All Forum Comments
Comment by Pentaxophile posted on tokina at-X SD 100-300mm f4 at 29/07/2011 - 18:20
Personally - as someone with limited funds for photography myself - I think that experience with the SDM of the 16-50 would have seen me offloading it on to ebay while it was still working (isn't that an awful admission), and getting something cheaper (and probably optically slightly better) with good old fashioned screw drive! Ah, that reassuring 'zzzt zzzt' sound during focussing, reminding you that the lens will not suddenly stop focussing due to SDM issues... ;P
Comment by Pentaxophile posted on SDM 16-50 lens focusing not working at 29/07/2011 - 16:40
Looks like you'll be telling us how this lens performs, since you've just won it! I saw one in a shop recently, but could only find one review on PentaxForums. Seemed quite positive though.
Comment by Pentaxophile posted on tokina at-X SD 100-300mm f4 at 29/07/2011 - 16:34
If you are just using the jpeg as a preview, you can set it (in the camera menu) to the minimum image size and quality, to save space
Comment by Pentaxophile posted on RawTherapee 3.0 Released at 29/07/2011 - 09:59
It doesn't cause much of a delay. You'd notice if you were in continuous shooting mode, but otherwise probably not.
Comment by Pentaxophile posted on 'raw' paint at 29/07/2011 - 09:51
I would take 2 or 3 cards rather than one big one... spread the risk if something goes wrong with it (and you'd also always have a spare).
Say if you took two 8MB cards. When one is full, you can stick the other one in without all the usual going back and deleting shots, which isn't what you want to be doing if you happen to urgently need to take pictures.
You can then make some space on the full card at your leisure the next day.
Mind you, you'll struggle to fill a 16MB card if you're shooting jpeg.
Say if you took two 8MB cards. When one is full, you can stick the other one in without all the usual going back and deleting shots, which isn't what you want to be doing if you happen to urgently need to take pictures.
You can then make some space on the full card at your leisure the next day.
Mind you, you'll struggle to fill a 16MB card if you're shooting jpeg.
Comment by Pentaxophile posted on 16gb memory card at 29/07/2011 - 01:18
Shoot in RAW+Jpeg and there will be a jpeg alongside the RAW file to give you a quick preview.
Or instead of looking for your files in Windows Explorer, open Photoshop, and go to Menu - Open - and look for the files. The thumbnails will be displayed so you can see the pictures to pick from, but you will still need to edit them before you do anything else with them.
Or instead of looking for your files in Windows Explorer, open Photoshop, and go to Menu - Open - and look for the files. The thumbnails will be displayed so you can see the pictures to pick from, but you will still need to edit them before you do anything else with them.
Comment by Pentaxophile posted on RawTherapee 3.0 Released at 28/07/2011 - 21:23
trickletreat wrote:
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/inamini/IMGP1817.jpg[/IMG]
I love this shot! [IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/inamini/IMGP1817.jpg[/IMG]
Comment by Pentaxophile posted on Bugged out at 28/07/2011 - 20:43
These are with the 35mm f2.4, all wide open, of course. 35mm is not especially wide, especially on APSC - there isn't really any distortion like you would see with the 16-45mm. I know proper portrait photographers use longish lenses to 'flatter their subjects' but I don't mind a very slight exaggeration of facial features (brings out character and looks more 3-dimensional). It's just adifferent look from the 50mm, and lets you get close to your subject.
These are quick family snaps which I think this lens excels at. It's so small and quick to focus.
These are quick family snaps which I think this lens excels at. It's so small and quick to focus.
Comment by Pentaxophile posted on Best focal length for party portraits? at 28/07/2011 - 20:27
thespirit3 wrote:
Mark: Very nice - and fantastic to see good results with those tools too.
I'm 100% Linux here and so far my attempts at converting raw (both DNG and PEF) have resulted in abysmal results (the camera JPEG is far superior). I've tried a few of the RAW converters (which seem ok) but then Gimp for noise reduction (which is *very* poor).
I see Bibble is available for Linux and I'm hoping to test the 30 day trial before deciding if it's a worthwhile purchase.
However, I have also read that RAW images from the K-x are particularly poor (in terms of headroom for recovering under/over exposed scenes). For this reason, I'm wondering if sticking with JPEG may be the better option give the hassle involved with 'developing' RAW.
Steve
Have you tried DarkTable? Someone was saying it was Linux's version of Lightroom. Mark: Very nice - and fantastic to see good results with those tools too.
I'm 100% Linux here and so far my attempts at converting raw (both DNG and PEF) have resulted in abysmal results (the camera JPEG is far superior). I've tried a few of the RAW converters (which seem ok) but then Gimp for noise reduction (which is *very* poor).
I see Bibble is available for Linux and I'm hoping to test the 30 day trial before deciding if it's a worthwhile purchase.
However, I have also read that RAW images from the K-x are particularly poor (in terms of headroom for recovering under/over exposed scenes). For this reason, I'm wondering if sticking with JPEG may be the better option give the hassle involved with 'developing' RAW.
Steve
https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/darktable-update-29406
http://tutorialgeek.blogspot.com/2011/07/lightroom-vs-darktable-raw-photo.html
Comment by Pentaxophile posted on One reason why I love shooting RAW at 28/07/2011 - 20:03
The manual focus AT-X 100-300/4 is a great lens (NOT soft at the long end, and not that soft even wide open). The following six "tables" show the center and corner resolution and contrast, at 100mm, 200mm, and 300mm, of the manual focus AT-X 100-300/4, as determined by Modern Photography magazine:
Center and Corner Resolution at 100mm (at 1:49)
4 --- 55 Excellent --- 49 Excellent
5.6- 55 Very Good - 49 Excellent
8 --- 62 Very Good - 55 Excellent
11 - 62 Excellent --- 55 Excellent
16 - 55 Very Good - 49 Excellent
22 - 55 Very Good - 49 Excellent
32 - 49 Excellent --- 44 Excellent
Center and Corner Resolution at 200mm (at 1:49)
4 --- 55 Excellent - 49 Excellent
5.6- 55 Excellent - 49 Excellent
8 --- 62 Excellent - 55 Excellent
11 - 62 Excellent - 55 Excellent
16 - 55 Excellent - 49 Excellent
22 - 55 Excellent - 49 Excellent
32 - 49 Excellent - 44 Excellent
Center and Corner Resolution at 300mm (at 1:51)
4 --- 57 Excellent - 51 Excellent
5.6- 57 Excellent - 51 Excellent
8 --- 64 Excellent - 57 Excellent
11 - 64 Excellent - 57 Excellent
16 - 57 Excellent - 51 Excellent
22 - 51 Excellent - 45 Excellent
32 - 51 Excellent - 45 Excellent
Center and Corner Contrast at 100mm (at 30 lpm)
4 --- 54 High - 42 High
5.6- 59 High - 48 High
8 --- 74 High - 59 High
11 - 69 High - 56 High
16 - 66 High - 53 High
22 - 58 High - 48 High
32 - 49 High - 40 High
Center and Corner Contrast at 200mm (at 30 lpm)
4 --- 49 High - 40 High
5.6- 64 High - 48 High
8 --- 71 High - 55 High
11 - 73 High - 65 High
16 - 67 High - 57 High
22 - 53 High - 47 High
32 - 45 High - 34 Medium
Center and Corner Contrast at 300mm (at 30 lpm)
4 --- 53 High - 43 High
5.6- 58 High - 48 High
8 --- 73 High - 58 High
11 - 69 High - 56 High
16 - 64 High - 50 High
22 - 57 High - 45 High
32 - 48 High - 40 High
There is an optically different autofocus version of this lens, but I have no experience with it.
--
Fred
It looks good and I look forward to hearing how you get on with it.