All Forum Comments
Beautiful series ! Tough to pick out just one. Don't you just love that lense ?!
Comment by Frogfish posted on First real go with da 300 but birds i;m afraid at 05/06/2011 - 22:11
Some of the old (& the new !) tradesmen working the streets of Shanghai !
The Cobbler
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-zQDSL8C/0/XL/IMGP5230-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Florist
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-vsRMKNP/0/XL/IMGP0687-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Barber
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-sDk9nSn/0/XL/IMGP0628-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Policeman
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-3ZLnwgv/0/XL/IMGP0549-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Welder
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-7JJk9j7/0/XL/IMGP5280-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Bicycle Repair Man
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-Z8HqkDq/0/XL/IMGP5241-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Grocer
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-tKTXfpP/0/XL/IMGP5239-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Cobbler
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-zQDSL8C/0/XL/IMGP5230-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Florist
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-vsRMKNP/0/XL/IMGP0687-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Barber
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-sDk9nSn/0/XL/IMGP0628-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Policeman
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-3ZLnwgv/0/XL/IMGP0549-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Welder
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-7JJk9j7/0/XL/IMGP5280-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Bicycle Repair Man
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-Z8HqkDq/0/XL/IMGP5241-XL.jpg[/IMG]
The Grocer
[IMG]http://frogfish.smugmug.com/Shanghai-China/Street/i-tKTXfpP/0/XL/IMGP5239-XL.jpg[/IMG]
Comment by Frogfish posted on Working on the Streets of Shanghai at 05/06/2011 - 22:03
Lovely series ! #3 & #4 are gorgeous shots and #6 is just damn cute (great reflection too) !
Comment by Frogfish posted on Jay with Sigma 150-500 at 05/06/2011 - 11:37
Interesting story Pietro - thanks for posting !
Comment by Frogfish posted on Little ant story at 05/06/2011 - 11:27
Pwynnej wrote:
Hope you get your camera sorted Frogfish, a replacement might be in order.....
Thanks ! I've got my fingers crossed for a replacement Hope you get your camera sorted Frogfish, a replacement might be in order.....
Comment by Frogfish posted on K5 - Dead. at 05/06/2011 - 11:21
garyk wrote:
You are not alone. This happens alot. I took mine in with the same problem and the Pentax tec. tapped it on its side and it came back on. Just tap it and put a battery in it and start shooting. I googled it and we are not the only ones with the problem. Just crummy product at a premium price.
Yes, like Ken I'd like to know more about this ! I've also not seen this fault mentioned anywhere before - and I spend hours a day on photography sites. You are not alone. This happens alot. I took mine in with the same problem and the Pentax tec. tapped it on its side and it came back on. Just tap it and put a battery in it and start shooting. I googled it and we are not the only ones with the problem. Just crummy product at a premium price.
Bit late for me this time though as I have already given back to the shop I bought it from, I imagine it's in Japan now.
Even if it can be 'fixed' with a tap I'd still send it back in though since it's obviously a fault that needs rectifying whilst still under guarantee.
Comment by Frogfish posted on K5 - Dead. at 04/06/2011 - 20:40
Charlotte wrote:
I'm sorry I have inadvertently started a disagreement.
I'm sorry I have inadvertently started a disagreement.
You didn't start anything Charlotte ! You helped us kill some time we'd otherwise have wasted at work
Comment by Frogfish posted on Newbie in desperate need of help - please at 04/06/2011 - 17:41
Both the 55-300 and 60-250 have less than speedy AF.
The IQ is there in all 3 lenses although obviously the 60-250 & 100-300 are much better.
Has to be the 100-300 - on a K5 that should be a great pairing - though I hope you are not on the touch-line !
The IQ is there in all 3 lenses although obviously the 60-250 & 100-300 are much better.
Has to be the 100-300 - on a K5 that should be a great pairing - though I hope you are not on the touch-line !
Comment by Frogfish posted on Lens for Sports Photography at 04/06/2011 - 15:51
Darkmunk wrote:
I don't post much these days, but I feel compelled to add my view to the mix.
I think Stephan is totally correct. The fact that you can still edit JPEGs is irrelevant - the quality is abysmal in comparison to uncompressed formats and particularly RAW.
Unless you are extraordinarily talented and have a plenty of mechanical devices to increase dynamic range, fill shadows etc. You simply must use RAW if you want optimal quality.
Having said that that, it's a steep learning curve getting images better than the camera's own JPEGs so in the real world, in-camera JPEGs take a lot of beating, especially if you are short of time, or storage.
I store both, JPEGs for speed and ease of viewing (only) and RAW for ANYTHING I want to edit.
I think the debate has taken a strange twist. I don't post much these days, but I feel compelled to add my view to the mix.
I think Stephan is totally correct. The fact that you can still edit JPEGs is irrelevant - the quality is abysmal in comparison to uncompressed formats and particularly RAW.
Unless you are extraordinarily talented and have a plenty of mechanical devices to increase dynamic range, fill shadows etc. You simply must use RAW if you want optimal quality.
Having said that that, it's a steep learning curve getting images better than the camera's own JPEGs so in the real world, in-camera JPEGs take a lot of beating, especially if you are short of time, or storage.
I store both, JPEGs for speed and ease of viewing (only) and RAW for ANYTHING I want to edit.
Stefan has asserted that JPEG was DESIGNED NOT TO BE EDITED. My counter assertion is that quite obviously that is and was not the case, regardless of the benefits of other formats.
The debate was not about if JPEGs can or can not be edited. It is a fact that JPEGs can be edited (and to suggest that the quality is 'abysmal' is quite incredible, no matter the undoubted additional benefits of RAW).
The JPEG committee were only setting a standard for the coding of images that could be read and displayed by many different systems and I'm absolutely certain that they had no intention that the images produced using this coding would be the FINAL image as Stefan asserts. I'm equally sure they anticipated that these images would then in turn be manipulated to a greater or lesser degree.
Comment by Frogfish posted on Newbie in desperate need of help - please at 04/06/2011 - 12:00
Anvh wrote:
I think you are missing the point Stefan. Just because a file is compressed to save space (a huge & expensive problem when jpg evolved) doesn't mean it can't be, or wasn't designed to be, edited. That's your interpretation.Frogfish wrote:
In fact even in a basic P&S often it's possible to perform in camera PP, we know in DSLR's a lot more is possible so therefore manufacturers of cameras and software are not saying that a jpg is a finished product. It is a convenient product; easily transferable, space saving, easily read - but that doesn't define it as a 'finished product' even though we know it's far less manipulable than RAW.
Like i already said JPG simply isn't designed to be edited because the compresion throws away all the data it don't need and try to preserve the image you see while trying to get the smallest file.In fact even in a basic P&S often it's possible to perform in camera PP, we know in DSLR's a lot more is possible so therefore manufacturers of cameras and software are not saying that a jpg is a finished product. It is a convenient product; easily transferable, space saving, easily read - but that doesn't define it as a 'finished product' even though we know it's far less manipulable than RAW.
The fact that jpg has survived until now and that hundreds of software designers disagree with you I think proves the point sufficiently.
Comment by Frogfish posted on Newbie in desperate need of help - please at 04/06/2011 - 09:16
