Also worth checking out this: http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2007_01_01_archive.html

Looks like they're custom made at SPL, and the shots may give you some ideas
Matt

You might also want to try one of these:
http://www.pbase.com/mark_dominic/pentax_and_spl


EDIT: THIS - I want one of these stickers! LOL!

Matt

It won't help - that's the f/3.5 version (which I believe was a badged Cosina?)

You won't want anything less than the Pentax f/2.8 versions (I got my SMC-F 100mm for £199 from LCEGroup a couple of years back)
Matt

Just another thing...

NeatImage works well where the response of the image is very clearly defined. So, JPG out of camera works a treat. RAW is another matter.

Whenever you process a RAW file you are tweaking the response of the CCD, and therefore modifying where the noise sits. So, to get the best results out of NeatImage you have to:
1) Fix your RAW settings in stone for all images, and create a custom NI profile (following their instructions)
or
2) Manually profile NI for each image.

FWIW, I've just pulled out some *ist-D images taken at ISO1600 and ISO3200 in a very, very dark nightclub (Jazz Cafe in London) and Silkypix cleans them boootifully Even an ISO1600 image that was 3 stops underexposed (with shed loads of noise across the image) is easily and quickly cleaned in Silkypix.

Did I say I liked Silkypix???

Matt

I have bought both. NeatImage has its uses. But I find that Silkypix does the job at ISO1600 perfectly (that's the full version, not the free) - once you know how to work the noise reduction
(George - I know what you're going to say It's on my "todo" list which is rather long )
Matt

I didn't say the K10D was better at ISO1600. I said different.
The image quality between ISO100 to ISO400 is much better than the *ist-D etc. However, some have said that the *ist-D is better at ISO1600 and ISO3200.

Ultra low light handheld photography is pushing the physics - you're not going to get a good deal better to be honest. Smaller pixels = higher noise anyway. So, yes, you're better off with faster glass - or changing the conditions

Yes, NeatImage is a good product (and take note who did the *ist-D profiles for them )
Silkypix Studio, though, will eek out a good deal more out of the *ist-D, and give you noise reduction directly from RAW too I haven't used NeatImage for a long while...

Matt

Prieni,

Agree 100% with George.

My *ist-D doesn't really get used these days - but it's still a great camera, and it's there for the backup I could sell it for a couple of hundred quid, but as it's perfectly usable I'm hanging onto it

Using good lenses, and professionally printed at 8x6 and 12x8 you really can't tell them apart. As I said, others (including at least one pro) have asked if the *ist-D images were MF I have a few 16x12s from the *ist-D which are stunning (even if I say so myself )

Speed is probably the main difference, as the K10D handles RAW files like a *ist-D handling JPG . However, the *ist-D viewfinder indicators are bigger. Ah yes, and the *ist-D is smaller too, and equipped with a 50mm/f1.4 is a delight

Matt

Thomas,
It's wonderful, and the results are different. I find ISO1600 perfectly usable, especially with Silkypix Developer Studio and its noise reduction. Overall the K10D is a definite jump in quality.

No one said the K10D didn't I have a hunch that they've made it non-linear in the conversion from 22 to 12 anyway. The highlight control is much more film like, and I can pull loads more detail out of the shadows compared to the *ist-D (the shadows have far less noise).

The *ist-D was excellent, and I pushed it to its limit and have consistently got quality results from it (several have asked if the prints were from medium format). The K10D is much better, a complete joy to use (fast, intuitive etc) and is only lacking one or two very minor things - it's nearly my perfect camera

To be honest - as you haven't actually got a K10D, you don't know what you're missing

Matt

Either 1/2 stop or 1/3 stop increments.
Actually the K10D does it amazingly I have mine permanently in Av mode, and the front dial adjusts ISO in 1/3 stop increments. Pressing the green button switches to auto ISO (and you can specify the range of auto too).

Mongoose is right - it's physics. And it's not a problem in real life.
You've just got to know your tools

Matt

The point is that you don't always expose to get everything in. That's part of the creative process

To do what you want, you can just use spot metering and fully manual. Point at the highlights, get an exposure then add around 2Ev (because it metered as a mid grey) You can do that already.

Personally, I'd rather know where my midtones are.... since CCDs are linear, the detail is in the upper part of the histogram. In fact, as I've often said, the first 1-stop is in the upper 2048 values (of a 12-bit RAW), the next 1-stop occupies 1024 values, the next 1-stop occupies 512 values, and so on. If you are exposing so your detail is 3 or 4 stops underexposed you can guess what's happening to your detail


Frankly, I reckon the only "real" way is a full 22-bit RAW file with the JPG thumbnail processed exactly as it is now. But it'll mess up the histogram display on the camera too ('cause I reckon they work that out from the JPG to save time), as well as requiring a complex piece of RAW conversion software as well.

And then what about the K10D's ability to do in-camera RAW processing? How would they handle that with a 22-bit RAW. I can see the user interface getting unwieldy

But, I'm still hoping
Matt