MattMatic

Joined: 2nd July 2002

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

MattMatic
On the AF360/AF540 you have full control over the settings on the flash. It's a little bit fiddly, but definitely workable.

When using the Pentax wireless mode (either from an *ist-D/K10D popup flash or from a second AF360/540) there is no need to enter the settings at all.

If you are using radio triggers then you will have to enter the values manually and use either "A" or "M" mode of the flash. However, do be aware that triggering a remote flash on "A" mode will only give a correct result if the flash-to-subject distance is the same as the camera-to-subject distance. If there is a difference between those two distances then you'll have to compensate on the camera.

Personally, I would use remote triggered flash guns in "M" mode for all controlled situations. Takes a couple of minutes to setup but then it's a no-brainer after that

Hope that helps!
Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Question about auto mode on the Metz 48 af-1 at 22/02/2008 - 11:11

MattMatic
Cool

Comment by MattMatic posted on Still somewhat confused about the DVDs at 22/02/2008 - 13:47

MattMatic
Just to add to the list

I've used CD Burner XP a few times.
http://cdburnerxp.se/

Very nice control over the burn process (much like Nero), but free
Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Still somewhat confused about the DVDs at 22/02/2008 - 09:52

MattMatic
Opinions - yup

Photoshop's HDR is pants
CS2 couldn't cope with ghosting (movement between frames) and had nasty tone-mapping that was so picky it was untrue. Although I tried Photomatix I went with Artizen which had far more control over the tonemapping process.

You can, for what it's worth, use Artizen to produce an open HDR file (making use of the excellent image combining algorithms) and tone map in Photoshop. (It seems to do this even when your trial period has expired!)

Photomatix is, perhaps, easier to use. But the flexibility of Artizen is much, much better IMHO.

Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on combining multiple images CS3? at 22/02/2008 - 13:46

MattMatic
Quote:
When it comes to CD and DVD burning software I wouldn't trust freeware,
Balderdash
I write software for my "day job" and have seen good and bad free software, and good and bad paid for software.

Agree that Nero is very good, but there's also the superb "CDBurnerXP" which is free http://cdburnerxp.se/

Nero has all the smart media conversion stuff built in, but CDBurnerXP does a very, very good job of burning (and verifying) CD and DVDs.

Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Can't find good DVD burning software at 27/02/2008 - 11:00

MattMatic
Quote:
Not sure what you're getting at Matt - were you being humourous?
Actually, nor was I!
Of course, magnification does not relate to sensor size - it was just the calculations shown.
Just ignore me... it was a bad Friday
Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Magnification of a lens at 24/02/2008 - 20:26

MattMatic
Maybe, just maybe the magnification factors are 35mm values

(You can't actually change those values - historically the SMC-F 100mm/2.8 macro is a 1:1 lens, for 35mm. That magnification factor cannot be magically changed in all the specs just because you're using digital.)

Just a thought
Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Magnification of a lens at 22/02/2008 - 13:43

MattMatic
Quote:
My initial question "why save RAW to TIFF" has still not been properly explained. I can see no advantage as a JPEG seems to be fine with no loss of quality if you do anything else to it.
Quick outline:
1. RAW - full 12-bits per pixel. Loads of scope for exposure compensation, white balance adjustment etc.

2. TIFF - from camera it's 8-bits per pixel, from a RAW converter it's either 8 or 16-bits per pixel. 16bpp is required if you are using a high colour space (like ProPhoto), and/or if you intend to do a lot of post processing (like HDR, or severe curves).

3. JPG - a "lossy" image type, even at 100% JPG splits the image into a luminance component and a colour component. The colour contains only 11% of the blue channel. Consequently there is little scope for post processing and heavy editing. Try pushing the colour balance too hard and you'll see compression artifacts appear (even if it was saved at 100%).

The bottom line is: if you just process and print then JPG is fine. If you do some editing, then JPG might be fine (it often is) and TIFF-8 will probably be ok. If you're pushing the Photoshop boat out or doing serious HDR stuff, then TIFF-16 from the RAW file is the one to go for.

Clearer?
Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on RAW to TIFF at 22/02/2008 - 17:50

MattMatic
Quote:
One minor point on Pentax 80-320 and similar Pentax models: they generally don't come with a hood.
True, but I haven't need one on mine
Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on Pentax K10D at 28/02/2008 - 08:52

MattMatic
Quote:
Trigger voltage is OK on the K10D, i.e. I will not fry my lovely K10D???
Pentax make their flash systems very, VERY tolerant. There was an email somewhere from Pentax that said "up to 300V" was ok
EDIT: HERE.

On the video for the new K20D they make the point very clear regarding their PC socket and say it explicitly.

It's the Canons that have big problems getting fried

You will find that ANY Pentax flashgun will work on the new bodies (albeit with some provisos. i.e. that TTL mode will not work correctly).

The "A" and "M" modes will trigger just fine!
Matt

Comment by MattMatic posted on macro ring flash for a K1000 at 26/02/2008 - 14:59

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo