All Forum Comments
Comment by Prieni posted on First shots with the 10-17 at 26/05/2007 - 12:28
Quote:
I like the focal length range on the 10-17, but would prefer a rectilinear lens with these focal range.
How's about the Sigma 10-20? There is a thread Pentax 10-17 or Sigma 10-20 here.I like the focal length range on the 10-17, but would prefer a rectilinear lens with these focal range.
Comment by Prieni posted on First shots with the 10-17 at 24/05/2007 - 15:28
Oh yes, now that IS cool. Trouble is that I have the istD, not the K10D
Thinking of it, building a housing shouldn't be that difficult. After all it's my day job to build instruments that are dunked in the sea.
This SPL housing does look proper, though, and you get a housing for the flash as well!
Thinking of it, building a housing shouldn't be that difficult. After all it's my day job to build instruments that are dunked in the sea.
This SPL housing does look proper, though, and you get a housing for the flash as well!
Comment by Prieni posted on First shots with the 10-17 at 24/05/2007 - 14:43
Quote:
With a little apprehension I ordered the sam elens only yesterday and having seen your shots I'm glad I did.
Just hope I can do as well as you.
I'm sure you can. It will be fun to figure out how to use the 10-17 to the greatest effect. We learned over the years to "see" the frame when looking around. Now you have to imagine the distortion and it's effect as well. Maybe I should get new glasses with fish-eye vision. With a little apprehension I ordered the sam elens only yesterday and having seen your shots I'm glad I did.
Just hope I can do as well as you.
I hope to see pics taken with your new lens soon....
Prieni
Comment by Prieni posted on First shots with the 10-17 at 24/05/2007 - 10:39
Oooh, controversy sparked by my images!
Well, as far as controversy goes in this civilized forum.
Please keep in mind that these were the first 20 or so shots I took with this lens and it seems it needs some getting used to.
John is right in that the base should have been fully in the frame. I guess I was so carried away with the new view through the lens.
ChrisA does have a point (no offence taken) and it demonstrates that either you love the fisheye distortion or you loathe it. Chris, at least I have saved you from considering a 10-17 as it clearly isn't for you. I wasn't even sure if it is right for me and took the plunge anyway. After one day I know it is for me, although the danger is that I get tired of it quickly and never put it on again. Only time will tell.
I also was impressed by the shot against the sun, I used -1EV in this one and pulled up the darks a bit in post processing. The intention of this shot was to get a feel for the look of the sun (and possible flare) when it is in the frame (with such a wide angle it certainly is difficult sometimes to keep the sun out of the frame). John is right that I intended to have the horizon straight in this shot and didn't quite succeed. The curvature in the foreground pulls it in the right direction, though.
Compositionwise this shot is perhaps not that interesting, for me it's a bit more interesting as I know that the concrete jetty is straight, not curved.
Certainly this lens doesn't always produces images that "work", now I can start to learn when to use it and when it's better to leave it in the bag.
Cheers,
Prieni
Well, as far as controversy goes in this civilized forum.
Please keep in mind that these were the first 20 or so shots I took with this lens and it seems it needs some getting used to.
John is right in that the base should have been fully in the frame. I guess I was so carried away with the new view through the lens.
ChrisA does have a point (no offence taken) and it demonstrates that either you love the fisheye distortion or you loathe it. Chris, at least I have saved you from considering a 10-17 as it clearly isn't for you. I wasn't even sure if it is right for me and took the plunge anyway. After one day I know it is for me, although the danger is that I get tired of it quickly and never put it on again. Only time will tell.
I also was impressed by the shot against the sun, I used -1EV in this one and pulled up the darks a bit in post processing. The intention of this shot was to get a feel for the look of the sun (and possible flare) when it is in the frame (with such a wide angle it certainly is difficult sometimes to keep the sun out of the frame). John is right that I intended to have the horizon straight in this shot and didn't quite succeed. The curvature in the foreground pulls it in the right direction, though.
Compositionwise this shot is perhaps not that interesting, for me it's a bit more interesting as I know that the concrete jetty is straight, not curved.
Certainly this lens doesn't always produces images that "work", now I can start to learn when to use it and when it's better to leave it in the bag.
Cheers,
Prieni
Comment by Prieni posted on First shots with the 10-17 at 24/05/2007 - 08:17
*istD, DA 10-17, 1/350 s, A11, ISO 200
*istD, DA 10-17, 1/500 s, A22, ISO 200
Both taken at 10mm. There is quite some CA visible in the RAW pics but with SilkyPix I got it under control. That's great with digital, you even can beat basic physics (well, to a degree that is).
I'm pretty sure that I will have a lot of fun with this lens.
*istD, DA 10-17, 1/500 s, A22, ISO 200
Both taken at 10mm. There is quite some CA visible in the RAW pics but with SilkyPix I got it under control. That's great with digital, you even can beat basic physics (well, to a degree that is).
I'm pretty sure that I will have a lot of fun with this lens.
Comment by Prieni posted on First shots with the 10-17 at 23/05/2007 - 20:30
George,
thanks for your words of comfort. As I said I am happy with the *istD and the processing speed doesn't bother me too much. I have a 75 x 50 cm print that I made from a shot and this is marvellous. I guess that is exactly the point why I haven't made the jump to the K10D yet.
Cheers,
Prieni
thanks for your words of comfort. As I said I am happy with the *istD and the processing speed doesn't bother me too much. I have a 75 x 50 cm print that I made from a shot and this is marvellous. I guess that is exactly the point why I haven't made the jump to the K10D yet.
Cheers,
Prieni
Comment by Prieni posted on are ISO settings a nonsense on digital? at 25/05/2007 - 12:28
Quote:
The *ist-D was excellent, and I pushed it to its limit and have consistently got quality results from it (several have asked if the prints were from medium format). The K10D is much better, a complete joy to use (fast, intuitive etc) and is only lacking one or two very minor things - it's nearly my perfect camera
To be honest - as you haven't actually got a K10D, you don't know what you're missing
Matt
Matt, could you please stop that. I still have the *istD and are quite happy with it. It's posts like yours that make me want a K10D because they are giving me a taste of what I am missing. The *ist-D was excellent, and I pushed it to its limit and have consistently got quality results from it (several have asked if the prints were from medium format). The K10D is much better, a complete joy to use (fast, intuitive etc) and is only lacking one or two very minor things - it's nearly my perfect camera
To be honest - as you haven't actually got a K10D, you don't know what you're missing
Matt
I really would like to stay with the *istD for another while.
On the topic: It would be complete waste if the 22-bit conversion would be instantly and linearly converted back to 12 bit (wouldn't that just mean chopping of the 10 LSB's?). I don't think the Pentax engineers are stupid and I sincerely hope that the marketing department didn't talk them into doing such stupid things. Therefore I assume that it's not as straight forward as that.
Prieni
Comment by Prieni posted on are ISO settings a nonsense on digital? at 25/05/2007 - 12:11
Quote:
Not terribly difficult to set up - and you'll impress your instructor(s) if they appreciate puns... (If they don't, I'm not to blame... )
Yeah, the blame will be on me! Not terribly difficult to set up - and you'll impress your instructor(s) if they appreciate puns... (If they don't, I'm not to blame... )
Comment by Prieni posted on Really Struggling with movement image Help required at 14/05/2007 - 15:41
Well, I'm not a native speaker in English, but aren't there more meanings to the word "movement". Like in music or the movement of a clock? Both could be connected to the movement as in "something moving". Like a clock movement in motion or the conductor of an orchestra moving his baton.
The clock movement has the distinct advantage that you can take your time to set up the shot.
What do you think?
The clock movement has the distinct advantage that you can take your time to set up the shot.
What do you think?
Comment by Prieni posted on Really Struggling with movement image Help required at 14/05/2007 - 15:19
nice first try. I also noticed the CA but found that in SilkyPix I can easily correct for it (one of the great advantages of digital!).
Have fun with the new toy,
Prieni