[ogl]

I don't understand any word of RaduA. I have no reason for complaint -
I don't catch his strange position and very inadequate reactions.
He is the sample of some kind of prejudice and he has no ability to debate with any man who can express opposite opinion.

[zoltan1983snapper]

Will you both please just shut up?

[Mr Hyde]

Here's an idea...... how about returning to the topic of posting cool tidbits of info on the K-7????

[mutedphotos]

When you hook the camera up to the tripod, you should be able to go with 30 second exposure, up to a minute, and still have stars as spots

I read an article (I believe it was at the luminous landscape) that mentioned the "rule of 600" when it came to night photography.

Basically what it says is that to keep the stars from streaking, divide the 35mm equivalent focal length into 600 and that will tell you the maximum exposure you can do for that focal length before the stars start to streak.

So in the original post about using the 31/1.8 lens, at that focal length you can't go beyond a 13s exposure if you want to keep the stars as points (31x1.5=46.5mm 35mm equivalent. 600/46.5=12.9 or ~13s)

Obviously the wider the lens the longer you can shoot and still have stars as points. With the sigma 10-20 at the 10mm end you can go up to 40s (10x1.5=15, 600/15=40)

EDIT: I suppose I could have made that simpler by just saying that for a 1.5x crop sensor, use 400 instead of 600 and you don't need to convert to the 35mm equivalent. 400/31=12.9, 400/10=40, etc

[janneman]

Here's an idea...... how about returning to the topic of posting cool tidbits of info on the K-7????

Wel, at least this helps making it the longest Pentax thread ever

[janneman]

For me I would give up fast fps (not often useful especially when AF-C is not able to follow) for an articulated LCD because my back would be relieved and I would look less funny when trying to get some angles.

Oh remember the days when we considered P&S shooters holding that camera in front of them to look at the LCD looking weird....

[ryan s]

I read an article (I believe it was at the luminous landscape) that mentioned the "rule of 600" when it came to night photography.

Basically what it says is that to keep the stars from streaking, divide the 35mm equivalent focal length into 600 and that will tell you the maximum exposure you can do for that focal length before the stars start to streak.

So in the original post about using the 31/1.8 lens, at that focal length you can't go beyond a 13s exposure if you want to keep the stars as points (31x1.5=46.5mm 35mm equivalent. 600/46.5=12.9 or ~13s)

Obviously the wider the lens the longer you can shoot and still have stars as points. With the sigma 10-20 at the 10mm end you can go up to 40s (10x1.5=15, 600/15=40)

EDIT: I suppose I could have made that simpler by just saying that for a 1.5x crop sensor, use 400 instead of 600 and you don't need to convert to the 35mm equivalent. 400/31=12.9, 400/10=40, etc

Very interesting...definitely worth trying out

[Votesh]

When you hook the camera up to the tripod, you should be able to go with 30 second exposure, up to a minute, and still have stars as spots :
PENTAX Photo Gallery
This would then be at Iso 640-800.

Nope. At a minute they'd even be streaking with the 16-50mm set at 16mm. They may appear to be points with an image that's 600 pixels high but they are probably not depending on the lens used and shutter speed. The equation I've seen that gives the shutter speed to use to keep stars as points is 600/FL= Shutter speed(That's when using a lens with 135 film or a full frame sensor. Aps-c is less forgiving, at least with photos printed/viewed at the same size) So with the 31mm that would be about 20 seconds before stars show trails, and I can attest to that being true. Also, that photo doesn't show off the starry night to the extent I would like. I won't be buying a new camera simply for this reason, it's just one of the few things that I find my K10D completely incapable of doing as well as I'd like. It is something I'd very much like to do, and I have a feeling this new camera won't be much better than the K10D at it, and the other few things my K10D isn't good at.

Anyway, I kind of know what I'm doing now and what I'd like to do with photography in the near future. I don't need all these suggestions that I'm doing it wrong, or could do it another way, because none of the suggestions so far would actually help me get the photos I want. Unless the K7 has some new capabilities that completely dwarf those of my K10D I will probably be looking elsewhere for a new camera body. I love my Pentax camera and lenses, but not to the point of rejecting any other brand. I do this all primarily because its enjoyable for me, and I'm sure I can have fun using any brand.

[mutedphotos]

Votesh - What exactly are you looking for in terms of night photography? The shutter speed max will be the same regardless of the camera, so are you just needing better high ISO performance? If that's the case and you're looking at the D700 vs 5D, I'd say go for the D700. Not only is its noise performance on par with, or even a little better than the 5D, but Nikon also does a tremendous job of minimizing chroma noise so the resulting images have a more pleasing monochromatic noise pattern (looks more like film grain to me, instead of blotchy digital color noise).

[falconeye]

none of the suggestions so far would actually help me get the photos I want.

If you are serious about the kind of photo you have in mind, you'll probably have to do the following:

- Take a long-term exposure with the foreground (star trails).
- Create a mask for the foreground in PS.
- Take ~100 short term exposures ~10s each.
- Mask out the foreground in the 100 exposures and black it out (PS action).
- Overlay the 100 exposures, e.g., using PhotoAcute
- Now adjust black level and levels so now you get a starry night
- Recombine foreground and background from the overlay, using the same mask.

This gives you the starry night result you may have in mind. Don't expect any technology to give you the amount of light a hundred exposures can give you. Of course, a fast lens may help but beyond f/2.8, even the best lenses become soft.

[Nhawk]

Ricehigh had a dream

I'll probably be hated for this, but I think it's too similar.

[Torphoto]

I'll probably be hated for this, but I think it's too similar.

nope, now look at the Oly E-3 yes.

[mutedphotos]

nope, now look at the Oly E-3 yes.

I've seen this said a lot. Am I the only one that thinks the K-7 doesn't resemble the E-3 any more than it resembles any other comparable camera?

Edit: on that note, am I the only one that misses the button orgy design of the old Minolta 7D? I'm a fan of mechanical-looking designs and the ability to change practically every aspect of the image via a button, dial or lever was one of the reasons I lusted after that camera when it came out.

[Votesh]

If you are serious about the kind of photo you have in mind, you'll probably have to do the following:

- Take a long-term exposure with the foreground (star trails).
- Create a mask for the foreground in PS.
- Take ~100 short term exposures ~10s each.
- Mask out the foreground in the 100 exposures and black it out (PS action).
- Overlay the 100 exposures, e.g., using PhotoAcute
- Now adjust black level and levels so now you get a starry night
- Recombine foreground and background from the overlay, using the same mask.

This gives you the starry night result you may have in mind. Don't expect any technology to give you the amount of light a hundred exposures can give you. Of course, a fast lens may help but beyond f/2.8, even the best lenses become soft.

I don't have any interest in creating a photo like that. I'm not making a scrapbook, I'm taking a picture. The type of photo I'm talking about can be done with little to no PP. I've seen many examples of it

[KungPOW]

All DSLR's today look very similar to each other. Functional items (controls, grips, viewscreens), are all starting to be found in the same locations. Style cues are all very similar. All manufacturers are trying to make their product look modern with elements of history.

Canon has maintained the T90 look in all its cameras for the last 23 years. Pentax is trying to introduce style cues from the LX erra while not allowing the camera to look contrived and clunky. (to LX lovers, I am NOT saying the LX looks contrived and clunky). Sony has, IMO, the most distict look of all the DSLR's. Their A900 has strong style cues back to the Maxxum 9. It is one of the most distinct bodies, and one of the most contriversial. People love it or hate it.

Overall though, DSLR's are starting to be like the ubiquitous 4-door compact. In some ways they all look the same.