All Forum Comments
Comment by MattMatic posted on K10D, D200, D80 & 30D at 04/07/2007 - 10:29
Just to add,
K10D PEF files are losslessly compressed - so they vary greatly in size.
Other PEF files, and the K10D DNG files vary slightly in size because of the variation in size of the embedded thumbnail JPG file.
The K10D tells you how many uncompressed PEF files would fit on the card, but in actual use you'll get more PEF files on there - as you've demonstrated.
Matt
K10D PEF files are losslessly compressed - so they vary greatly in size.
Other PEF files, and the K10D DNG files vary slightly in size because of the variation in size of the embedded thumbnail JPG file.
The K10D tells you how many uncompressed PEF files would fit on the card, but in actual use you'll get more PEF files on there - as you've demonstrated.
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on SD Card at 04/07/2007 - 06:57
In my mind there's a difference between "shooting RAW and doing no post processing" and "shooting JPG in camera".
Because... when you shoot RAW and just use the RAW conversion software you have so much control - exposure, white balance, colour response (e.g. film responses), contrast, curves, selective colour control, sharpening, noise reduction etc etc etc.
Technically you could claim most of that is actually "post processing". However, as George will agree, you can use something like Silkypix and find you don't need any PS PP at all.
Even the Pentax converter (based on Silkypix) will do a better job than the camera because it's got heaps more processing power. The fact that Silkypix DS3 on my quad-core Xeon with 2Gb QDR RAM takes about 20 to 30 seconds to process a PEF file properly shows it's doing a load more than the camera ever could
And, as I've found out more than once, shooting RAW means you can always revisit the image later as RAW software gets better and eek out more from the image.
...now where was that Silkypix user guide...
But that's going a little off topic...
Matt
Because... when you shoot RAW and just use the RAW conversion software you have so much control - exposure, white balance, colour response (e.g. film responses), contrast, curves, selective colour control, sharpening, noise reduction etc etc etc.
Technically you could claim most of that is actually "post processing". However, as George will agree, you can use something like Silkypix and find you don't need any PS PP at all.
Even the Pentax converter (based on Silkypix) will do a better job than the camera because it's got heaps more processing power. The fact that Silkypix DS3 on my quad-core Xeon with 2Gb QDR RAM takes about 20 to 30 seconds to process a PEF file properly shows it's doing a load more than the camera ever could
And, as I've found out more than once, shooting RAW means you can always revisit the image later as RAW software gets better and eek out more from the image.
...now where was that Silkypix user guide...
But that's going a little off topic...
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Some flowers for perusal and critique at 04/07/2007 - 10:24
Quote:
It arrived this morning and I think I'm in love...
S'wonderful, isn't it?? It arrived this morning and I think I'm in love...
And mine is only the old SMC-F...
Bought a nice metal 49mm hood for it too off eBay and now it looks the part, especially with the grip
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on smc FA 50mm f/1.4 at 13/07/2007 - 12:06
Quote:
Is Hoya Pro-1's glass thinner than the standard stuff?
Very, very thin. Thinner rim too. Very nice filters...Is Hoya Pro-1's glass thinner than the standard stuff?
...until they break
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on smc FA 50mm f/1.4 at 03/07/2007 - 15:01
Quote:
I will now have a go at smashing some filters
Make sure they're Hoya Pro-1 filters I will now have a go at smashing some filters
Have some shots of the results somewhere...
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on smc FA 50mm f/1.4 at 03/07/2007 - 14:23
Quote:
I'm mostly concerned about minor knocks and scrapes that would not be bad enough to smash the filter but would be bad enough to scratch the lens. Bigger knocks and falls are rarer.
Hmmmm. As I mentioned earlier some filters will go with a "bang" given the smallest knock that I'm sure wouldn't have harmed the lens. I had two Hoya Pro filters nearly wrecked the front element of £800 lenses. Not funny. I'm mostly concerned about minor knocks and scrapes that would not be bad enough to smash the filter but would be bad enough to scratch the lens. Bigger knocks and falls are rarer.
A hood is definitely a better method of protecting the lens. Knock on lens = cracked hood = about £35 to replace (or glue it).
My motto now is - no filter, but hood always on and round the right way
But you can use a filter if you want... I have a 72mm Hoya Pro filter for sale if anyone is interested...
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on smc FA 50mm f/1.4 at 03/07/2007 - 11:25
Quote:
Oh, Matt that kinda freeks me out, always paranoid about a filter, so you say SMC is tough, what about rain on surface of lens, would you be perfectly happy just to wipe it dry with cloth?
If you're paranoid then get a filter Oh, Matt that kinda freeks me out, always paranoid about a filter, so you say SMC is tough, what about rain on surface of lens, would you be perfectly happy just to wipe it dry with cloth?
I have no problem with the front element and rain, or dust, or fingerprints etc.
No filter means you look after your lenses
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on smc FA 50mm f/1.4 at 03/07/2007 - 09:59
Lilly,
I don't use anything on the lens
Just a metal hood to stop glare and to protect the lens should I drop it
Pentax SMC coating is also very tough...
(I've had two Hoya Pro filters go crunch - and it wasn't a pretty site The splinters of glass very nearly ruined the lens.)
Matt
I don't use anything on the lens
Just a metal hood to stop glare and to protect the lens should I drop it
Pentax SMC coating is also very tough...
(I've had two Hoya Pro filters go crunch - and it wasn't a pretty site The splinters of glass very nearly ruined the lens.)
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on smc FA 50mm f/1.4 at 02/07/2007 - 22:45
Chris' pineapple - processed from PEF in Silkypix:
(Be warned - this is a JPG that weighs in at over 6Mb!
http://www.pbase.com/mattmatic/image/81600002/original
Resized and sharpened in PS2:
(Even this is 530k, compressed at 80%!)
http://www.pbase.com/mattmatic/image/81599922/original
Looks like there's still a slight touch of mis-focus at the bottom end - it might not have been square ( But then when was the last time you saw a square fruit? )
The lighting should've been more diffused and from one side (with a reflector on the other side I reckon).
But it looks sharp enough to me!
Matt
(Be warned - this is a JPG that weighs in at over 6Mb!
http://www.pbase.com/mattmatic/image/81600002/original
Resized and sharpened in PS2:
(Even this is 530k, compressed at 80%!)
http://www.pbase.com/mattmatic/image/81599922/original
Looks like there's still a slight touch of mis-focus at the bottom end - it might not have been square ( But then when was the last time you saw a square fruit? )
The lighting should've been more diffused and from one side (with a reflector on the other side I reckon).
But it looks sharp enough to me!
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Image quality of Pentax in question ??? at 03/07/2007 - 16:09
The other thing I garnered was the importance of understanding the latitude of the sensor in regards to extreme highlights to shadow detail.
I have concluded that without a doubt in my mind, that RAW is the best solution for pulling the best performance out of the Pentax K10D.
And if you haven't tried it yet, Ben, Silkypix Developer Studio gives the most amazing sharpness and colour rendition and control I've seen out of all the RAW converters (pixel peeping or otherwise).
Matt