Actually, the whole image is not especially good.

The picture is from a set I did with an aspiring fashion model recently. I don't usually do this sort of thing, and I am now having to hurriedly learn the techniques used to produce pictures for the glossies, otherwise she won't be impressed.

The problem is not so much in doing one picture, but in doing a hundred or so in a reasonable amount of time.

Normally I shoot RAW, but I was away from home and ran out of space on my laptop. As a consequence, I have now invested in a 250GB portable drive (which cost a lot less than a 2GB CF card). It has both USB2 and Firewire interfaces, so is pretty flexible and works a treat.

G

Thanks, guys. I tend to agree that for screen display the first or second are best. Given that the first has had no sharpening applied at all, it rather gives the lie to those who claim that Pentax DSLRs are soft (the camera was set to medium sharpening, not high).

The exposure/lens details are available if you download the pic and examine the EXIF data. Briefly, it's the 77mm at 1/125 at f9 with studio flash.

It's obviously taken quite close, but even so, the shallowness of the DOF surprised me.

G

PS: Matt, I've bookmarked your tutorial and will try out your techniques when I have a bit more time. Thanks. Any tips on smoothing skin (not for this model, who doesn't need it)?

It's quiet on here, so I'll post a pic, or two.

The first pic is a full-size crop from a portrait, unretouched, unsharpened and otherwise unaltered (save for adjusting gamma/contrast). The original was a JPEG. The other pics are of the same image with various degrees of sharpening.

Any thoughts on which is the optimum sharpening level?

G

Thanks Matt, you're a pal.

As I already own two *ist D bodies, I really can't justify another DSLR.

But, hell. When did anybody need justification to buy a Pentax?

We shall see what we shall see.

G

Irfanview has a very quick and easy batch rename facility, and it can append additional characters to the existing file name if you wish.

And it's free, and perhaps the best image viewer you can get.

G

Right first time. Hear, hear!

G

I use a Lowepro Micro-Trekker 200 SE. Not all-weather, sadly, though showerproof.

It'll take a body with long lens fitted - such as a *ist D with F* 300mm. It's too small to take the M 400mm, though, unless detached. There's space for several smaller lenses, plus batteries, etc. as well.

When full it's pretty heavy, and I wouldn't want a larger bag. Even when travelling abroad it takes all the equipment I am likely to use, and more.

I take JR's point about access, but I think it's a question of need. If I'm just out for the afternoon, I'll take a smaller bag slung round the front. If I'm on a jopurney, I'll take the Trekker.

G

All else being equal, you should keep the ME Super because it was quite simply a better-made camera, from the days when Pentax weren't building down to a price to compete with rubbish from copier companies.

I have a P30T, and the DOF lever just broke off. Cheap plastic. Since you'll most likely only be fondling the camera, not using it, keep the one whose body is nicer to fondle. It has to be the ME Super. End of story.

G

You'll probably get more for the ME Super. But that's the one I'd keep.

G

If Pentax write "SMC" on a lens, it will be super-multi-coated.

I think it is highly unlikely that Pentax would supply SMC glass to Tamron for use in their own lenses. If they did that, there would be no point in buying Pentax, and no justification for the higher prices.

If Pentax WERE to allow Tamron to use SMC glass, you can bet that they would make Tamron write SMC on the lens, and pay extra for the privilege.

G