Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
03-25-2019, 10:45 AM
|
|
You can use your own API key with a little bit of work on LR 6.14. As I understand it, it's free up to 28000 map loads or 40000 calls to the Geo Coding API, but you have to give your billing information to Google in case you exceed this. You can set quotas (or budget emails) to prevent actual charges.
I haven't personally tested it out because my photos aren't geotagged, but I'm looking to combine that with this neat work that geotags photos with google location history, now that I know it's possible to replace the API key.
|
Forum: Pentax Forums Giveaways
12-13-2014, 05:53 PM
|
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-09-2014, 06:30 PM
|
|
I was never a fan of mirrorless as I love the optical viewfinder look, but one area of possible major advantage of EVIL is the potential for a very large viewfinder, even if it is electric and not optical.
I've always wanted a bigger and brighter viewfinder with APS-C. There are optical limitations with mirrors and optical viewfinders. APS-C pentaprisms have nothing on old FF or MF VF's anyway.
Current EVF's aren't enough, yet, many are noisy and slow in low light.
With where technology is going, it will be no time until it is jerk free in low light, with no shutter lag, and noise free (real-time Topaz DeNoise4-like) and so many pixels and color gamut that it is indistinguishable from an optical viewfinder. It is simply a matter of processing power, and there's Moore's law.
I guarantee you that the technology will be there such that a EVF can look as good as an optical viewfinder to you or me in the near future.
We can have 100% coverage, XXX% size viewfinder (not rear LCD), as bright as we want in darkness from low light or say 100mm of extension tubes, 1000 f/13, and so forth.
Also, the major barrier of phase-detect auto-focus is starting to erode away.
However, for the astrophotographers out there, one day we will have very low-brightness displays, but it will probably be quite a while unfortunately.
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
04-24-2014, 10:18 AM
|
|
I adjusted my silver screw so it doesn't move around when latched, was pretty simple.
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
02-26-2014, 12:09 PM
|
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
02-01-2014, 07:00 PM
|
|
Interesting, I had heard the opposite from others on the forum, although they may have been complicated by front focus. Did you have them at the same time?
We are talkign about the original K-5, not the K-5 II (which improved a lot of AF), right?
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
02-01-2014, 08:22 AM
|
|
How is the low light AF between the two?
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
08-11-2013, 10:31 PM
|
|
Could we get a comparison in low light AF like the K-5 vs K-5 II test?
I'd like to see how it compares to the K-30 and K-5 II and I
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
07-29-2013, 12:09 PM
|
|
So are there improvements to low light AF?
Where do they fall within the K-5 to K-5 II low light AF scale?
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
07-12-2013, 09:04 AM
|
|
I'd really like to see how the low light AF compares between these (and the K-30, K-5).
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
05-25-2012, 10:40 AM
|
|
The D800 sensor is the 16 MP sony sensor scaled up. On a per-pixel basis according to dxo, it's the same. The improvements you see have to do with only having a larger sensor area, not technological pixel improvements.
Low light AF and predictive AF-C (neither are the SDM focus speeds people seem to complain about) are my biggest Pentax gripes and will definitely play a role on what system I have in the future.
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
05-24-2012, 02:25 PM
|
|
Yes, my politeness expectation was meant for those kinds of statements and I agree entirely.
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
05-24-2012, 01:06 PM
|
|
It will be a sad day when people are required to to state that what they say are their opinions, especially in something so subjective like this.
Politeness, on the other hand, is a perfectly reasonable expectation on both ends.
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
05-23-2012, 08:16 PM
|
|
Having options for color doesn't make it a double edged sword. Your weight is the only true double edged sword and I agree with that.
Video format is infact a double edged sword for different reasons. Motion-JPEG on the K-5 is easier for more extreme editing. But it is humungous and can actually be lower quality. H.264 is much smaller which is better for countless reasons, like sharing and SD card usage.
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
05-23-2012, 05:02 PM
|
|
Although like the rest of the posters, I always saw it as being splashed on the side, I think a few people will see it differently, like the OP.
The bigger problem, IMHO, is that many retailers are choosing to bundle the non-WR lens with the camera, despite having the option, according to a Pentax representative.
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
05-23-2012, 04:14 PM
|
|
This is the biggest issue and again everyone seems to be stuck on focus motor speed. The other issue is low light focus speed, IMHO. Hopefully at least the K-5 replacement can be on the same level as last generation CaNikon.
|
Forum: Homepage & Official Pentax News
05-21-2012, 06:53 PM
|
|
That's fine. The most annoying part is mixing up the position of the buttons to me.
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-28-2012, 10:22 AM
|
|
One large limitation that exists now is the processing chain of moving that raw data around (even before it hits the SD card).
Another part is the physics. I believe it's easier to design a lens that resolves more detail with a smaller true aperture (not f-ratio), due to imperfections in the glass and amount of curvature required. Since this is going on a smaller sensor, the true aperture is much smaller. The shorter focal length and more parallel incident rays to the microlenses probably have an effect, too. And you'll start to bump up against the diffraction limit soon anyway. Add in SR/VR and the sweet center spot isn't in the center anymore.
Also, the light falloff at the tele-end is significantly more than even on variable aperture zooms (which do increase the true aperture while zooming in), and of course, fixed aperture zooms.
There's also the AF system, since the depth of field will be shallower and the circle of confusion much smaller.
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-28-2012, 09:06 AM
|
|
Cropping affects the camera system the same way a teleconverter does, just in the digital instead of the analog domain. This includes affects on field of view, depth of field, resolution, noise/snr/light loss.
But you're right, the term hasn't been used in this way before really.
This is correct, in contrast to your earlier statement:
This is a good point and is exactly what's missing from marketing, though Falk dives in a bit. It goes along with what you said here:
At some point, all parts of the image will be larger than the circle of confusion and the effective depth of field will be 0 due to the lack of resolution in the source image. Does anyone know how this is accounted for?
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-23-2012, 01:15 PM
|
|
To have the same system for everyday pocketability (thin with pancake that fits in a pocket but with good quality and DOF control) yet large specialized lenses and ergonomic grip (battery grip, huge fast lenses), if needed. And also the shorter flange distance to adapt any lens desired (including rangefinder lenses).
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-19-2012, 02:47 PM
|
|
It's still in it's infancy and has a lot of room to grow.
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-19-2012, 12:52 PM
|
|
I wouldn't mind a new collapsed FF compatible mount that had an adapter to fit K-Mount in full operation, including autofocus. But maybe I'm the minority? It would only mean they'd make lenses that don't fit on old bodies, although that will probably be the case now anyways.
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-19-2012, 12:07 PM
|
|
And exactly why can't you have a shorter mount with FF? Just look at Leica. Don't tell me it is because our microlenses aren't as good.
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-19-2012, 11:26 AM
|
|
It makes sense. But I'm a bit sad because I wanted the Pentax's unmatched pancake lens design to actually go towards a thin complete system (collapsed flange depth). I guess it wouldn't fit with their superb ergonomics.
|