All Forum Comments
Welcome home John ! I'm sure you are going to absolutely love the K5 - it's a stunning camera.
Comment by Frogfish posted on Hello from Lancashire at 17/02/2012 - 01:43
Comment by Frogfish posted on Fortnightly competition 87 entries: bokeh at 16/02/2012 - 18:25
Jumbo48 wrote:
Superb shots, have just started to turn a slight shade of green, I have never seen one in all my years of birdwatching. Thank you for sharing these with us.
Judging from the above .. maybe you have and just didn't recognise it Amazing camouflage !Superb shots, have just started to turn a slight shade of green, I have never seen one in all my years of birdwatching. Thank you for sharing these with us.
nanhi wrote:
Hello Cliff, congrats for being a proud owner of a brand new 150-500 Bigma. I have read varying reports on sharpness at the 500mm end. One particular variant has a good review on the Pentax US Forum.
I envy you as I too wanted this lens for my K20D and later a K-5. All I have for birding is an old Sigma 100-300mm DL - tack sharp at 100, sharp at 200mm, but soft at the 300mm end.
Great bird shots as a first attempt Cliff. Good composition, but a tad soft. You may need lots of practice - hand or monopod mounted.
Here is some advice from a Japanese Forum. Use Bright setting (Fn menu). Boost Saturation to +1, Contrast to +3 and Sharpness to +4 Fine. Turn off noise reduction. leave SR On when using a monopod. Use 100 to 400 ISO only. Shoot RAW + JPEG at the highest resolution. Put these settings on USER mode and give your new lens a try.
Nice tips Nanhi. Minor correction, the 150-500 is the Bigmos not the Bigma (which is the 50-500) Hello Cliff, congrats for being a proud owner of a brand new 150-500 Bigma. I have read varying reports on sharpness at the 500mm end. One particular variant has a good review on the Pentax US Forum.
I envy you as I too wanted this lens for my K20D and later a K-5. All I have for birding is an old Sigma 100-300mm DL - tack sharp at 100, sharp at 200mm, but soft at the 300mm end.
Great bird shots as a first attempt Cliff. Good composition, but a tad soft. You may need lots of practice - hand or monopod mounted.
Here is some advice from a Japanese Forum. Use Bright setting (Fn menu). Boost Saturation to +1, Contrast to +3 and Sharpness to +4 Fine. Turn off noise reduction. leave SR On when using a monopod. Use 100 to 400 ISO only. Shoot RAW + JPEG at the highest resolution. Put these settings on USER mode and give your new lens a try.
Some excellent shots to get you going Cliff. Love the Dunnock.
Comment by Frogfish posted on First attempts with the 150-500 at 16/02/2012 - 15:07
Well since digitalCG has used NIght and Day I guess I'll have to use Chalk n Cheese ?
I haven't had the K20D but if it is anything like the K7 then the difference is as astounding in 'taxing' shooting conditions as Dr' O's example above. In good conditions I doubt there is much difference that most people could discern between the K7 & K5 but as soon as you step outside the bounds of 'excellent shooting conditions' then the K5 races away.
I haven't had the K20D but if it is anything like the K7 then the difference is as astounding in 'taxing' shooting conditions as Dr' O's example above. In good conditions I doubt there is much difference that most people could discern between the K7 & K5 but as soon as you step outside the bounds of 'excellent shooting conditions' then the K5 races away.
Comment by Frogfish posted on Upgrading from K20D to K5 - is it really worth it? at 16/02/2012 - 14:00
9aul wrote:
Frogfish - Thanks - I'm sure there's nothing there that long term Pentax users don't already know.
Have just been on your Smugmug - the Pentax seems to be serving you well - you have some really great shots on there.
Have you had any issues with the reds on the K-5 - if so have you changed any settings in-camera?
Thanks 9aul - pleased you enjoyed the site.Frogfish - Thanks - I'm sure there's nothing there that long term Pentax users don't already know.
Have just been on your Smugmug - the Pentax seems to be serving you well - you have some really great shots on there.
Have you had any issues with the reds on the K-5 - if so have you changed any settings in-camera?
I haven't had any issues per se (and if I did they could well be lens related) however for 'important' shots I switch over to RAW anyway. A lot may depend on your original colour setting, mine is set to natural though I know a few people set theirs to 'bright' or 'vibrant' either of these (without adjustment) could cause your reds to come out too rich. I'm not sure what setting the K5 arrives with as default.
Comment by Frogfish posted on Why buy Pentax? (k5 mini review) at 16/02/2012 - 13:55
It'd be interesting to hear what you bought (cameras and lenses) and why you moved on from them (when you have the time - it sounds like an opus) !
Comment by Frogfish posted on Can I come Home Please??? at 15/02/2012 - 17:15
Unlocker wrote:
As Gwyn's links show, its built in at the export stage.
Curious as to why you're suggesting using extra software and adding to the workflow Kevin?
Aperture can do batch on export built in, you can also have masses of presets set up as well. Why export them then use another piece of software to add a watermark when you can add the watermark to all your photos on export itself?
Sure you have a good reason, just wondered what it was?
If you use the built-in watermarker then you need to :As Gwyn's links show, its built in at the export stage.
Curious as to why you're suggesting using extra software and adding to the workflow Kevin?
Aperture can do batch on export built in, you can also have masses of presets set up as well. Why export them then use another piece of software to add a watermark when you can add the watermark to all your photos on export itself?
Sure you have a good reason, just wondered what it was?
a) create a string of watermarks as jpgs/ PSD / PNG whatever and in different sizes because you will need to know which size is best for the image you are exporting, not much flexibility there if you want to increase or decrease the size, or angle offset of the watermark. Those watermarks are created in another program outside of Aperture.
I use presets all the time - but not for watermarking. Didn't know you could !
b) If you then need to change the wording for any reason then off you go back to create another graphics file !
c) I export everything to SumgMug but haven't found a way to watermark in Aperture on the way to SmugMug (using the built-in exporter) so it's not really an extra step because you are still exporting to a folder before uploading to SmugMug in stead of sending versions straight there.
The latest implementation of Border FX (which I used to love - even though it doesn't do batch) is very buggy and often crashes or falls to render your shot at all on exiting.
Don't get me wrong, I love A3, but watermarking is IMO a poorly implemented feature that needs improving - unless I'm doing it all wrong, and if I am then I'd really love someone to put me right and improve my workflow !
Star Watermark is extremely fast, flexible and reliable (never crashes or freezes) and does a great job for me. Want to change a word ? No problem 5 secs later you are ready. Not sure if the text will fit in that font on this shot ? Keep both panels open (the editing and the processing) so you can immediately see, via preview, if any changes you have made (text, opacity, angles etc.) suit both that shot and others. Best of all it's free
Comment by Frogfish posted on Watermarking my photos at 15/02/2012 - 17:06
I use Star Watermark which is a standalone and therefore doesn't need Aperture (I export the files I want to watermark to a folder, watermark them, then upload to SmugMug).
The free version works just fine however if you want the full version then it's around US$20. Works very well however note that if the font of your watermarking is too large then it will overflow the horizontal in Portrait shots, or will appear as too large for some, if you have heavily cropped some and not as it doesn't scale.
The free watermarker (that also adds borders as it's name suggests) that works with Aperture, Border FX, is crap for watermarking anything except individual files, because you can't batch process.
The free version works just fine however if you want the full version then it's around US$20. Works very well however note that if the font of your watermarking is too large then it will overflow the horizontal in Portrait shots, or will appear as too large for some, if you have heavily cropped some and not as it doesn't scale.
The free watermarker (that also adds borders as it's name suggests) that works with Aperture, Border FX, is crap for watermarking anything except individual files, because you can't batch process.
Comment by Frogfish posted on Watermarking my photos at 15/02/2012 - 12:42
