All Forum Comments
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Question for Matt on M/K lens metering at 03/04/2007 - 16:29
But it's very strange, because the light that the camera is measuring is the same light that will be used to take the picture. There is no need to adjust for the working aperture, as there is when metering wide-open.
It's as though the camera is making an adjustment when none is needed.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Question for Matt on M/K lens metering at 03/04/2007 - 14:27
If it's down to the screen, surely that would affect all lenses, not just pre-A lenses.
My guess is that this is an algorithm issue, and if the algorithm processing is done in firmware, then it should be fixable.
Come on, Pentax.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Question for Matt on M/K lens metering at 03/04/2007 - 13:45
Apologies to Chris, incidentally, for suggesting he was doing something wrong.
My question is, is this something that is likely to be controlled by firmware, and therefore fixable, or is it controlled by a lower level of software which can't be updated?
I don't imagine it is a mechanical problem.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Question for Matt on M/K lens metering at 02/04/2007 - 16:18
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Ohmigawd! at 01/04/2007 - 18:16
You're just to smart George
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on The dangers of digital photography at 01/04/2007 - 10:21
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on The dangers of digital photography at 01/04/2007 - 10:12
I have done a couple of tests comparing in-camera sharpening versus sharpening in PS (I have Pentax DL).
The result is that I have difficulty detecting much difference, in fact the photos taken with in-camera sharpening set to +2 look as good as the ones I sharpen during post-processing. Sharpening in PS does not result in less noise as far as I can ascertain.
As this seems to contradict the theory, can anybody explain what is happening? Has anybody done more systematic tests ?
You may regret your doing in camera sharpening when one day you decide to print a large poster size image for example.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Question re. in-camera versus Photoshop sharpening at 06/04/2007 - 18:04
So the fact that it costs a bit more isn't really a major consideration. Most people can beg or borrow the £350 -£400 that a second-hand 77mm will cost, and you'll also have the satisfaction of owning one of the world's best lenses.
That's what I would do (if I didn't already have a second-hand 77mm bought on Ebay!).
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on affordable fast 85mm? at 01/04/2007 - 18:48
85mm f1.4 - as rare as rocking horse poo and expensive new and second hand..
I managed to get a hook on one several years ago, gorgeous, gorgeous lens..
If you can't find one at the moment, what about a 1.4 teleconverter or the Pentax 1.7 adapter? Might not be ideal and as the lens you already have is an M-series, you won't lose out on facilities.......
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on affordable fast 85mm? at 01/04/2007 - 10:19


blende8
Lens-Buying-Enabler, retired
Admission executive of the "Kate IS/WAS/AND CONTINUES TO BE WONDERFUL" Nutters Club
Kate Adie/Middleton/Moss/Rusby/Kiss me/the Great/Winslet/Nelligan/Hoey/Beckinsale?
My guess is Hoey.
G