|
Forum: Monthly Photo Contests
07-08-2008, 12:20 AM
|
| |
Some nice shots, some pictures with faults, some are not wide angle and some are not even portraits....
So what was meant I think is this : A portrait, but with some surroundings or interesting background. And because we are talking about a portrait, preferrable no close-up because a clos-up with a wide angle lens deforms the portrait/face...
Where 13 is a nice picture - it is wide angle ànd a portrait - it deforms the face. As this was the intention, it's OK. Some other pictures have the same effect, not all intended I suppose but a side-effect of coming too close to your subject with a wide-angle lens.
Anyway : try to avoid vignetting (remove any filter when using wide-angle) and if you are using a flash, use an external one or don't use any :o
Try to find an interesting background and then put your subject in place, don't go too close to your subject and you'll get interesting results !
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
04-29-2008, 02:51 AM
|
| |
I really love number 3 where the bee is leaving the scene....
I used to take macro shots with the Sigma 17-70 but then I missed the 1:1.
A real macro lens 1:1 could help you a lot, better and faster focussing and the ability of staying a little bit further away from your object.
I was going to buy the Sigma 105 mm but at that time this lens was temporarily out of stock and I bought the Tamron 90mm.
I am very pleased with the Tamron lens. Extremely sharp and light, and easy to use.
I still wonder if the 15mm extra with the Sigma would have been interesting, but than I can't imagine any macro lens as sharp as the Tamron, so I am glad I took this one.
Any way, both lenses, Tamron 90mm and Sigma 105mm should be very nice for macro.
The 90mm offers the capability for portrait, the 105 is too much. The 105 gives you more distance from the object, interesting for insects. If you mostly want to macro insects, consider the Sigma or even the Sigma 180 mm ! If you buy the 180 mm and add a 2x you get e very nice and sharp tele too :ugh:!
JL
|
|
Forum: Monthly Photo Contests
04-09-2008, 05:46 AM
|
| |
Very nice shots, but many of them have a subject that not really interacts with the space...
It is the interaction that makes the picture interesting.
;)
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
03-21-2008, 07:08 AM
|
| |
No, defenately don't use SR. Use a good tripod or an equatorial mount. (such a mount compensates for the rotation of the earth)
When shooting at dawn or sunset, use a polarizing filter.
Check Astrophotography homepage of Wesley Verbraecken for more pictures or tips on astrophotography.
|
|
Forum: Homepage & Official Pentax News
11-22-2007, 01:07 AM
|
| |
This is not only Pentax's fault, consider the extra import-taxes added by other countries. This can add up to 100 % to the prices in the USA.
If prices are too high in your country outside the US (like in Europe), complaint to your ouwn government. It's the public administration who steals your money, not the manufacturer....
( and perhaps your dealer who wants a too large peace of the pie ;)
-----
Pentax K10D | Pentax ist DL | Sigma 135-400 F4.5-5.6 | Sigma 17-70, F2.8-4.5 | Pentax SMC 50-200 | Pentax kitlens 18-55 | Sigma 28mm prime 1.8 | Sigma prime 105 2.8 macro |
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-24-2007, 10:49 PM
|
| |
Just try changing some settings by default :
Sharpness : maximum,
Contrast + 1,
Image Tone : vivid.
This should get you the right results.
On the onther hand, the Jpeg conversion is not perfict with the K10D, so you should compare with shooting in RAW mode and then converting on your PC. This will defenately give you much sharper pictures.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-06-2007, 03:53 AM
|
| |
The Sigma 135-400 won't work with a teleconvertor because you won't have enough light. No more AF and problems with white balance.
On the other hand, the lens is a nice one but I seem to use the lens mostly at the 400mm edge.
This means I actually would not need a zoom but more a fixed lens and perhaps would a 500m do better.
The lens is usefull for birding but then again, a fixed lens would be better for me since I allways use it at 400mm.
ist DL | K10D | Sigma 135-400 F4.5-5.6 | Sigma 17-70, F2.8-4.5 | Pentax SMC 50-200
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-06-2007, 01:04 AM
|
| |
I have been compairing the ist DL with the K100D myself. Then I sold the K100D and bought a K10D, I kept the DL.
This pretty much covers what I think of the K100D offering 'more' than the DL...
With SR on, I always had more blurry pictures. Only when shooting from a driving car, SR was usefull, but than again, results were not perfect.
So, I would think the main reason was that SR was on...
But there are other reasons why there was a difference :
- What aperture was used ? A large aperture results in less sharpness depth...
- How steady was the photographer ? Do you both have the same steady hand ?
- Did you both use flash te same way or did you shoot normally and use the flash as fill-in ?
- If focussing was not a problem, was the exposure-time longer on one ?
- Did one person take pictures of moving objects and the other from steady ones ?
- Was SR on where it should have been off ?
etc
I would like to hear from the results you had from getting deeper into it ;-)
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-01-2007, 01:24 AM
|
| |
Very strange. I have the same experience. It looks like my DL is sharper than my new K10D !
I never had the impression with my DL that pictures were not sharp - except for when cropping estremely, but then it is the jpeg compression you see and not 'unsharpness'.
With my K10D, I have the impression that from time to time pictures are not really in focus. I changed the settings and have been testing with several settings but generally, the K10D does'nt seem 'better' than the DL when it comes to sharpness.
And I have been using the SR occasionally. All pictures I took with SR on are less sharp than without SR. (and I did turn off SR in cases with long shutter speeds ;-)
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
05-29-2007, 01:11 AM
|
| |
Using the tripod was for testing. I wouldn't use SR with a tripod in normal conditions - exept if you had a very bad tripod :lol:
Anyway, results showed that you should turn it off when not needed - or even better : only turn it on when you really need that extra step down "in the dark"...
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
05-29-2007, 01:04 AM
|
| |
Hi.
Two years ago, I bought a Pentax DSLR because I owned several older K-mount lenses I wanted to use.
After a few month's I sold my old lenses and moved to the new ones, especially designed for D-SLR's.
The reason was the same as you describe in your post.
After some research I found that there are 4- yes, four - main reasons :
1. These old lenses are not as sharp as the new ones. The glass dissipates some light in different directions and because the CCD is much more sensitive than the old film we used, these diffractions are recorded as 'soft' lightning.
2. These lenses throw light around the CCD (note the CCD is smaller than a 35mm film) - and that light is kind of reflected. This may originate more softness...
This may also interfere with the white-balance.
3. Coatings are good but not optimized for the digital camera. You might want to add a hood for this lens so ambiant light doesn't scatter or diffracts in the glass.
4. The diafragma may be reacting to slow - or even not at all - and therefore you use the whole lens (the maximum aperture), and thus adding all the abberations of the lens, where typically, these abberations are more important at the edges of the lens.
Conclusion : Although we would want to keep our lenses that performed perfectly on our older analog camera's, they can't keep up with the new lenses.
Consider also this : when did ou enlarge a picture taken with your old lens and an analog 35mm film to the size you do with a D-SLR ?
Enlarging just to the size of your screen would probably add as much 'softness' We tend to be more critical than we were in the old days. Sadly, we need new and better lenses...:(
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
05-29-2007, 12:41 AM
|
| |
I have been using the ist DL for two years now and recently got a K100D for testing.
After taking about 100 pictures outdoors with SR on, and watching the pictures on my laptop, I had the impression that pictures were less sharp than on my DL.
I use a Sigma 17-70 lens, so at first I thought the K100D was allergic to this lens.
Then I did a test with the two camera's on a tripod and the Pentax kit-lens (the 18-55).
I took several pictures of the same object - a roof in front with a landscape behind, with both cameras and for the K100D with SR on and off.
Strangely indeed, it seemed that pictures with SR on were a bit less sharp than with SR off !
Then comparing with the ist DL, these pictures were even sharper !
So I think it would be better not to use the SR unless you are shooting in very poor lightconditions.
You probably will gain on batterypower not using the SR...
And then, why should Pentax put a knob on the unit for turning it of, if there would not be any reasen to turn SR off ?
Conclusion : Turn SR off if you don't need it.
Because of the other improvements on the K10D (especially the flash that goes higher than on the DL), I retuned the K100D I had for testing and ordered a K10D.
Probably I won't be using the SR at all ;-)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-11-2006, 06:15 AM
|
| |
For Pentax, you have the choice between Tamron, Sigma, Pentax...
And a good alternative, an all-purpose-walk-around-lens is the
Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 EX DG (for analog/film)
Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC MACRO. (for Digital)
I compared it with the Pentax 18-55 that came with my ist DL, and except for a larger zoomrange and a faster lens, it focussed slightly faster too. I noticed no vignetting (which was a bit the case with the cheaper Pentax-lens).
So, this new Sigma lens is a good and fast all-purpose lens which might give you a nice zoom-range with very sharp images, even in low-light contidions.
Because it is a fast lens (2.8 in wide), you have the opportunity to make more creative pictures than with most other 'standard' lenses.
Give it a try ! You probably won't be using any other lenses anymore (except for a telezoom lens as a 50-200...)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-11-2006, 05:44 AM
|
| |
I have been using the Sigma APO 135-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG for three months now on my ist DL.
Although not as crisp-clear as my Pentax DA 50-200, the lens performs well, even in low-light contidions.
The lens is just fast enough for wildlife shooting, but if you really want extra zoom, you might want to add the 1,4 multiplier....
The lens should be available new for under 600 $. Spectacular lenshood and good carrying-bag included.
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3275&navigator=3
If you look on the Sigma site, the pictured lens is WITHOUT the lenshood ;-)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-11-2006, 05:33 AM
|
| |
I have been using the Sigma APO 135-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG for three months now and this might be a better choice as you will increase the zoom capability and still having a rather fast lens (for a 400 mm).
Price is very nice for this lens.
Pictures are sharp and the lens isn't too slow focussing.
I also own the Pentax 50-200, and althoufh this lens is'nt the fastest, it allways results in christal-sharp images, as long as you have enough light.
It is a very good lens for it's price, with better contrast and sharper than the Sigma lens.
Why this lens might be interesting, it is intended to use on DSLR's only, so all the light is used on the CCD.
If you are on a budget, take the Pentax lens, but you won't get mucht more than the lens you already have. If you can spend some more, try the Sigma 135-400, the most affordable 'ultra' zoom lens.
|
