Rosanna,

(Nice to have a name to a post )

Thanks for commenting. I think you will find the *istD will earn its keep The quality is somehow different from film, but I am finding that overall it's a winner. Being able to quickly check the results and retake immediately, plus the ability to change ISO rating dynamically (without changing film) really pay dividends.

If you have something really special, try finding a Fuji Pictrography (not a typo - it does have an 'r') lab. Apparently they produce stunning results. One of my local labs provides super large format with Pictrography and other methods - all quite expensive just to try, but the results look fantastic.

In addition, there's a local photographer who does portraits and weddings who went digital and they have huge portrait images in their window that look stunning. One of these days, I'll pop down and find out how they output their images...

Let us know if you get an online gallery together
Matt

Hi!
The final print size and the ISO rating are not directly related

What stops you producing great prints is the image size. The *istD is 6.1mega pixel, giving an output image of 3008x2008 pixels. If you print at 20x16" that will give you about 130 pixels per inch. It will look great inkjetted, but may benefit from some Photoshop enhancing. That said, pretty well all the DSLRs at the moment are in the 6 mega pixel range - and I've seen some positively huge portrait prints from DSLRs (but I am not sure of the complete workflow used in those cases).

Back to ISO... at ISO200, the *istD is similar in noise to most DSLRs, and in my experience, there is less "grain" than even Fuji Provia scanned on a Nikon Coolscan IV (ie a good reference). The *istD produces that silky smooth image - you may even want to add noise to simulate film

In addition to ISO200, the *istD performs very well at up to ISO3200, that is to say, compared with an ISO1600 negative film. The digital noise is very managable, and is easily cleaned up with NeatImage. Here's an example of an ISO3200 image, cleaned up - http://www.pbase.com/image/23620188 (check out the whole gallery too)

If you want to know what the *istD behaves like, download one of Pentax's test images (from www.pentax.com, www.pentax.co.jp, or http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxistd/page19.asp) and print one out. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at the quality

Hope that answers your question,
Matt

Don Schoolmaster,

The other fact to bear in mind is that the Dimage 7 uses phase focussing (I think) - by reading information directly off the CCD. Hence, any sensitivity in the IR range will allow it to focus.

The *istD, on the other hand, has seperate focussing, as in all the film versions. In addition, the electronics for the CCD are different to the consumer cameras. The way the image is clocked out of the chip requires a real shutter (whereas in the Dimage 7, and my Canon S30 etc etc the sensor does not require a physical shutter, and that's why those cameras can do video too ) Here's a nice link describing the difference: http://www.dpreview.com/learn/Glossary/Camera_System/Sensor_01.htm The *istD is "Full Frame Transfer" (not to be confused with full 35mm frame size), whereas the Dimage is "Interline Transfer".

If I find any other info on IR and the *istD, I'll post it here first

That said, there are some really neat actions and tricks to simulate IR under Photoshop (as John quite rightly said).

Matt

Hi!

You didn't say which Pentax

Matt

Colin,

First thing - you must calibrate your monitor otherwise whatever you see will be "off". You can get free software from: www.praxisoft.com - just download the WiziWyg program - http://www.praxisoft.com/pages/products.wiziwyg.html. You can purchase it with a "spider" attachment that reads the colours automatically, or download the software alone. The manual setup is not difficult, and is the only one I use for calibrating LCD/TFT monitors (and I dispense with the Adobe gamma correction utility - because it does not support LCDs).

Personally, I find that is enough. The Epson Stylus Photo printers that I use all give very pleasing results. In addition, emailing to Jessops for real prints yields the same results I see on screen.

That said, though, you can go ahead and calibrate your scanners, your printers and everything else using WiziWyg.

Regarding printers, make sure you are using the original ink cartridges too and decent papers. Some papers (like the Ilford range) specify adjustments for Epson printers (e.g. -5 on Magenta) to correct further. It's all in the small print.

Colour matching is a big field (some of it seemingly "black art"). However, once your monitor is setup correctly, almost everything else falls into place

Let us know how you get on
Matt

Sequin,

Could be almost any price
It is not the camera type that is important, but the filter thread size. If you have a 50mm lens, it will almost certainly be 49mm.

Here are some places to try looking:
www.7dayshop.com
www.mxv.co.uk (second hand)
www.parkcameras.com (very helpful if you call them or drop in)
www.jessops.com

Hope that helps
Matt

Malcolm,

Thanks for the update I think there are some other issues at stake here too... I have had some problems with wireless flash underexposing when using a 20-35mm. However, I do know that the auto sensitivity was enabled at the time.

As soon as I get a little time I will be sitting down to work out the conditions that make things go a little kooky. I'll keep you all posted.

Matt

Yes, there is no such thing as "standard" Nikon, Canon and Pentax are all completely different - it is just that some lense companies (like Sigma, Tokina etc) make several versions of the same lense optics.

The only odd-one-out is Tamron who make one lense and have their own little adaptors to fit each make of camera body.

That said, you can get decent second hand PK-fit lenses from:
www.mxv.co.uk
www.ffordes.co.uk
www.parkcameras.co.uk
www.clocktowercameras.co.uk
(and other second hand places)

Hope that helps
Matt

Treve,

Your understanding of the result is correct, but your understanding of the manual is wrong

Trailing curtain sync works this way: shutter opens, delay the Tv value, flash fires, shutter closes.

Normal flash works this way: shutter opens, flash fires, delay the Tv value, shutter closes.

The net effect of curtain sync is that the blur appears before (that is before-in-time), with the sharp flash image imposed on top. Normal flash will have the sharp image first, and the blur after (effectively layered on top of the flash image, thus reducing the quality of the sharp image). Get it?!

If you pan perfectly, there'll be almost nothing in it. However, if you don't pan and time your shutter correctly you'll get a blur of cyclist with a sharp image as the last thing (ie blur before, time-wise). It could be tricky timing it since you'll have to judge the finish point

Hope that clarifies things
Matt

Treve,

If you using just the AF330, all you need to do is set the mode on the flash

The flash feature on the Z1p controls the built in flash. See page 91 of your manual. If you use the popup flash in addition to the AF330 and set curtain mode, the AF330 will change modes automatically to match You really can't go far wrong!!

If you use an exposure mode other than auto, than you will only get the curtain sync if the shutter speed is less than 1/60.

Hope that clarifies things
Matt