look fine to me, but they may well be unsharp when viewed full size. Likewise, sharp images can be rendered fuzzy by careless resizing.

To me, the thing that stands out is their lack of contrast. The lighting looks very flat and uninspiring, yet there are crisp shadows and plenty of blue sky. This lack of contrast may give the impression of a lack of sharpness, as sharpness is generally increased by increasing the contrast along edges in a picture.

Here's one of yours with the contrast boosted, but no extra sharpening.




By the way, your sensor needs a clean, those dark marks on each pic are the result of dirt on the surface of the sensor.

Dan

Flattery will, of course, get you everywhere!

Dan

P.S. It was a poppy, not a tulip.

P.P.S. Father Ted, does all this answer your question?

Okay, just a bit of confusion between everyone about the term 'bad light' I think.

George, when you say 'bad light', what do you mean? I took it to mean overcast.

I'm of the opinion that 'bad light' doesn't exist. One type of light will not suit certain subjects, whereas it will be perfect for others.

I think you're of the same mind, but then "Go through your best pics, and tell me how many were made with bad light. Then good light." doesn't fit that, unless you meant to have the word 'landscape' in there.

Of course, the term 'landscape' would be open to interpretation too - would a woodland full of bluebells be a landscape? In which case overcast days are a godsend then, too.

Dan

But he's just said there's no such thing as 'bad' light, just different light. I had a quick think through some of my favourite shots, and most of them were taken on overcast days.

That may be the law of averages, but it still says something.

Braod landscapes, with the sky included - yes, clearer conditions are best. But many of my shots exclude the sky completely, and I love the soft, even lighting that a layer of cloud gives.




Dan