All Forum Comments
Comment by MattMatic posted on Flu Card Firmware Update at 08/10/2014 - 12:35
even when calibrated with my X-Rite i1 Display Pro
The ArgyllCMS and dispcalGUI (both OpenSource) are excellent at allowing multi-monitor calibration.
http://www.argyllcms.com/ and
http://dispcalgui.hoech.net/
Might be worth a shot
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Monitors & Calibration Advice at 08/10/2014 - 09:34
I have found the 16-50 to be soft pretty much everywhere at F2.8
This shot, although at f/5.6, is demonstrative of the lens' capabilities.
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on 16-45 to 16-50 at 07/10/2014 - 09:44
The DA*16-50 is a different beast altogether. It's substantially heavier, has a lovely bokeh, and a very nice rendering. It does suffer from quite a bit of purple fringing - it's never a problem when shooting RAW with LR as it can all be handled post-process. (A bit of a problem when shooting JPG).
I am torn between the DA*16-50 and the DA17-70. I found the extra 20mm was very useful indeed. The DA17-70, I think, had the edge on sharpness (at f/4 it really was close to the FA50/1.4!!), is not as heavy, and has excellent bokeh, sharpness and contrast. There is a tiny something special about the DA*'s rendering compared to the DA17-70 - but it's a close call. (My DA*16-50 benefitted from a service at JPS - came back much improved). It was also very convenient having the same filter size on the DA17-70 and DA*50-135
The DA*50-135 is really astonishingly good, and there isn't a direct match at the lower end. The DA*16-50 is weather sealed, but the barrel extends when zooming (I like the relative compactness of the DA*50-135). As mentioned, SDM failures are a common issue.
Money wise, it's a tricky one. DA16-45 go for around £150, DA17-70 for around £300, and DA*16-50 above £500. The improvements are not proportional to the extra spend, alas
For an all-rounder, or a take-one-lens-out, the DA17-70 is superb.
But then for my regular kit, I have the (also astonishing) DA12-24 as well
So many lovely lenses
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on 16-45 to 16-50 at 07/10/2014 - 08:49
Super creepy crawlies
#1

#2

Hardly ever use the K5iis at the moment...
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Spiders with the MX-1 at 29/09/2014 - 14:24
Comment by MattMatic posted on pentax 35 mm 2.4 at 25/09/2014 - 15:48
Matt, you have a touch with noise that seems to elude most of us, so your image is like a spike in the graph and doesn't count!
Would love to know what I could do with a 645Z
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Full Frame So They Say at 25/09/2014 - 14:22
Wow!
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Taken the plunge. at 24/09/2014 - 15:40
do you concur with Ken though on the issue of the P-TTL pre-flash causing problems
But it depends on contrast too - fill in flash hasn't been a problem for me.
One event I did I had to use the Metz 50MZ5 for indoor shots, and switch to the AF540 for outdoor fill in. Probably could've done it with just the AF540 in "A" and "P-TTL/HS" modes though
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Flash for wedding photography at 24/09/2014 - 12:35


e.g. Chrome, etc
(If the browser uses the "WebKit" core to handle HTML you will probably have a solution.)
Matt