Another vote for the books of Martin Evening published by Focal-Press....

I'm presently wading thru his 'Adobe Photoshop CS2 for Photographers'. I won't pretend it's easy going!!...but it IS at least well written, concise and above all, actually reflects the software,...there are more than a few of the 200+ titles about PS that frankly don't!

Can't get the CD supplied with the book to run on my brand new and exotic computer tho'.....

After many keyboard adventures, I have managed to load the Camera Raw 3.7 and can sort of open the files in CS2/bridge......

Unfortunately, there seems to be no thumbnails, just the numbered files so it's difficult to know what one is opening without clicking on loads of files until the right one comes up by accident.


Anyone know what I'm doing wrong please?....it goes without saying that I have spent hours fretting and fuming while clicking on everything and checking all the menus repeatedly......

Hi Matt,...thanks for the speedy reply.....

To cut straight to the kill,....what is the best converter/method of getting the files into CS2 please?

CS2 is massively challenging in itself and I need all the help I can get..!!!

When loading RAW (PEF?) files into CS2 you apparently need a plug-in or update to plug-in to get the software to recognize PEF files from K10/K100. As far as I can discern this is 'Camera Raw 3.7'.....

Does anyone know if this is correct?....or,....is there a better plug-in/RAW coverter that will do the job in CS2.

Thanks for any help which would be greatly appreciated.

Good old George!....I knew you would'nt be able to ignore a baited hook!!

If you are refering to the k100 then it's ok.....

I did'nt really expect much,...but it's ok if one overlooks a basic crudness and lack of refinement........

???.........

Where is it written that a FF Pentax must have SR...?

Where is it written that a FF Pentax MUST follow all the other along the 'black plastic blob type SLR designed by Canon 30 years ago'....?

Personally, I don't want a FF,... but I would be very interested in a 30mm square sensor system with existing mount and designed, rather than styled, elements,....a sort of 'mini-medium format' but using full frame lenses. Such a system could be a great performer for all those of us who don't spend our time crouching at goal posts cluchin big white lenses.....

Theres too much 'racing bike' syndrome in DSLR's at the moment......it's all actually got more than a bit stupid.

Eventually, one of the more intelligent makers WILL break the trend of the last 30 years and head off into good modern design to get customers rather than the 'jelly mould' styling that we are all obliged to know and love.

I realise that this is heresy to many people here but it would be great if a giant killer like Pentax did it......and brought photography into the new millenium

Anyone seen the Canon G9....?

Now, THATS a real comera!......10 mil, RAW files, flash socket and "poster" sized prints,...more than enough camera for everyone here and it goes in your pocket!

Best of all it has a fantastic built in zoom so there's no point in thinking about all of these tedious lenses insuch detail.

Supposed to be as good as a digital Leica,.. thats what people on the web are saying and lets face it, they should know...

You could all start to enjoy shooting pix........

If Pentax wantsw to stay in the game then they will have to make FF models eventually as the market is moving that way. Since they were until recently a maker of 35mm bodies and lenses they still have much of the capability in place and there would not be any "backwards compatability" problems that people seem to imagine.

Whether or not FF sensors offer better image quality seems to be largely down to whether or not the claimant has a FF or APS camera.......

However, it has always been true that a big chunk of film ALWAYS beats a smaller chunk of film when it comes to image quality in most of it's many issues, so physics will dictate that this is also true with sensors.

It's basically 'horses for courses' with camera sizes and formats,...it always was, despite the delusions of folk, and it remains so in the digital era.

Hi Gwyn,.....

"........Viewfinder, no one is forcing you to buy the next super duper new model every year. People didn't do that with analogue cameras so why should you with digital. If you are happy with your camera why change it just because the next model offers a few more Mp?...."

I DON'T want to buy a new model every year........with respect, that's what I have been trying to say..... But, neither do I want to have a camera which is not only valuless for resale but also not worth repairing.

I would expect to be quite happy with k10D,..that's why I;m interested in aquiring one,.....but, I'm unwilling to pay thru the nose to get tommorows valuless junk, should i wish to trade it in, or more likely, need to get it repaired.

Hi Pete,...thanks for your message, however I can't share either your view or your logic unfortunately,...I only wish I could.

"........If you buy a new K10D from the UK now, and sell in three years time, the net cost to you may be less than £200, perhaps less than £150.."

In three years time K10D will be a piece of valuless junk,...and, sadly it will HAVE TO BE, if Pentax is to survive. At the moment there are only two model levels but that must change if Pentax are only to keep level with other mnakes notably Sony. K10 is already obsolete, so just pause for a moment and consider it's commercial appeal in three years time when there has been a K30 (2009), K40 (2010) and we have arrived at the 'K50D' with 30 mil pixels, fully articulated 100mm electronic viewfinder and super enhanced exposure/contrast control,.....??

Plus, by then there will have to be pentax models in several market slots, all with up,market features to tempt the punters.......any k10's still working will still take as good pix as now, but they will be unwanted (and valuless) junk.

Remember there will be much more market saturation in three years time than now and makers MUST keep selling new models each year just to survive.

In addition, your point about the cost/value of "high end cameras 20 years ago", is frankly nonsense,...most of them retained there value more or less indefinately over the next 15 or so years as I know well, since I was a user (and buyer) of medium formate systems during that period.