I like 1 and 2 best but I think they all show that sometimes a monochrome version has more character.
I took several tree shots yesterday and I found they blurred into the background in the colour images 'as shot' - so you've got me thinking !

Nice PP
Best regards
Peter

I managed to get a genuine Sigma lens hood and also work out how to set the Auto Focus to spot focus so took a few more shots today.
For completeness here is another 100% crop of one of the magnolia buds. Taken at 1/500s and f/8. Again the camera jpg with no PP except for the crop.

All these shots were taken without a lens hood (it didn't come with one) and the ones of the buds were backlit (i.e. into the sun).

I had a close look at the images last night and here are two '100% crops', i.e. Actual Pixels, from the jpg image 23 & 24 above.







I think these say it all !

(PS. the dng images look even better !)

Peter

Many thanks, Barrie, you've put my mind at rest. Guess I'll just have to PP out any dark corners if they bother me ?

Thanks again
Peter

To put this right I have now taken some more shots using my K1ii.
I taken a similar range of shots and again all taken hand held with the camera on TAv at 1/250s and f/8, to provide a comparison with those taken with the K50.

As davidwozhere has pointed out in his comment on the gallery pic I posted, the exposure settings are not neccessarily ideal but they serve as a standard setting for the comparisons.

As above all images are the camera jpg with np PP except for size reduction for posting.

Firstly are some taken around 9:15 this morning with slightly dull sunlight and after that are some taken around noon in brighter sun. The main differenc then is the ISO value chosen by the TAv setup.

I'll start the numbering at 12 to continue the sequence from above.

12


13


14


15


16


17


18



And now the later set:-
19


20


21


22


23


24


25



What I do notice is that even at f/8 there is limited DoF in many of the shots and in the wide end shots there is a bit of vignetting ?

All C&C welcome

Peter

A very good question and I hope to post such shots soon.

For now though, since I've not got used to the (more complicated) K1ii yet I thought I'd do the first tests on my familiar K50.
I can then compare the results and it will also be a good test of whether the big cost outlay was worth it !!!

Peter

As they say "the eyes have it !"

A lovely shot of a beautiful model.

Great work

Best regards
peter

When I moved up from APSC to FF my problem was that none of my favourite DA lenses are FF compatible so I embarked on a search for a lower cost alternative to the advertised 'Kit lens' for the K1 family i.e. the D FA 28-105mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR. I came across a Sigma 28-105 UCIII AS IF which, apart from the lack of the WR, has similar specs to the DFA lens and has received very similar reviews on the well known US Forum.
My copy is in immaculate condition with 'sparkling' glass so here are some initial test shots using my K50.
All were taken hand held with the camera on TAv at 1/250s and either f/8 or f/11. I tried to cover the full zoom range from 28 to 105. All used auto focus.
The images below are all out of camera jpg with no PP except for size reduction for posting
1


2


3


4


5


6


7


8


9


10


11



All C & C welcome
Peter

Thanks, David.
Yes, f/5.6 is wide open at the long end so it was a tough test.
When the sun returns I'll try some more shots at f/8 and f/11

Peter

And another OK from me.
This is the lens that spends most of the time on my K50 or K70.
But I usually switch between the DA 55-300 PLM and my Sigma 18-250 on the other camera for when I want that little extra 'reach'.

Peter