Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-10-2010, 06:02 AM   #31
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Kaunas
Posts: 1,452
QuoteOriginally posted by wll Quote
7) Images transferred thru infrared
Do you have any compatible device?

09-10-2010, 06:30 AM   #32
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,883
About the HDR feature, is the output still jpeg only?
09-10-2010, 06:50 AM   #33
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 523
QuoteOriginally posted by Edvinas Quote
Do you have any compatible device?
They have cheap USB sticks, or buy a 2nd K-r!!!
09-10-2010, 06:51 AM   #34
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tri-Cities, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,784
I'm waiting to see what the actual street price will be, but my wife is looking to dabble in photography with a digital SLR and a robust, low-end body like the K-x/K-r sure fits the bill!

09-10-2010, 07:40 AM   #35
Veteran Member
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,663
QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
About the HDR feature, is the output still jpeg only?
Undoubtedly. It will be a while yet before camera makers give us full high-dynamic-range RAW files to play with and tonemap ourselves.
09-10-2010, 08:08 AM   #36
Veteran Member
tomtor's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 382
QuoteOriginally posted by wll Quote
10) No more pre flash, infrared light for flash (it is about time)

wll
But you will still have the exposure pre flash,
only the control flashes could be avoided.
09-10-2010, 10:48 AM   #37
Pentaxian
LFLee's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Western MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,249
QuoteOriginally posted by grainbelt Quote
I wanted these specs, with this AF and sensor, in the K200D body (weathersealed with top LCD)

so I'll pass
I am with you... a k200d user, will have to pass the k-r for weather seal and top lcd... the interchangable battery is awesome though.

Lee
09-10-2010, 10:55 AM   #38
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Photos: Albums
Posts: 842
QuoteOriginally posted by tomtor Quote
But you will still have the exposure pre flash,
only the control flashes could be avoided.
This assumes you're intending a flash exposure -- and if you are, then two flashes isn't likely to be more of a problem than one. (Well, other than the potential for making your subject blink, of course.)

My point being, sometimes you want AF assist, but not a flash. Shooting in a museum or church, for example, where flash may be frowned upon, but an AF assist LED could go unnoticed. In those circumstances, a dedicated AF assist lamp is far preferable to a short burst of highly obtrusive (albeit low power) assist flash.

09-10-2010, 11:07 AM   #39
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote

Rather, it's intended for making small prints and sending photos from a cellphone, wirelessly. For that usage, IrSimple is perfectly fast enough using downsampled images. A second or so would easily transmit something suitable for, say, a 4x6 print or a blog post.

It's not a feature I'd personally use, but for somebody who owns an IrSimple-capable phone or printer, I can perhaps see the attraction.
Hmmm, y'know, I'd use that. I often end up taking a "real" picture with my K-7, and then, because it'll take a long time to go home, upload, sort, etc., I take another snap with my cell phone to post to Facebook or send to my wife.

But Bluetooth would have been way better. I don't know how much magic the "simple" puts into IR, but back in the day with the Palm Pilot, IR was finicky and irritating.
09-10-2010, 11:10 AM   #40
Veteran Member
tomtor's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 382
QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
This assumes you're intending a flash exposure -- and if you are, then two flashes isn't likely to be more of a problem than one. (Well, other than the potential for making your subject blink, of course.)

My point being, sometimes you want AF assist, but not a flash. Shooting in a museum or church, for example, where flash may be frowned upon, but an AF assist LED could go unnoticed. In those circumstances, a dedicated AF assist lamp is far preferable to a short burst of highly obtrusive (albeit low power) assist flash.
Yes (or no, because I do not get your reply), I mean the measurement flash. IR control cannot avoid that as the OP was suggesting.

And two flashes (measurement followed by exposure) is often a problem, eg blinkers and when using optical slaves for background, hair lights, etc. So using IR control will reduce the number of flashes from more than 3 to just two, and that is not really an advantage.

I don't understand why you mentioned the AF assist strobe flash, that is unrelated to wireless control.
09-10-2010, 11:13 AM   #41
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Photos: Albums
Posts: 842
QuoteOriginally posted by tomtor Quote
I don't understand why you mentioned the AF assist strobe flash, that is unrelated to wireless control.
Having re-read the first post, you may be right that this is what he meant. It's honestly not clear from his post. Certainly if he thinks there's no pre-flash, he's wrong. If he thinks there's no AF assist preflash, though, he's right.
09-10-2010, 11:19 AM   #42
Veteran Member
tomtor's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 382
QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
Having re-read the first post, you may be right that this is what he meant. It's honestly not clear from his post. Certainly if he thinks there's no pre-flash, he's wrong. If he thinks there's no AF assist preflash, though, he's right.
I think he didn't mean the Af-assist light, because that is not IR, and he explicitly mentions IR.

No big deal, it's clear we agree.
09-10-2010, 11:23 AM   #43
Forum Member
ManWithCamera's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Auburn, CA
Posts: 87
NOBODY will use IR to transfer images

QuoteOriginally posted by Mystic Quote
strange feature i'd say.. that IR data transfer..

IR transfer is already out of date.. because there's bluetooth. why didn't they implemented that? is it that much more expensive?

all the contemporary electronics, such as mobile phones, computers etc. use bluetooth.. strange move from pentax.
I can't imagine anyone using IR to transfer photographs. Speed may be improved over older IR technology, but my greater objection to IR is that it is line-of-sight! I don't want to have to set my camera down within a few inches of another device and make sure it stays pointed at it the whole time the pictures are being transferred.

They just need to make sure it works with Eye-Fi cards -- at a minimum. If they want to go further, I'd love it if the camera had built-in WiFi support.

I just don't understand why they would waste any R&D money on this functionality. Sure, they already have an IR receiver for remote triggering, but making this IR image transfer work seems to me to be a total waste of resources.
09-10-2010, 11:28 AM   #44
Forum Member
ManWithCamera's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Auburn, CA
Posts: 87
architecture photography without a tripod?!

QuoteOriginally posted by wll Quote
The more I read and see on its ISO performance the more I like it, this thing could be an awesome low light machine !

I love the new in camera HDR feature (without a tripod, very cool for those of us who do architecture or landscapes and don't want to carry a tripod around all day, fantastic).
wll
I, too, like the idea of being able to potentially shoot an in-camera HDR handheld, if I happen to run into a situation where it would be useful and I don't have a tripod with me, but I can't imagine going out to intentionally shoot architecture and landscapes without a tripod.
09-10-2010, 06:09 PM   #45
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Photos: Albums
Posts: 842
QuoteOriginally posted by tomtor Quote
I think he didn't mean the Af-assist light, because that is not IR, and he explicitly mentions IR.

No big deal, it's clear we agree.
Yep, indeed we do. I've heard enough people mistakenly refer to AF assist lamps as being IR that I must admit I just skipped over that in my head.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
af, camera, flash, k-r, k-x, love, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Landscape A View cupic Post Your Photos! 1 06-26-2010 11:33 PM
The View Jimbo Post Your Photos! 11 01-31-2009 07:15 PM
View from the Tower mk07138 Monthly Photo Contests 0 01-23-2009 07:30 PM
what a view....again distorted_vision Post Your Photos! 0 11-08-2008 10:57 AM
Papermill from a different View melander Post Your Photos! 23 08-11-2008 06:29 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:45 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top