Niblue - the example you showed is more "purple fringing" rather than lens-specific CA. I get some PF in certain circumstances on the SMC-F 100/2.8 macro, as well as other lenses.

Wikipedia have some excellent articles on Lens CA and PF (which is still not completely understood!)
Matt

Just as well I mentioned it then

Might be obvious, but I thought I'd mention it just in case...

With the SR turned on, you have to half-press the shutter and wait until the little "hand" icon appears in the viewfinder before fully pressing.

If you jab the shutter straight down then SR doesn't have time to work out what's happening!

(Also, according to the manual, there are some modes where SR won't be enabled at all.)

And I'd agree... you need to set up a test scenario that is repeatable and controlled

Matt

Real shame about the crinkly curtain on the left
..and the detached fingers on the girl's back

The main thing: Were they pleased?
Matt

Quite probably not
The defaults (which are normally D65, gamma 2.2 and native white balance) will be just fine and dandy!

Some include ambient light compensation (or at least measurement). It's pretty likely that you'll need to reduce the ambient light to almost nothing - you'll be surprised how bright a condition you work in!
Matt

Just for the record....
I tried out C1LE4 yesterday on some high ISO K10D shots. Bleurgh

Silkypix pulled out far more detail, produced a much more natural look. C1 produced what I can only call "mush" - it had over aggressively smoothed the image. Skin had blotchy posterisation as a result. Didn't have time to grab some captures.

So, yes, more Silkypix development would be most gratefully received. (And the pricing has changed now that it's bought - it's more expensive Glad I bought a 3 user license when it was cheaper )
Matt

Yes

Photomatix Pro is easy to use and does produce good results. Artizen is clunky in terms of user interface, but what it excels in is its choice of tone mapping operators (They're probably similar in terms of handling compositing multiple images where elements have been moving)

And I think Artizen is cheaper
Matt

Just to augment what is said:

I always shoot RAW. There are times when some delicate curves adjustment will bring in "HDR" (not true HDR) and handle deep shadows and highlights. However, there are times when HDR (that's 32-bit per colour channel) is needed. And this is how I work it:

1. Shoot RAW
2. Shoot 3 or 5 exposures, 2Ev apart
3. Bring them all into my RAW converter
4. Leave the exposure, curves etc all alone
5. Set the white balance and colour for them all - everything has to be set exactly the same for each RAW shot
6. Develop to 16-bit TIFF
7. Bring the TIFFs into Artizen and merge into HDR
8. From the 32-bit per channel image you then need to tone map back to a single 16-bit image.

It takes time, patience and practice - and a whole lot of hard disk space and RAM. But if you can recognise when you need absolutely massive dynamic range (talking more than 10Ev apart) then HDR is the way to go.

(This is HDR in the above way: http://www.mattmatic.co.uk/photo465791.html )

That said, 95% of the time you'll only need a single RAW shot (perhaps with ND grads). Always expose to get the highlights just in the histogram - if you blow out the highlights you can't recover them. If you can get the shadows just in as well, then you don't need HDR.

And then there's Photoshop (Elements as well) with the "Shadows/Highlights" which will balance things out for most shots.

Just remember that deep shadows will have much more image noise
Matt

Yes.

Setup 5 shot auto bracket, 2Ev apart.
Use Av mode (the aperture MUST not change!)
Use a tripod, of course.

Shoot the 5 shots and merge with your favourite HDR app (I use Artizen).
Not all HDR apps can handle movement between the frames so well (Adobe CS2 is pretty terrible actually!).

And use the Search facility of this forum - it's been discussed quite a bit over the past 12 months or so

Hope that helps!
Matt

There's a good Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Digital_card

Have to revise some of my earlier comments
(I'm used to working with the raw NAND flash chips, rather than with SD directly... but I should have checked, I know :roll

And...
(But note that the device's firmware must be able to cope with this as well!)

Hope that helps!!
Matt