All Forum Comments
Comment by testdasi posted on K5 and improved DR at 12/04/2011 - 23:32
Did you rotate the aperture ring on the lens to the A position?
Comment by testdasi posted on Tamron 70-300 Help at 12/04/2011 - 23:14
Glover wrote:
manuf date oct 2010, strange since i bought it in feb 2011
I bought one last month with similar manufacture date. You must have gotten an old stock. Make sure when you get the replacement, check it immediately (I did and my replacement also had stain). And check manufacture date as well.
manuf date oct 2010, strange since i bought it in feb 2011
AFAIK, anything made in 2011 should be safe. The stain may develop over time as well so if yours was made in 2010, keep an eye on the stain every now and then.
Comment by testdasi posted on I have rather a large problem, need some advice at 12/04/2011 - 18:57
dueddi wrote:
Dear all,
last week a friend of my showed me a bunch of pics taken with a d700 and a 16-35 lens..
I was stunned about the sharpness, so i decided that i need a suggestion to complete the lens set for my K-X to achieve better and more effective results (what i care most in pics are: contrast/color, sharpness and a little less the bokeh )
Please consider that photography is an hobby and i'd love to shot landscapes in "manual focus" and mostly in daylight (fast lenses are not necessary..).
I also have an adapter to use nikon manual lenses
PRIMES
K 135mm 3.5 (i've it, seems quite ok. rarely)
A 50mm 1.7 (i've it, seems more than ok. often )
1st miss: a normal 28-35mm (will be the most used)
ZOOM
2nd miss: a mid wide good zoom, mostly interested about 14-35 or around that, but also wider range is ok.
1) i was thinking about one of those:
SMC Pentax-FA 35mm f/2 AL (never seen, good on paper)
Nikon 28mm f/2.8 AI-s (pleased by results, seen on d700)
SMC Pentax 35mm F3.5 (little disappointed, seen on k20)
Sigma 30 1.4 (never seen)
other not considered
2)this is more challenging..
SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL (bad quality/price)
SMC Pentax-DA 16-45mm F4 (better than the kit, far from the primes)
SMC Pentax-DA 12-24mm F4 ED AL (quite expensive)
Sigma 10-20 mm f/4-5,6 DC EX (good lens, still not like a prime)
Pentax 18-135 f3,5/5,6 ED AL IF DC WR (expensive and not wide enough)
othr
thankfully for any suggestion
I'll be frank here fistly.Dear all,
last week a friend of my showed me a bunch of pics taken with a d700 and a 16-35 lens..
I was stunned about the sharpness, so i decided that i need a suggestion to complete the lens set for my K-X to achieve better and more effective results (what i care most in pics are: contrast/color, sharpness and a little less the bokeh )
Please consider that photography is an hobby and i'd love to shot landscapes in "manual focus" and mostly in daylight (fast lenses are not necessary..).
I also have an adapter to use nikon manual lenses
PRIMES
K 135mm 3.5 (i've it, seems quite ok. rarely)
A 50mm 1.7 (i've it, seems more than ok. often )
1st miss: a normal 28-35mm (will be the most used)
ZOOM
2nd miss: a mid wide good zoom, mostly interested about 14-35 or around that, but also wider range is ok.
1) i was thinking about one of those:
SMC Pentax-FA 35mm f/2 AL (never seen, good on paper)
Nikon 28mm f/2.8 AI-s (pleased by results, seen on d700)
SMC Pentax 35mm F3.5 (little disappointed, seen on k20)
Sigma 30 1.4 (never seen)
other not considered
2)this is more challenging..
SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL (bad quality/price)
SMC Pentax-DA 16-45mm F4 (better than the kit, far from the primes)
SMC Pentax-DA 12-24mm F4 ED AL (quite expensive)
Sigma 10-20 mm f/4-5,6 DC EX (good lens, still not like a prime)
Pentax 18-135 f3,5/5,6 ED AL IF DC WR (expensive and not wide enough)
othr
thankfully for any suggestion
a. You look for a wide zoom lens and twice compare it to primes. You don't compare oranges to grapefruits and says they are too small. You want a zoom, you compare it to another zoom!
b. You say "affordable" and have DA* 16-50 and DA 12-24 in the list. And then say 18-135 (which is cheaper) as too expensive. How about just telling us a budget? Cuz IMO, DA* and the 12-24 are not affordable and definitely less affordable than the 18-135.
c. Just in case you haven't notice, the Nikon D700 is a full frame camera. The 28mm result you saw on the D700 is more equivalent to 18mm or so on Pentax. The Nikon 28mm on Pentax will become 43mm FF equivalent. Noticeable difference. So do you want 28-35 equivalent or 28-35 actual FL?
Comment by testdasi posted on Affordable lens set for best results: wide zoom and primes 30, 50 & 135 at 11/04/2011 - 20:42
johnriley wrote:
The picture illustrates perfectly what I fine useless about these new cameras...you have a very compact body with fiddly and easily nudged controls onto which you place a whopping big lens.
It still needs to be carried in the same way as a DSLR and Pentax DSLRs are so compact anyway we might as well stick with them.
Totally agree! Precisely the reason I switched to Pentax. My K-5 is definitely heavier than the GH1/GH2 but not by a significant margin.The picture illustrates perfectly what I fine useless about these new cameras...you have a very compact body with fiddly and easily nudged controls onto which you place a whopping big lens.
It still needs to be carried in the same way as a DSLR and Pentax DSLRs are so compact anyway we might as well stick with them.
Comment by testdasi posted on there are still rumours about Pentax Evil Cameras.. at 11/04/2011 - 18:28
Tyr wrote:
Dittogartmore wrote:
The smoggy polluted kind?testdasi wrote:
The 18-55 is drizzle-safe. I don't even bother to take pictures when it's pouring (I'm more worried about myself getting sick than the camera) so can't test.
Your combo sounds nice. I found the 16-50 too heavy though. None of my current lens has working weight (body + lens) above 1.3kg and even so 800 pics in 2 hours can wear your fingers down pretty quickly.
What kind of rain do you have in London that makes you sick?The 18-55 is drizzle-safe. I don't even bother to take pictures when it's pouring (I'm more worried about myself getting sick than the camera) so can't test.
Your combo sounds nice. I found the 16-50 too heavy though. None of my current lens has working weight (body + lens) above 1.3kg and even so 800 pics in 2 hours can wear your fingers down pretty quickly.
Comment by testdasi posted on New Pentaxian here! How Far Do You Push Your K5/K7 Weather Seals? at 11/04/2011 - 18:25
Also it's kinda funny when I posted the pics on another asian photography forum, one of the first few comments I received was "too much purple fringing/chromatic aberration". Nicely technical.
Comment by testdasi posted on Old Royal Naval College Painted Hall at 10/04/2011 - 15:40
Thanks all.
davidtrout wrote:
What a gorgeous set Alex. You've really captured the Baroque architecture and artwork. When you speak of the ultra wide Sigma do you mean the 10-20mm lens? If so I agree, its a little treasure.
David
It's Sigma 8-16mm. All these were taken at 8mm. What a gorgeous set Alex. You've really captured the Baroque architecture and artwork. When you speak of the ultra wide Sigma do you mean the 10-20mm lens? If so I agree, its a little treasure.
David
Comment by testdasi posted on Old Royal Naval College Painted Hall at 10/04/2011 - 12:46
Utopia Poppy wrote:
I only own the 35mm macro, and I think Unlocker (Danny) will agree that the thing rarely comes off my K7, and that you would have to prise it out of my dead cold fingers! I find it so versatile: it's great for me for landscapes, and because of my love of flower macros, is a great all round lens for me. I can visit a garden and keep the same lens on all day! And the quality is excellent.
Fiona
Ditto! The versatility is enormous.I only own the 35mm macro, and I think Unlocker (Danny) will agree that the thing rarely comes off my K7, and that you would have to prise it out of my dead cold fingers! I find it so versatile: it's great for me for landscapes, and because of my love of flower macros, is a great all round lens for me. I can visit a garden and keep the same lens on all day! And the quality is excellent.
Fiona
Comment by testdasi posted on 43mm Limited at 10/04/2011 - 12:44
Wow, where did u get the glasses from? I reckon my parents will love to have some.
Comment by testdasi posted on Glass theme and variations at 09/04/2011 - 22:27
And nothing pulls shadow and highlight like creating HDR photos from a single RAW file.
In the below HDR, to see the bars in the large window, you need to pull the original exposure down 1.5EV. To see pattern on the pillar in the lower left corner clearly, you need to pull the original exposure up 1.5 EV.
If my calculation is correct, 1 EV = 1 additional bit of data so to do the HDR from RAW, you need a minimum of 11 bits of usable DR (8 bits visible JPEG + 3 bits of "space"). Usually will need at least 1 bit more because the different colour channels clip at different rate and have different noise level.
Old Royal Naval College Painted Hall by Tùng béo, on Flickr