Hi Ratbag,

It's so that when you have a polariser filter mounted on the lens, you can still rotate it with the lenshood in place, you just remove that small piece so that you can access the filter.

Happy playing,
Dan

Yeah, I knew that, I'm not daft!

Hi Matt,

Just saw about ver. 4 when I was looking at the site, 300% increase in processing speed looks interesting . I've still got a free upgrade due for mine, so I might hang on for that (I'm on version 3.7.1).

Dan

Of course, that assumes that the K100 has different PEF's to the DS and DL - might be worth trying the update in case your PSE4 is a version that didn't ship with support for these cameras Barry.

I'm hoping that by the time the K10D is realesed, Capture One will at least support DNG format, as the new K10D PEF's won't be supported for a couple of months at least, from what I've read on the C1 user forum, although just having looked at the PhaseOne website, they're already supporting the D80 and EOS400D, so perhaps not.

Dan

Apparently not...


http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=3523

http://www.adobe.com/special/photoshop/camera_raw/Camera_Raw_3.5_ReadMe.pdf



Dan

Ah, such is the price one pays when you have the latest thing! I guess at some point Adobe will update the RAW convertor and it will then be able to open the K100's files. I wonder if these are different from the DS's, in which case you may have trouble with most third party convertors, they tend to take a while to catch up.

If you have the Pentax Lab version 3 loaded, that may be your best bet for RAW conversion. If you've got version 2, try updating it now (free dowload from Pentax) as 3 is apparently much better, although I can't say as I now use Phase One.

Good luck,
Dan

Also, the Pentax RAW convertor will allow you to convert to TIFF instead of Jpeg, and this will be better for editing in photoshop, and you can then save your final image as a PSD (to preserve all layers etc), or as a Jpeg if you wish (if you're getting prints done in store for instance). At this stage you can say how compressed you want the jpeg to be, pick '12' for the highest quality. I think, although someone more knowledgable might correct me, that the 'best' jpegs from the camera are still only '8' quality, so fairly compressed.

Dan

Barry,

You should just be able to open the images, which will automatically start the RAW convertor. So 'File>Open' then navigate to your PEFs and open. I use an istD, and I think the PEFs from later models are different, so can't say whether that might be an issue.

Dan

Tim,

Are you sure the lens isn't stopping right down - I hate to tell you this, but I think your sensor needs a clean. The images have quite a few specks of dirt showing, and being this defined would suggest that you were using a small aperture - you probably wouldn't notice them at all at 'normal' ones. The very shallow depth of field is probably just due to the high magnification.

And I'd suggest a beanbag as a support.

You've inspired me, just off to round up my extension tube collection...

Dan

Hi Golf,

Glad you liked the pics - your onion looks fantastic (bet you never thought you'd hear that phrase ). At the moment I've got nine extension tubes knocking about (three sets), so perhaps I'll try something like that myself. Might have to use a 200mm lens though to keep the subject off the front element!

I too am happy to try anything cheap to get the effect I want, see my post here: https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=15417&highlight=#15417. I've now replaced this with a Lumiquest Diffuser (http://www.7dayshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=777_1&products_id=100368), which I find just as effective, doesn't blow around in the wind, and looks a little more professional.

To answer your quesions:

1) My Sigma 105mm works perfectly with my D. Whether there would be any differences with the way the DS would communicate with it, I don't know, but I haven't heard of any problems. I'm sure someone else on here uses this combination.

2) You do get 1:1 magnification, but you can also use tubes too, to get greater ratios. The fly pic on the other thread was using a tube, and the image is full frame. As the lens has an aperture ring, you can use manual tubes with no problem. A lens that gives 1:1 is so much more convenient than any lens with tubes, as you never seem to have the right combination on for the composition you want.

3) I haven't tried the 150mm, but it's an EX lens (I find the build quality of these lenses superb, very solid), and I have no reason to think the quality would be any less than the 105. The 105 is more common though, and you may well be able to pick up a good value secondhand one. Mine was from Jessops a year ago, and cost me about £90.


Hope that helps,
Dan