If you set f11 on the lense aperture ring (thats what you are saying has been set?) then the F--- should be flashing - this is exactly right. That is because with this older lens the camera cannot tell what aperture has been set on the lens.

As John said above, with the aperture ring turned fully and locked into 'A' position, then you will be able to set the aperture on the camera (rear e-dial) in Av or P mode, and the lens will stop down when you fire the shutter to the setting as on the camera. (this is what is called 'auto' operation)

If you want to operate the lens fully 'manually', that is to set the aperture on the lens ring, then as said above you must activate the menu function to allow this or else the camera just locks up, which is what you are experiencing it sounds like.

I second that David, some very creative work and always enormous variety. I think the display style of our Gallery & individual portfolios on this forum is a great plus - the portfolio page thumbnails give an instant feel of each personal style and it looks polished and well presented.

I do wonder though, if any others have been thinking, and I know this has been raised before, is the full view display of images a bit soft generally? I notice quite a difference between my shots viewed in my Fullscreen Viewer or indeed in any of my editing software and when I click on them on this web forum. I use different computers, a windows 7 laptop with Opera and at work XP with Explorer 7, and it seems the same. The same images viewd on different websites (eg Photoshop.com) appear very crisp as I expect?

To get the best out of HDR (at least for the purpose of attaining an expanded visible DR, more replicating what our eyes can detect), then I think Andrew is right - what you will end up with if using one shot that has had the exposure settings altered up and down and saved in different versions, is really an image with expanded contrast, not the same as increased DR. Your output is likely to show a histogram with brightness data clumping up thickly at both edges of the graph.

To be able to produce an expanded DR, the HDR software ideally needs at least one image with a high EV that pulls the brightness data well away from the left hand edge (this would be the brightest image of your brackets), and at least one image at the other end with a low EV pulling the histogram data down off the right edge. Both of these shots are therefore actually recording detail optimally which will be used in the final output. In between these two extremes you could choose either one or three midtoned shots, giving either 3 or 5 brackets in total.

By this method the software is able to extract the optimum detail and quality from each exposure zone and merge them, discarding the blown out or clipped parts where no detail exists.

I think what most seem to find is 'not much'. The last time I saw this discussed the most common advice was to 'focus lock & recompose', an age-old tried and tested technique. One thing to consider with this though is your preference for exposure bias at this point - we have the option now of linking the active focus point to the exposure system for greater weighting, or not.

I went for the 'linked option', as logically in most situations this focus point is the main subject and what we would want exposed most accurately. But it wouldn't always be the case.

I'm starting to think that the extra focus points will mostly be useful for fairly precise shooting situations, say on a tripod with offset subject which its hard to see clearly in the viewfinder.

I usually find (K7) that more often than not the centre point is the only one that lights up, even in multi-point operation. I do find myself wishing that the spread of points was wider and extended further towards the sides of the viewfinder. Often the objects under the outside points as they are seem to be covered by the centre one anyway.

I certainly don't have any experience of these matters, but it is very interesting, so I'd love to explore it more. These .dcp files, are these the ACR default settings that would be applied to a specific camera's RAW file when opened first?

I was aware that the regular updates to ACR add new support for newer models, but I'd have thought the K5 has been around long enough to have included already.

I am wondering how these profiles would provide specific and different colour renditions as you seem to suggest? Does not camera RAW apply saturation / vibrance globally across the spectrum?

I'm sure others will provide some insight. In any case, are you producing the results from PDCU4 by applying any specific adjustments, or are you saying it gives these results by default just by opening the files? If so, then why not keep bulk processing in PDCU just to carry out the coversion into 16bit TIFF, then you can still continue working on the TIFFs in ACR for further adjustment if you prefer that program.

I've had the Samyang 14mm a couple of months now, and as I've reported here before am very pleased indeed. Check out the previous posts and examples :

link

link

Distortion keeps getting referred to. On the test charts I saw before buying it is limited to the outer reaches, and after all for now we will be shooting on APS-C (I assume you're shooting digital). For my landscapes I havn't really seen any issue. Bear in mind the Samyang actually covers a 'full frame' sensor size, so it will be a truely super-wide lens on any future FF DSLR, or indeed even now on a 35mm film camera!

Oh, yes! Now I'm just going to hold out for a Pentax 5x4D.

Kris, these have that special quality that only the film (and scanning process) could provide. Nice viewpoints and great DOF too.

Having stopped shooting film a while ago, what jumps (back) out at me are the blown highlights out the windows, something that I now routinely eliminate on digital, in the quest to obtain a full DR with detail (although of course we don't really get detail back into these sorts of hotspots, only a greyer tone which is less distracting).

This sort of characteristic is of course 'natural' to negative film (this is neg isn't it?) - we just get used to not seeing it now. I always understood to 'expose for the shadows - let the hotspots go', and its interesting to see it here. Hey, like everyone else here, guess you just can't wait to go Full Frame eh

RAW straight out of camera would not normally provide any 'punch'. Don't know how you've converted this to JPEG, but most software would provide some default settings that normally boosts brightness and sharpness. But maybe your conversion didn't have these set up? I'm sure it would only take some minor control inputs to give the shot all it needs.

Also you have the option of the in camera Custom Image Parameters (right hand button on the four-way controller). The Bright and / or Vibrant preset would be appropriate here I believe,a should give a nice bright & punch JPEG from the camera.