[wildman]

by the way, I like your shots, can you post EXIF data, I would be interested in a comparison, just to demonstrate the point. I really intended this to show what can be achieved under extremely adverse conditions

OK.
Went out and took what I believe is pretty demanding conditions - at least they are as far as I'm willing to push things and still get, what I believe, is decent quality.

Taken with K20D. ISO 1600. 1/60 sec, F/7, tripod mounted (I always use a tripod), cropped. Stopped down 2/3 of a stop.

NOTE: I do not use conventional telephotos. This was taken with 560mm FL astro scope at prime focus (about 16x) at a distance of aprox 40 feet.

I just looked at it after posting - the file was reduced from 188kb to 25kb and much worse quality. what's going on?

---

Last edited by wildman; 12-26-2008 at 01:00 PM.

[borno]

The only compensation I actually had to do, was in metering, use green button then stop down 1.5 stops to account for the K10D metering error.

That is actually something I would like to comment about. On my *istD, even manual metering allowed for exposure compensation, but the K10D does not. Given there are cases where you know the metering is off by 2 stops in manual, it would be nice to be able to dial that in.

Hey Lowell,
I remember all the work you did checking exposures with the k lenses because it drove me nuts too. Being able to add comensation with manual would be excellent I just wish they would have stuck to the old screen, I have better exposure with old lenses with my *D screen in my k10d but have to add a little more light with "a" lenses usually. I find the old screen a little better for focusing manually too, at least I seem to get more keepers with it(my eyes are getting kind of bad)

[RiceHigh]

RH

I was looking for comments regarding the image produced based upon equpment used, i.e. technical comments

Re your photos, I liked the origonals better, not the corpped images

Also, I always liked the High ISO of the *istD, just I had the K10D with me this time. (note I don't normally shoot this lens on the K10D but use it on the *istD)

Your shots went wide open, (I would guess FA300 F4.5) at 1/500 and 800/1600 ISO. I went the other way on F stop and shutter, playing a little with the shake reduction.

I used the F*300/4.5 with a "Tamron" (actually Kenko) 1.4X MC4 PZ convertor (SDM compatilble, I guess!).

Actually, if you load my photos into the Photo Browser, you can see the lens model.

I used Monopod too, IIRC (as the pics were taken almost five years ago and I am not totally sure).

And yes, you're right. This lens is tack sharp even at wide opened - amazing! And, the F*, whilst optically is identical to the FA*, it does have tripod collar and mount, unlike the FA* updated version which has none.

[SteveB]

Your image is easy enough to edit, and doing so shows the obvious underexposure and WB issue cause by green lighting. Sharpness could be a bit better but I've seen worse, it needs brighter and better lenses and/or more light to get the shutter speed up and that's what the shot needs more than anything for a crisper result. Here's my best effort at tweaking, I hope you don't mind.......

[Lowell Goudge]

It's been interesting seeing the comments on this shot. It is the worst of a series of 6 that I had the chance to take before the visitor left my yard.

I really had the camera and lens only to play with as I don't normally use this lens on the K10D. Normally I use this lens and TC on my *istD along with an AF500FTZ flash, but wanted to see what it could do on the K10D any way. It is really not fast enough to hand hold, and not sharp enough wide open.

I would be curious to see what a K20D could do in similar lighting, with respect to noise, as I am "sitting on the fence" no pun intended or reference to my subject of this photo, as to whether I shoudl get a K20D or what ever comes next (dare I say K30D? or perhaps a K1D?) as my 3-4 year decision between DSLRs has not yet arrived.

[Lowell Goudge]

OK.
Went out and took what I believe is pretty demanding conditions - at least they are as far as I'm willing to push things and still get, what I believe, is decent quality.

Taken with K20D. ISO 1600. 1/60 sec, F/7, tripod mounted (I always use a tripod), cropped. Stopped down 2/3 of a stop.

NOTE: I do not use conventional telephotos. This was taken with 560mm FL astro scope at prime focus (about 16x) at a distance of aprox 40 feet.

I just looked at it after posting - the file was reduced from 188kb to 25kb and much worse quality. what's going on?

have you tried ISO 3200 or 6400?

At some point, I am hoping that high ISO in cameras can overcome the need for fast glass