It does work really well, but it is at its most useful when shooting macro, moving slowly back and forth to achieve critical focus. I can't see it being very effective for bird shots.

Regards
David

I have bought two AOC 23" IPS screens - they are simply brilliant for the money. I work in a software company - we have a variety of Phillips, Samsung and HP screens, all more expensive than the AOC's, but the AOC's are miles better for sharpness, contrast and colour rendition.

Regards
David

As far as I can tell it actually compresses the dynamic range and does not increase it. It stands to reason, also if the manual is read carefully it states that it 'reduces the occurrence of overexposed and underexposed areas'. To me, that means compression, not expansion. The manual also does not differentiate between RAW and Jpeg when shooting with the dynamic range options turned on which implies it affects both.

The accepted wisdom of most knowledgeable K-5 users (judging by what I've read and what people have said to me) is that the best dynamic range is achieved by leaving these settings turned off, lowering the ISO as far as possible and shooting / processing RAW files. My experience of using the K-5 also leads me to the same conclusion.

Regards
David

I can't quite follow your logic here Algi and you do seem to be contradicting yourself in this thread. You said earlier "The best Dynamic and Tonal Range for the K-5 is at ISO 80 which is actually ISO 70".

If this is true, then the dynamic range at ISO 80 without the Highlight / Shadow correction turned on is greater than the Dynamic Range at ISO 200 (minimum available) with it turned on. Am I not correct? If I am wrong, then your previous assertion is also wrong.

Given that it is much easier to recover details at the extremes of the dynamic range in RAW than it is in JPEG (and retain better quality whilst doing so), I fully stand by my previous point that if shooting in RAW, what's the point in having Highlight and Shadow correction turned on? If the data is there in the file, then RAW processing can surely recover it? With jpeg the camera has already processed it and makes its own decisions so it may not have done as good a job as a person would with decent RAW processing software.

Having said this, I see no logic or relevance in your other statement as to the Shadow and Highlight correction "not being any use for jpegs". Surely the camera uses the sensor information as its starting point for processing a jpeg and if Pentax thought that using the Dynamic Range settings at ISO 200 was not providing a benefit why would they offer this setting? I would bet you a pound to a penny that a jpeg shot with these turned on would look different to a jpeg shot with them turned off.

Going back to my first point, I usually shoot RAW and ISO 100 maximum, unless taking shots of action subjects or things like birds in low light. I think I am getting the best dynamic range from my K-5 by shooting this way.

Regards
David

If you're shooting in RAW it's best to leave the highlight and shadow settings switched off. There is no point in them for RAW shooters.

Regards
David

There's no risk of anything jamming if the adaptor is correctly fitted; this is an easy task and only needs doing once. At under £8 each there's no reason not to have them permanently fixed and I'm unsure why this 'minimises the advantage'? It makes each M42 lens so easy to use; as far as I can tell there are no downsides to this method.

Regards
David

Not this weekend it won't Stuey! Have you seen the forecast? Just right for getting some dramatic snow shots with your weatherproof cameras!

Cheers
David

All mine are from this ebay supplier:

link

No problems with any of them, I've bought six or seven so far. The trick with these is knowing how to fit them. Leave them permanently on the lens, screwed down very tightly. Remove the spring clip first. Use a paper gasket between the Adaptor and the lens body - this is to regulate the fit in the camera bayonet - thinner paper = tighter fit, thicker paper = looser fit. The paper should not be visible - it needs carefully cutting out - use the adaptor as a template to draw around and then cut around the inner and outer circles to make a ring of paper which fits around the M42 thread on the lens and then the adaptor is screwed down over the gasket to seal the gasket between the adaptor and the lens body.

Piece of cake, 100% reliable, no hassles, easy to use the lenses now, just like a bayonet lens!

Cheers
David

Drew, come and see me or remind me to show you the adaptors on my lenses next time we're out on a shoot. You absolutely do not have to pay out for genuine Pentax ones and I am happy to show you why! Mine cost around £7 each, there is no risk of them getting stuck on my cameras and no risk of the lenses accidentally coming off. I've used them a lot, with no issues.

Peter KR's point (1) above is valid to a degree - yes you should remove the screw and fix the adaptor permanently to your lens; this means there is no risk of it getting stuck and it is far more user-friendly. It is possible to make them fit as tight as you wish, so there's no problem using the adaptors with heavy lenses and no risk of the lens inadvertently 'coming off'. Someone with your DIY skills would find it easy to drill a small hole to make the lens 'lock' on the camera body, exactly as a normal K-mount lens does. I haven't bothered with this, but it is easy to do if required.

I would stongly recommend you do not use the flange type that is mentioned above - you will lose infinity focus and I don't think this would work for you.

Give me a ring on the mobile if you'd like to have a chat about this - I've done this a fair few times and have a system that works well.

Cheers
David

Short answer is 'yes', one can get natural looking HDR with it, which is exactly what I aim for. Also, using the 'Fusion' instead of the 'Tonemapping' results in more natural looking images, but avoid the default settings and use your own.

Regards
David