All Forum Comments
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Pentax-645D-Limited-Edition-Camera-UK-/151149782633?pt...
Comment by jules posted on LTD 645D Go on you know you want to! at 04/03/2014 - 14:58
RE: The Flipside Sport 20AW, I wanted the orange one but they were out of stock. My heavyweight bag that un, with a K3/Siggy 8-16/Pentax DA*16-50/Pentax DA* 50-135/Pentax DA* 300MM (+1.4X convertor coming soon) with the Velbon Ultra REXI-L Tripod, which if no one has tried just get it!
Going lighter I use the Photo Sport 200AW with just the K3 and the 16-50/50-135, with the pod and manage to squeeze the same in the Passport Sling, minus the pod...
Calmly waiting for a K60 and a lighter short zoom...
Going lighter I use the Photo Sport 200AW with just the K3 and the 16-50/50-135, with the pod and manage to squeeze the same in the Passport Sling, minus the pod...
Calmly waiting for a K60 and a lighter short zoom...
Comment by jules posted on My go anywhere ever-ready bag at 02/03/2014 - 22:43
I'm hoping for a K50 (K60) replacement that comes weather sealed/100% viewfinder, with a less demanding sensor but have slightly watered down versions of all the K3's new features, would make for a great second shooter, for me but I think we'd be looking at the new Sony 20Mp chip as they are no longer producing 16's, and there is not much left out there under 24Mp. However it's not difficult to do a better job on the noise/DR front than sony so there is some hope...
Comment by jules posted on Asking a favour form anyone who owns a K5iiS and a K3 at 28/02/2014 - 09:37
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/04/sigma-30mm-f1-4-dc-hsm-vs-sigma-30mm-f1-...
Intresting article but then I find all his stuff interesting, perfect for me a it has sharpness into the corners not quite your classic F1.4 Prime tohugh like the old version and the 35mm F1.4. I actually think you would prefer your old one Smeggy? What they call personality? (What I'd call soft corners:lol. For tip top performance all the way it's the 35mm Version, which has an elevated price tag to match it's increased quality...
Intresting article but then I find all his stuff interesting, perfect for me a it has sharpness into the corners not quite your classic F1.4 Prime tohugh like the old version and the 35mm F1.4. I actually think you would prefer your old one Smeggy? What they call personality? (What I'd call soft corners:lol. For tip top performance all the way it's the 35mm Version, which has an elevated price tag to match it's increased quality...
Comment by jules posted on YES!!! 30MM!!! at 28/02/2014 - 09:26
I'm with the Canuck! Moire is very Rarely seen and just in the usual places, net curtains and tweed spring to mind, never so bad that it can't be got rid of!
Not that I spend too much time around tweed warers mind you!
Not that I spend too much time around tweed warers mind you!
Comment by jules posted on Can you help moi (re) K-5IIs question at 28/02/2014 - 06:00
McGregNi wrote:
Get that a lot when showing prints for sale. "They're lovely you must have a really good camera!"Darkmunk wrote:
...you appear to have a good version of that lens tho'.
had to laugh at that - sounds like that constant comment I hear from non photographers ... 'ah, you must have a very good camera, is it expensive?' ...you appear to have a good version of that lens tho'.
harrumph!
Comment by jules posted on The Dobbin, my mountain at 27/02/2014 - 16:38
McGregNi wrote:
Well, we're definitely focusing minds here now Jules . Expose to the right I guess will head towards blown highlights of course. From what I have gathered from other user reports the big 'thing' of the K5 series was shadow detail recovery - so you could shoot at 'average reflectance', keeping an eye on your highs, and pull up the shadows successfully later. This is certainly what I do with the K7 - I agree, I'd rather pull up what I can from black, and sacrifice what I can't, than have no come-back from blown whites. Other users have reported better performance in this respect from the K3 I think?
I'd be cautious using the camera histogram to assess the highs though - it is showing you the graph for the processed JPEG - even in RAW only its still a processed small embedded JPEG. This has got automatic DR compression, and it can be quite severe at the upper end - JPEG shooters will often believe that the DR of the scene is less than it really is for this reason - they're seeing the results post processing.
Totally agree there Neil, Screens and EVF's matched/calibrated to what the Sensor see's are not that far off, I'll bin OVF and spit on it then!Well, we're definitely focusing minds here now Jules . Expose to the right I guess will head towards blown highlights of course. From what I have gathered from other user reports the big 'thing' of the K5 series was shadow detail recovery - so you could shoot at 'average reflectance', keeping an eye on your highs, and pull up the shadows successfully later. This is certainly what I do with the K7 - I agree, I'd rather pull up what I can from black, and sacrifice what I can't, than have no come-back from blown whites. Other users have reported better performance in this respect from the K3 I think?
I'd be cautious using the camera histogram to assess the highs though - it is showing you the graph for the processed JPEG - even in RAW only its still a processed small embedded JPEG. This has got automatic DR compression, and it can be quite severe at the upper end - JPEG shooters will often believe that the DR of the scene is less than it really is for this reason - they're seeing the results post processing.
I think the viewfinder in the new Panny GX7 is Adobe RGB?
I'd love to get a truer indication of what the Camera is seeing...
Comment by jules posted on Asking a favour form anyone who owns a K5iiS and a K3 at 27/02/2014 - 15:24
Credit where it's due Johnathan!
Yeah those aerials shots will give you real spikey histogram right in the middle no doubt, Yes I reckon the image pipeline in your K5IIs and Gr will be matching, very interested in your thoughts on the Gr too!
Pulling the ISO often leads to a little better image quality, something I have to admit I never remember to do!
P.S. I apologise as I feel I have kinda hijacked your thread somewhat...
Yeah those aerials shots will give you real spikey histogram right in the middle no doubt, Yes I reckon the image pipeline in your K5IIs and Gr will be matching, very interested in your thoughts on the Gr too!
Pulling the ISO often leads to a little better image quality, something I have to admit I never remember to do!
P.S. I apologise as I feel I have kinda hijacked your thread somewhat...
Comment by jules posted on Asking a favour form anyone who owns a K5iiS and a K3 at 27/02/2014 - 15:21
Not really Neil, though on the face of it I can see why you may think that.
I always felt that the K5 had plenty dynamic range now from what I read the K3 has less (just over half a stop less but if your Smeggy a full stop!:lol but in practice it dos'nt seem to add up. I'd meter manually in order not to get burned out Skies and be using an ND Grad to balance the exposure (No burned Sky is More important to me than a few blocked shadows) and checking the histogram was within the boundary on the right and the screen for blinkys, (Not accurate but I like to check!) I'd get no warnings either way, take the shots home crank up the PC and bingo, blown highlights, it was like the meter and histogram were lying to me, something was going on and it was the same on every K5 I 've had!
Now it's well known that the K5 doesn't like flash metering, there are work arounds but I feel it goes deeper than that...
With the K3 and it's colour meter this just does not happen, didn't happen on my K7 which also had the 77 zone meter IIRC?
It's just inconsistent.
Now as regards actual individual exposure I totally agree it's down to personal taste. Now then, absolute exposure is whatever it needs to be in order to maximise shadow detail without blowing highlights. The reality much of the time, on full auto, is a camera that effectively performs "expose to the right" - not a camera that meters average reflectance in the classic way. So we can expect our mid-tones to wander around a bit, not to follow some ideal of accuracy. The interrelationship of tones in between black and white, in this sense, is determined by the subject not the camera. Processing a Raw, the only absolute restrictions are the exposure itself, and the amount of highlight recovery achievable. The black clipping, tone curve, contrast and brightness etc, and colour calibration that we first see are just someone else's notion. Adobe, or whoever, has made a guess at what we may want to see as a starting default for our Raw conversion. If we don't like that, for a particular image, we change it.
The original file however must be workable to start with and the K3 gives me that...
I always felt that the K5 had plenty dynamic range now from what I read the K3 has less (just over half a stop less but if your Smeggy a full stop!:lol but in practice it dos'nt seem to add up. I'd meter manually in order not to get burned out Skies and be using an ND Grad to balance the exposure (No burned Sky is More important to me than a few blocked shadows) and checking the histogram was within the boundary on the right and the screen for blinkys, (Not accurate but I like to check!) I'd get no warnings either way, take the shots home crank up the PC and bingo, blown highlights, it was like the meter and histogram were lying to me, something was going on and it was the same on every K5 I 've had!
Now it's well known that the K5 doesn't like flash metering, there are work arounds but I feel it goes deeper than that...
With the K3 and it's colour meter this just does not happen, didn't happen on my K7 which also had the 77 zone meter IIRC?
It's just inconsistent.
Now as regards actual individual exposure I totally agree it's down to personal taste. Now then, absolute exposure is whatever it needs to be in order to maximise shadow detail without blowing highlights. The reality much of the time, on full auto, is a camera that effectively performs "expose to the right" - not a camera that meters average reflectance in the classic way. So we can expect our mid-tones to wander around a bit, not to follow some ideal of accuracy. The interrelationship of tones in between black and white, in this sense, is determined by the subject not the camera. Processing a Raw, the only absolute restrictions are the exposure itself, and the amount of highlight recovery achievable. The black clipping, tone curve, contrast and brightness etc, and colour calibration that we first see are just someone else's notion. Adobe, or whoever, has made a guess at what we may want to see as a starting default for our Raw conversion. If we don't like that, for a particular image, we change it.
The original file however must be workable to start with and the K3 gives me that...
Comment by jules posted on Asking a favour form anyone who owns a K5iiS and a K3 at 27/02/2014 - 14:16
Missus just rang me and asked my why I've spent a hundred quid on a memory card
This'll take some explaining methinks...
This'll take some explaining methinks...
Comment by jules posted on Nice little review on the FLU Card at 27/02/2014 - 13:00
