All Forum Comments
Comment by MrCynical posted on Dallmeyer Super-Six Anastigmat 83mm Sold for £8k on Ebay at 09/08/2011 - 17:25
MarkTaylor wrote:
I thought this thread was about Little Bo Peep until I opened it.
Being a geek I was expecting a post about that awful Firefox-based 'social media web browser' from a couple of years ago I thought this thread was about Little Bo Peep until I opened it.
Comment by MrCynical posted on Look - No Flock! at 09/08/2011 - 17:20
Blythman wrote:
I saw that
Do you hand over copyright to Tyne Tees. I was talking to someone last weekend who said the BBC can sell pictures which are sent in for their weather spot. And that T&Cs give them full copyright
BBC standard T&Cs are that they don't take copyright, but they do take a license which allows them to do anything they like to the image (including selling it to other media organisations and not giving any of the proceeds to the photographer) and keep it forever. Britain (or really the EU, since copyright is one of the things done mainly at EU level) really needs an equivalent of UCTA/UTCCR for user generated content.I saw that
Do you hand over copyright to Tyne Tees. I was talking to someone last weekend who said the BBC can sell pictures which are sent in for their weather spot. And that T&Cs give them full copyright
Comment by MrCynical posted on Gunnerton Crag at 05/08/2011 - 01:48
I think Pentax accessory sales have been hurt by the fact that the comedy pricing department seem to have moved on from the DA 12-24 to the accessories:
http://www.srsmicrosystems.co.uk/156/Pentax-Mount-Adapter-K.html
http://www.srsmicrosystems.co.uk/156/Pentax-Mount-Adapter-K.html
Comment by MrCynical posted on If you like Pentax, should you only buy Pentax at 05/08/2011 - 01:43
johnriley wrote:
Too expensive for a first dabble in prime lenses Stefan. Excellent, certainly, but not necessary as a beginning lens.
Cheaper new than the FA50 is (£275 DA40 vs £309 FA50).Too expensive for a first dabble in prime lenses Stefan. Excellent, certainly, but not necessary as a beginning lens.
Comment by MrCynical posted on Help with choosing a lens - looking at 50mm f1.4 at 05/08/2011 - 01:34
cardiff_gareth wrote:
Am I right in saying that PEF files are larger than DNG and take up loads of space??
No. On my K20D at least it's the other way round: PEFs are compressed (losslessly, like a ZIP or FLAC file) but DNGs are not. This may have changed subsequently because when the K20D was designed DNG was still very much in its infancy.Am I right in saying that PEF files are larger than DNG and take up loads of space??
As for the codecs, in true Microsoft fashion the website stalled when I tried to download them.
Comment by MrCynical posted on New Microsoft Codecs at 03/08/2011 - 02:38
johnwhit wrote:
Pentax accessory prices are, unfortunately, comical these days. See for example the M42 adapter. For some bizarre reason Pentax think people will pay £60 for it Cliff-P wrote:
John, does it have to be a Pentax branded one?
Hi Cliff, I'd prefer it to be, fussy b*gger y'knowJohn, does it have to be a Pentax branded one?
Comment by MrCynical posted on SRS Free postage? at 03/08/2011 - 02:34
Pentaxophile wrote:
from what I've seen from other users, and the review on PentaxForums, this lens is as good or better than the 18-55mm and therefore a pretty good lens.
And of course they ought to work even harder to reduce sample variation!
This is what I've been thinking about the 18-135: Klaus clearly knows what he's doing, yet the images posted by users (there were some great ones of Paris in a thread on DPReview) are much sharper than those his copy could achieve. Yet this begs the question: why did Pentax Germany tell him that the lens was operating within specification?from what I've seen from other users, and the review on PentaxForums, this lens is as good or better than the 18-55mm and therefore a pretty good lens.
And of course they ought to work even harder to reduce sample variation!
The 12-24 is certainly a good lens: it got a good review from Photozone, and even Ken Rockwell described its optics as 'very good' (for comparison, he described the original Sigma 10-20 as only 'fair' - the Sigma is sharp!)
EDIT: Loving the general contempt for photography magazine howtos on the website of a photography magazine
Comment by MrCynical posted on Pentax 12-24mm bottom of class at 03/08/2011 - 02:12
Mike-P wrote:
How many times do we actually crop a picture to 100%? Don't think I have ever done it to be honest. All this pixel peeping rubbish is useless in everyday use, as long as the finished article looks sharp then that's all that matters.
Looks fine to me.
When making large prints? (15x10 or greater is my rough guesstimate for the K20D)How many times do we actually crop a picture to 100%? Don't think I have ever done it to be honest. All this pixel peeping rubbish is useless in everyday use, as long as the finished article looks sharp then that's all that matters.
Looks fine to me.
Comment by MrCynical posted on quick siggy 100-300 sharpness test... at 28/07/2011 - 23:20
Dangermouse wrote:
I thought there was a fundamental limitation of the K mount in that it's physically impossible to make lenses faster than f1.2 or so for it? IIRC the mounting just doesn't provide a big enough hole?
Presumably if it were possible then Pentax would have done it back in the days when they were huge (i.e. around the time of the 50 f1.2s!) If I recall correctly, this issue was the reason Canon decided to develop an entirely new lens mount for their autofocus cameras (ie the EF mount): their old FD mount couldn't do f0.95 either.I thought there was a fundamental limitation of the K mount in that it's physically impossible to make lenses faster than f1.2 or so for it? IIRC the mounting just doesn't provide a big enough hole?
Comment by MrCynical posted on Noktor 50mm f/0.95 at 28/07/2011 - 23:02
Nutty Collector?