Ok, so if I use CS4, and ACR to convert my DNG's from the K7, which came after CS4. Do I have to update the colour profile for my DNG files from the K7?

AhhhBellaaa
grande Claudio, bellissima foto, complimenti e congratulazioni.

And that's a Cheers' for the Italians on pentaxuser and the PPG!!!!

I absolutely love the wireless trigger of off-camera flashes.
I use this for most of my studio work, and have shot the catwalk show with the same system. Both the K10 and K7 work flawlessly, but the K7 is indeed more reliable.

Also, its quite surprising that using the flashes in manual and setting 1/2 or 1/4 (in softboxes/umbrellas/ snoots/whatnot) I';ve done 2-3 hours shooting without missing 1 flash burst. absolutely brilliant.

Just a note to Ravi, and everybody else.
Use the camera in Manual if it can't read the exposure properly. Its a machine, and its not perfect. I am sure that setting the time/aperture is not too hard. if it underexposes, change the aperture, or the time, or the ISO....

Post processing is astonoshingly time consuming.

But amin is right, when one does so many shoots one after the other, the need to get correct exposure in camera is a must.

I think a good percentage of my shjots are 'machine gun' frames to show pentaxian friends how fast the camera is!!!!!!!

lol
In truth i've gone through 3 K10's from decemer '06 to august '09. So not this rate of clicks... nonetheless...

Ahhhhh I didn't consider the ones on the K10 in the same period of time. Oh my God its even more serious than i thought

Yep, last night during a big event shoot I shot my 10000 photo on the K7

Am I shooting too much? working too much?

Have had it since August 15th... this is not very promising for the future..

I am really very sorry for having caused (in part) so much grief.

So I apologise to all that participated in yesterday's events, and welcome amin back to the forum.

Good night now,

Nathan

And just to grace you all with my magnificent art...



This was shot with the 10-17 - 2 Sec. exposure - ISO800 -

THis was specifically shot to show the reflection of the colums and arches in the water, and the bottom of the Cistern.

[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/Cistern-3.jpg[/IMG]

LOL

Thank you all for your comments!

Some of you are actually wrong in your judgement

The photograph might still not be perfectly level, but what is tricking your view is the first non-horizontal bar at the top of the photograph. I knew it was going to raise comments, but looking at the bridge at the far end, its a very debatable situation. Also, being under the ground level, the only measure would be the water (the columns are very irregular) - so might still be a bit bent ... but who cares!!!

THere is also absolutely no stained glass in the photograph. This is the Istanbul Cistern - built in 532 - it is REALLY an incredibly spooky place.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilica_Cistern

Not only, but its incredibly difficult to photograph, because its wet (thanks pentax) very very dark, with the only illumination being the red beams on the column's base, and 1 or 2 lamp posts on the walkable paths. What looks like reflections on the sides, are not glass, but surely 3 people under a lamp post on one of the diagonal paths...

THank you for your comments,
Nathan

EDIT: forgot to say - K10, ISO 800 DA*16-50