Can you post an example picture?

I wonder if it could be a light leak in the camera, which could cause patches of reddish discolouration. If possible, try another camera body and compare the results.

Other than that, it's difficult to draw any conclusions without seeing an example.

I don't feel as though I'm stuck with Pentax, rather that it's a pretty positive thing to be able to use my existing lenses on any digital SLR at all. From most accounts the *istD is a splendid DSLR.

I'm sure that using Pentax lenses on any other marque of DSLR is not a feasible proposition, for the reasons already suggested.

The TTL prism presumably is the one with a built in match needle meter and the AEII will be the auto exposure version for the 67II.

It does very much depend on the degree of fine detail present, but most of the digital photographers at ADAPS are producing very good A3 prints that stand up well against traditional photography. The cameras they are using generally produce 6 MP images.

If you are losing detail then I would certainly turn off the noise reduction, and also ensure the lowest possible ISO setting is being used. Then the print needs to be viewed from a normal viewing distance - if we look very closely at a large print we will see the defects.

If quality is still an issue, there is still the Pentax 67!

The ppi will stay the same, but the number of pixels will be increased or decreased to produce the size of print you want. As you say, there is a limit, but this will depend not only on the size of the print but also the distance from which the print is to be viewed.

300ppi should yield a print that can be viewed holding the print normally. If the print is to be mounted on a wall and viewed from further away in theory you might find 150ppi acceptable. The upshot of this is that in this example you could make a much bigger print.

By resizing and letting the computer interpolate - that is, make up some more pixels. So, set your 300 ppi, set your required print size and let Photoshop sort out the pixels. The file size will alter accordingly.

Some photographers find that Genuine Fractals enables larger prints to be made without pixelation, but I found very little advantage to this and I let Photoshop do what it will...

I find 6MP to be very satisfactory for architecture and portraiture, but I'm not convinced that it is good enough for highly detailed landscape work.

Hi Brian

They aren't quite the same. The top one is the SMC Pentax-F, which is super-multi-coated. The bottom one is a standard coated Pentax-F, which would have been offered at a lower price. It may also have a simpler construction, but I don't have any information on that.

The SMC version will give better contrast, better colour saturation and lower levels of flare and is the more desireable of the two lenses. It is the most expensive of the 28-80mm options from that particular vintage of Pentax autofocus lenses!

I think I would only want to pay around £20 for this on eBay! I would honestly be looking out for Pentax lenses. I just bought a SMC Pentax-F 35-70mm for just £12.05 on eBay, so there are bargains to be had.

We have a Nikon Coolscan IV which gives good results and will happily produce A3 prints from its 2920 dpi scans. However, if we were buying now we would go for the Coolscan V at 4000 dpi and I guess the quality will be even better.

The Coolscans come complete with slide and negative holders, are simple to operate and seem to do a very effective job.

Welcome to the forum!

I hope you'll enjoy the site, there's always something interesting being discussed.