All Forum Comments
Comment by MattMatic posted on Megapixel discussion - why limited to 6 ? at 21/10/2005 - 09:40
The discharge required is a combination of ambient light vs distance. Being outdoors helps, but don't forget the inverse-square law : that is, that if a subject is twice as far away it requires four times as much light.
The other thing is the P-TTL mode. It requires twice as much power - one flash for the preflash, and the same for the main flash. Combining this with the inverse square law you end up with some serious drain!
Maybe you were just stretching it too far?
If you are in a fairly controlled setup, you can switch to manual on the camera, then change the mode to M or A on the AF360. This will give you twice as much power because there's no preflash.
Obviously I can't give a complete answer (as I don't know the exact circumstances), but hopefully that's given some food for thought!
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Multiple flashes on AF360FGZ? at 20/10/2005 - 11:29
Cleaning isn't that difficult though. The bulb blower gets most of the stuff away though
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Sensor Cleaning at 09/11/2005 - 12:30
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on *1stDS / Windows XP problem at 16/10/2005 - 20:54
Glad to help
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Optimising your monitor? at 28/10/2005 - 07:28
Comment by MattMatic posted on Optimising your monitor? at 19/10/2005 - 20:45
Just download WiziWYG from www.praxisoft.com
It's free, and does a great job of calibrating laptop monitors. Just go through the process, select D65 (6500K) and gamma 2.2 (PC standard), and when asked for the monitor type, select "Generic LCD" - this should get you a pretty excellent colour match.
In fact, I have a laptop that, for some bizarre reason, a Pantone Spyder doesn't do a good job on, and WiziWYG works a treat
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Optimising your monitor? at 13/10/2005 - 09:28
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=12704651
Personally, it's not going to make any difference at all. It'll be the only super wide zoom for Pentax that can take filters.
I'm just waiting to get my hands on one...
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Conspiracy Theory at 14/10/2005 - 06:41
Comment by MattMatic posted on Filters & Light Refraction at 13/10/2005 - 21:28
I'd definitely recommend them
I've also used Photobox, but have just got back better results by using a Fuji Frontier profile, rather than just sRGB (their equipment is nearly sRGB, but not quite).
Going off thread a bit...
Matt
Comment by MattMatic posted on Filters & Light Refraction at 13/10/2005 - 17:34


Forget compact digicams. They don't compare. The sensor for compacts is miniscule, and consequently the pixel zone is minute. Noise becomes a serious problem. For example, the *ist-D at 1600ISO has less noise than some compacts at 400ISO.
As regards the agencies - it doesn't matter. Just upsize the image from the camera. The *ist-D at 6mega pixels will give you fine art quality at 18x12", given the right workflow. By that I mean - work in RAW, convert well (Capture One being my personal favourite). Capture One Pro, and Adobe Camera Raw in Photoshop CS/CS2 will upsize to 4x, and the resolution is absolutely stunning.
Of course, you have to have half way decent lenses
In fact, since going RAW and improving my workflow I've had to upgrade all my lenses (that I used happily with the MZ5 & Z1 film cameras) because I have become much more critical
Yes, more mega pixels would help.
Pentax are producing a medium format digital camera which should be superb, and who knows? Maybe they are developing a higher resolution DSLR too?
It's true, Pentax are a little way behind the other brand names, but you certainly get a full featured product (things like true spot-metering for example are often not available on other entry level products). And the compatibility with older lenses is second to none
Matt