|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
07-27-2013, 03:00 AM
|
| |
There is a brand new Noise Ninja 4 incorporated in Photo Ninja v1.1 Pre-release that is incredible. It is extremely simple and fast, and the results are far superior to NN 3 and ACR/LR. I would even venture to say that it may be the new gold standard in noise reduction, although I have not yet done head to head comparisons with Topaz DeNoise 5 (which is painfully slow and cumbersome). Because Photo Ninja works as a standalone program and as a Photoshop plugin or filter, NN can be applied either to raw or converted files. Just another reason for people to give PN a serious look.
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
06-19-2012, 10:47 AM
|
| |
If a FF K-11 mirrorless camera has a high quality EVF and is significantly smaller and lighter than other FF cameras and is attractively priced, I expect that it would be a great success. But those are big "ifs".
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
05-22-2012, 03:12 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
02-04-2012, 10:24 PM
|
| |
$250 is approximately the difference in price between the Nikon J1 and V1, with the main difference between the two being the EVF in the V1. And it is a relatively low resolution EVF.
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-24-2011, 06:30 PM
|
| |
Somehow, this thread got resurrected. My opinion is that the photographer matters much more than the lens. Furthermore, the photographer's skill at digital editing is far more important the the lens and the camera combined. I say this as one who uses only high quality gear, but the truth is that good post-processing trumps everything else except artistic vision.
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-13-2011, 10:17 AM
|
| |
I find it interesting that at a time when the photographic world is moving decisively to smaller cameras, some people want larger ones. And I'm referring to serious shooters lusting after high quality cameras that are lightweight and compact. Personally, I won't mind if Ricoh/Pentax does produce a FF camera, as long as they keep cranking out top of the class APS-C cameras as well. My Canon and Nikon FF buddies are genuinely envious of my neat little kit of K-7 and Limited lenses.
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-15-2011, 03:39 PM
|
| |
The facial features are just right for those particular photos, IMO. If I had used a longer lens, they would be different photos, but not necessarily better ones. I'm not taking portraits for a high school yearbook, which must always be "flattering" (and invariably boring.) I want photos that have impact, and I can achieve that with a variety of focal lengths. To return to the original topic of the FA43 vs. the FA50/1.4, I would bet that if I showed people a series of portraits taken at 43mm and 50mm, very few would be able to tell the difference based on facial features alone.
On the two FA43 color photos of the baby, look at the smoothness of the OOF hair and the clothing. For portraiture, you can hardly do better than that with any lens.
Regarding the bokeh with busier backgrounds, I have not taken many such photos with my FA43, but bokeh can be a bit nervous at f1.9. Stop down just slightly, and it is much better. The real strength of the FA Limiteds is how they render subtle tonal transitions. This is what sets them apart from other lenses, not the bokeh, as fine as it may be. Some photographers may prefer the slightly harsher rendering of the more modern lenses. That is their privilege, and they have a number of fine DA Limiteds from which to choose.
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
07-18-2011, 04:05 PM
|
| |
I fail to see the point of having a small camera hanging off the back end of a large lens. Why bother?
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-20-2011, 08:20 PM
|
| |
I've engaged in more than my share of lens discussions, mainly for the fun of it, but I have come to the realization that in the digital age, most photographic artistry takes place at the computer. It does help to start with a photo of an interesting subject that is sharp, well composed and properly metered, but that is rarely sufficient to create an image with real impact. Moreover, digital editing skills are not technically complicated or difficult. Yet so few people make the effort to develop them. When I try to convince my friends of this, they usually respond by going out and buying another expensive lens.
For the record, I do love my FA Limiteds beyond all reason, but that is because I derive pleasure from the quality of their rendering. Still, many of my all-time best photos have been taken with much more pedestrian zoom lenses.
Rob
Robert Goldstein Photography |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-20-2011, 06:42 PM
|
| |
My guess is that some people buy the FA77 and other Limited lenses with the expectation that their photography will automatically undergo a dramatic improvement. When this does not happen, they are then disappointed. None of this should be surprising, because, as we all know, it is still the photographer, not the gear, that makes a good photograph. Perhaps it is this fact that some people don't "get."
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-03-2011, 02:18 PM
|
| |
It depends on whether you want to sample the FA31's magic or expand the range and flexibility of your lens kit. Either path is reasonable and depends on your own personal values and needs. The DA35/2.8 is undoubtedly a great lens, but its rendering quality is different from that of the FA Limiteds. You might also consider the FA43, which I regard as the finest of the FA Limiteds and which works very well as a portrait lens. It is about half the price of the FA31 at B&H.
Someone above said something to the effect that once you get the bug for the FA31, you cannot rest until you have one. That is a classic symptom of LBA, a rather common malady around here. :D
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-07-2011, 04:32 PM
|
| |
Well, you can also stand back a bit and crop the image, which is what I did with the portrait that I posted above. I have gotten some outstanding portraits with even shorter lenses, such as the 31 Limited. I'm sure that we have all seen wonderful people pictures taken with true wide angle lenses. One just has to learn how to get the best results from any given focal length.
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-09-2011, 12:44 PM
|
| |
The DA* 16-50 has been my workhorse lens for the past two years, and I am highly satisfied with its optical performance, which I would rate a notch above that of the DA 17-70, which I previously owned. I also own the 31 Limited and the 77 Limited, which are optically superior, but not by as much as one would think. They have a clarity that leaves one thinking that there is no glass whatsoever in the lens, and it is easy to fall in love with such lenses.
That said, post-processing can do more to affect rendering qualities than can the lens itself. This includes the choice of raw processor and its optimal application, as well as skill in the use of Photoshop. That is where the magic really happens, IMO. Developing one's digital editing proficiency, along with an artistic vision, will improve one's photography more than any lens or camera.
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
12-29-2010, 04:23 PM
|
| |
I see the K-5 as a 2 to 3 generation camera, because IQ is so good that further improvements are likely to come in relatively small increments. Improvements in AF will certainly interest some users, but not most. Still, one never knows what technology will bring our way that might prove irresistible. Clean ISO 52,000 and a DR of 16 stops, for instance, will tempt almost anyone.
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-16-2010, 09:04 AM
|
| |
As I see the new samples posted at dpr, it appears that the on-chip NR of the K-5 at ISO 3200 and above is effective and quite good at retaining detail. Otherwise, it would appear that the only differences between the K-5 and the D7000 can be explained by differences in the lenses used and exposure. Also, GordonBGood has looked at the Imaging Resource raw files and confirms that the K-5 has slightly larger DR at ISO 800 and below, but that there is otherwise very little IQ difference between the two cameras, certainly not enough for choosing one camera over the other.
John Bee has stated that high ISO noise from the K-5 cleans up more easily than that from the K-7000. We will see if his observation is confirmed by others.
Rob
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-03-2010, 04:20 PM
|
| |
Some may consider the price of the K-5 a bit steep, but you do get an awful lot of camera for it. Moreover, the K-5 would appear to be a 2 or 3 generation camera, meaning that one should not feel a need to upgrade for at least that long. With my K-7, I sort of knew that I would be upgrading to its immediate successor when I bought it, but I needed a new camera for a major photo excursion and could not wait. On the whole, I have been very pleased with the K-7, but the new sensor in the K-5 is too good to resist. I just hope that the final production model lives up to our expectations.
Rob
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
04-29-2010, 12:05 AM
|
| |
I really don't miss the local editing very much. That's because all of my good images are exported to Photoshop for serious work. I love the Nik Suite, which I find to be much better than LR in in terms of local and global adjustments. (Just give Viveza 2 a try, and you will see what I mean.) Yes, you can use Nik as a LR plug-in, but you will be working on TIFFs, not RAW files, so I see no advantage to not working in PS, where you can benefit from its many features. If you work with layers, PS in non-destructive too, but it is not a RAW file.
So my workflow is to use Capture One 5 Pro for RAW conversions, because it renders so beautifully, and it has a wonderful user interface and excellent adjustment tools. The best photos are processed as TIFFs and then opened in CS4 for whatever additional work needs to be done. It's a very smooth operation, I think. I realize that there are some folks who want to do everything inside their RAW converter, but I think that means missing out on some powerful editing tools in PS. If I were going to limit myself to a single program, it would be CS5, which is due out next month. It will have the same ACR as LR 3 that is much improved over the current version, but I still prefer C1 for RAW conversions.
Rob
|
