Originally posted by MarkJerling Annie and I have just returned from Otago where we did the Central Otago Rail Trail from Clyde to Middlemarch.
Fantastic trip. We used a company shebikeshebikes for bike hire, shuttles and accommodation and they did a superb job at a very fair price. I highly recommend them should you decide to do such a jaunt.
Here's a few photos.
Thanks for sharing, Mark. I think the Pentax-F 35-70mm is a proper stack-o-primes. When I put it on my Pentax, the images it rendered just looked very, very modern. Nowadays, they can be had for peanuts. Possessed AF is the right term for its AF.
Originally posted by zkarj I just recently saw a comment in another forum from a lady who frequently prints large and that was "I don't know why people keep asking for 300ppi when 240 will do."
I know there is a Kiwi Pentaxian from Waikato with an old Pentax DSLR (K-30, maybe?) who gets his photos on magazines many times, but I am not sure if he's on this forum.
I believe that 300DPI is just the suggestion for optimised printing, meaning they want photos that are optimised for 300DPI and it's up to the publishers to scale them down. Many of the modern mirrorless ones don't really scale properly with 300DPI, even those with higher MPs. Some photographers scale their digital pixels to to make sure that nothing will overlap. Oftentimes, when printed, a DPI will have to cater for a couple of pixels and overlaps will render the whole image rather muddy but not pixelated. It's hard to explain here but can be demonstrated easily in-person.
Prints are still my final products/image and Pentax printing is a different story. The satisfaction is way up there and I print at 300DPI.
Originally posted by seventhdr Another thing to think of is that the gerneal viewing distance is 1.5 x the diagonal of that you're viewing. So an 8 x 10 print with a diagonal of 12.8 inches should (???) be viewed at about 19 inches from the print. A 1m x 2m print on a wall would be viewed at 3.35m from the print. A billboard at 6m x 3m is viewed at 10m.
This makes sense when you look at the resolution of large billboards, especially the electronic ones, and observe just how large the individual pixels are but when viewed at a reasonable viewing distance (greater than or equal to 1.5 x the diagonal) that there is no notable pixilation.
Regards
Chris
This is good info, Chris. That's why it's important to ask the person/shooter what the final product medium is.
Originally posted by GUB Yeah -- my first 1000mm lens! Handheld shot of my silly Magnolia flowering now while old season leaves still adorn the tree.
Sometimes you have to take a gamble on the wording - paid off in this situation! Mirrors are so damn hard to use I don't blame someone for thinking it was faulty.
I saw this on TM. Congrats on the purchase. Shooting one of these is always a different experience.