[RobA_Oz]

From all accounts, the MX screen is exceptional, but I know what you mean. I bought an LX to get back into film, and immediately noticed the difference in the viewfinder, all of which helped me rediscover my K2DMD! Notwithstanding, the viewfinder is probably the number one reason I'd like a Pentax with a 35mm sensor, provided they don't make a monster of it, the way Nikon and Canon have. K-5 size for preference, K20D size at a pinch. Any bigger and, for me at least, you might as well be buying one of the other brands.

[ElJamoquio]

(That's right folks, using "equivalent" lenses, twice as skinny DoF on FF if thats what you want...you heard it here first. Test done in normhead's back yard, deal with it.)

If for some reason, you want to take two different pictures with the same numbers on the exif, by all means, use the same aperture for both.

If instead you'd prefer to take the same picture, you'll need to go down a stop in aperture when taking pictures with FF.

[Digitalis]

I think utilizing the shallowest depth of field possible is just a trend right now.

Last student that I had that tried to justify his rather average portraits by saying " but they have shallow depth of field" somehow thinking that that would earn him better marks when compared to other students of mine who used more sensible apertures got a D.

[bossa]

Mannersists exist in all human activities and photography is no exception. Artists, typically, would consider what they are trying to achieve with each work, awareness being part of a living process. DOF for it's own sake is not necessarily to do with that process but should respect the subject and it's relation to environment etc. The subject in isolation may have no meaning in that there are no references other than perhaps some existential perspective.There are many members here who use the same PP on all of their shots regardless of the subject and that too is another example of thinking once and doing it over and over. Powerful visual communication is more subtle and demanding than that.

In my experience it does seem that enthusiasts of The Arts tend to think of them as 'Craft' or extreme sports of some kind rather than what they are actually about.

---

Last edited by bossa; 10-21-2012 at 03:36 PM.

[thibs]

Funny I almost never do any PP but slight sharpening (because I shoot RAW).

[Allison]

Funny I almost never do any PP but slight sharpening (because I shoot RAW).

I think it all depends on the things you are shooting. All of my pictures get a little basic sharpening, noise reduction, clarity boost, and vibrancy boost (unless we are talking about the color red) and then I tweak each one individually from there. For weddings, 95% of what I need to do can be done in lightroom. High school senior portraits? Almost everything goes into photoshop for some face retouching. Personal family stuff? almost no PP at all...personal art stuff usually finds its way into photoshop. And then there is the issue of time....

[bossa]

DNG are RAW 'undeveloped' files. The so-called Post Processing stage of the image making process is actually the development or 'darkroom' stage. Whilst some images work pretty SOOC most need some work to bring out the best in them. Subsequently, I don't understand the point thibs is making in his previous post.

[vonBaloney]

DNG are RAW 'undeveloped' files. The so-called Post Processing stage of the image making process is actually the development or 'darkroom' stage. Whilst some images work pretty SOOC most need some work to bring out the best in them. Subsequently, I don't understand the point thibs is making in his previous post.

Think he was just pointing out that RAW files almost always need sharpening in PP...

[thibs]

No. What I stated is indeed true, I almost do not PP but obvius sharpening.
I do not claim it is the way to go though. PP is so boring.... My images probably could be a lot better.
I just hate PP

You guys should win prizes

[Digitalis]

I just hate PP

this is just one of the critical differences that have to be reconciled when camera makers come out with a new product - how to please everyone. I love post processing - I have done it for YEARS in the darkroom, and I still do it with my platinum prints. These days I only buy cameras that support DNG - because it is an open standard. I only use my Canon and Nikon cameras for commercial work (I also use my 645D for paid work too) but for a majority of my digital work has been done in DNG format from the K10D to the Leica M9. I would be very happy if pentax continued this trend.

[vonBaloney]

this is just one of the critical differences that have to be reconciled when camera makers come out with a new product - how to please everyone. I love post processing - I have done it for YEARS in the darkroom, and I still do it with my platinum prints. These days I only buy cameras that support DNG - because it is an open standard. I only use my Canon and Nikon cameras for commercial work (I also use my 645D for paid work too) but for a majority of my digital work has been done in DNG format from the K10D to the Leica M9. I would be very happy if pentax continued this trend.

With Adobe DNG converter (free program) and (if you use Lightroom) auto-conversion to DNG on import an option, it doesn't particularly matter if the camera itself has DNG, any RAW format will do. It would have to be a pretty rare specimen for the RAW format from any maker not to be supported in the Adobe converter...

[thibs]

With Adobe DNG converter (free program) and (if you use Lightroom) auto-conversion to DNG on import an option, it doesn't particularly matter if the camera itself has DNG, any RAW format will do. It would have to be a pretty rare specimen for the RAW format from any maker not to be supported in the Adobe converter...

Fuji XPro1

Of course I agree with you

[gazonk]

No. What I stated is indeed true, I almost do not PP but obvius sharpening.

The meaning of this statement depends on how your camera is set and which RAW converter you use (at least the Pentax DCU will respect your image tone settings).

[thibs]

this is just one of the critical differences that have to be reconciled when camera makers come out with a new product - how to please everyone. I love post processing - I have done it for YEARS in the darkroom, and I still do it with my platinum prints. These days I only buy cameras that support DNG - because it is an open standard. I only use my Canon and Nikon cameras for commercial work (I also use my 645D for paid work too) but for a majority of my digital work has been done in DNG format from the K10D to the Leica M9. I would be very happy if pentax continued this trend.

Agreed about the DNG, I myself do so since K10D.
I made possible the use of a GX10 raw taken at Photokina 6 years ago on my LR laptop in the car on the way back. Samsung did NOT prevent the SD card use though Pentax did.

IMO it's just in my head. I have no problem with darkroom stuff (also I'm by any means an expert). It's really fun.
Less so on the digital side of things but working in LR has less but still the same kind of satisfaction from darkroom stuff.
Photoshop though, I'm more thinking about "manipulating" images, not tweaking. And that bothers me.
As I said, probably just in my head...

[ogl]

I'm against FF...FF is marketing trick.