|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
01-19-2013, 01:29 PM
|
| |
Yes we definitely think alike! Also, thats horrible about the red streak during long exposures... that would have made me furious. I am definitely excited by the prospect of a pentax FF. To be honest, a pentax FF with 24mp, good long exposure performance, and weather resistance would be my next body without question (it would also further validate those nice pentax primes).
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
01-19-2013, 11:16 AM
|
| |
I'm a NIkon shooter who was about to pull the trigger on a d600 kit but am now going to Pentax.
My plans for Pentax are K5 IIs + 12-24 + sigma 35mm 1.4 + sigma 70-200 2.8 OS
I shot the d600 and found it to be quite nice. However, I was upset by Nikon's lack of response on the sensor oil issue (which is real! however it seems to get better over time) and the build quality of the camera (which is good but not d300/K5 levels). I also found the autofocus points to be very centralized and not very useful considering how much of a step backwards this is from the d300/d700.
A great d600 kit could be:
D600 body
16-35 f4 VR
50 1.8g
70-200 f4 VR
That kit is about the same price as my k5 iis kit, and the high iso IQ is going to be better (but not as much better as you may think). If I hadn't seen how lush the colors straight out of camera are on the new pentax models and the staggering long exposure performance, the d600 would be my camera. Sharpness appears to be about the same and the Nikkor 70-200s are going to be better than anything from pentax (so far) or sigma, tamron etc etc (although maybe not worth the extra $$ to most shooters).
I've never had a client able to nitpick over the dof or iq difference between aps-c and ff... only other photags for the most part are going to notice or appreciate this difference.
Another primary reason for me to go Pentax is I can grab a second used K5 body for well less than 1000, while another d600 body is going to cost a fortune. The d600 is not a $2000 camera body to me because the small autofucus point spread and build. If you are shooting events the d700 is a far better option. For general casual use the d600 or k5 ii are going to play pretty equal (assuming you can get the lenses you want on either mount). I regularly print 24x36 inch prints and even a sharp 12mp image is perfectly acceptable for this size, so don't sweat the 24mp.
good luck!
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
01-17-2013, 06:59 PM
|
| |
Thanks for the kind words! No ND filter used, it was very very dark where I was shooting under the tree. The light was very even (coming off the clouds mostly) which was very helpful for the exposure.
Why do you say I may be disappointed in K5? Does it not do well over 30 seconds?
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
01-17-2013, 05:56 PM
|
| |
Here is one quick sample from a few years ago. It was DC cherry blossoms late at night, exposure was for several minutes. JPEG straight out of camera with no PP. I like to take exposures at least this long because I just get a kick out of how differently a scene looks at night as opposed to the day. It's not award winning work, but it's my favorite way to relieve stress (I also shoot occasional events and those induce stress!)
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
01-17-2013, 05:35 PM
|
| |
B- thanks for the recommendation! I will be sure to buy through those links.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
01-17-2013, 03:34 PM
|
| |
Hi pentaxians, I've actually been on the boards since 2009 but only posted briefly back then due to a purchase of a spotmatic. I love this forum and am glad I have an even better reason to post again... I'm switching to pentax digital.
My reasons for swapping are probably a bit atypical; I am doing it for long exposure performance. I loved my Nikon D90's long exposure performance without the need for dark frames (long exposure noise reduction). Nikon's latest cameras, including the d7000, show horrible hot pixels at even mild exposures of a few minutes at base ISO. The new 24mp APS-C sensor shows hot pixels below 1 minute. I was particularly disappointed that the d7000 and d800 had long exposure performance issues; these are great cameras otherwise.
I've seen samples of K5 long exposures and my jaw hit the floor... I've seen hot pixels on the K5 develop after a 1 hour exposure that the latest Nikons show in 45seconds. This is a paradox to me considering the K5 and the D7000 have a similar (identical?) sensor. I'm assuming the K5 II and IIS have similar long exposure performance to the classic K5?
I basically wanted a Nikon D300S with better high ISO, a built in level, and better resolution. The K5 IIS is perfect for me. I'm going to pull the trigger on a K5 IIS as soon as I select some lenses to purchase.
Thanks! Once I grab the camera I will start posting much more
|
|
Forum: Travel, Events, and Groups
11-17-2009, 11:44 AM
|
| |
Haha I don't hang out with any canon shooters so I think we are good! I love mongolian barbecue
|
|
Forum: Travel, Events, and Groups
11-17-2009, 11:15 AM
|
| |
I'm in! Are guests allowed or is this a pentaxian function only?
|
|
Forum: General Talk
11-12-2009, 01:55 PM
|
| |
About Hasan:
I'm generally against the death penalty for cost reasons as well as for the occasional wrong execution... but in this case I wouldn't loose any sleep over it.
I do believe though that this man is absolutely insane and executing an insane man doesn't really do anything. He was obviously prepared to die on the day he committed his crime (Hasan)- it seems like the death penalty may end his suffering rather than prolong it.
Muhammad was also probably insane but he was cold, calculating, and very much afraid to die. In this case I believe the families of the victims' desires are more important than ours. If they want him dead then so be it. I would imagine his execution didn't actually bring them any solace but only satisfied revenge, but then again I've never been in their shoes so its hard for me to speculate.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
11-12-2009, 01:41 PM
|
| |
EXACTLY! This is because of the recent focus on terrorism and radicalism in the mainstream. The media outlets focus on it more because it sells newspaper/brings in webtraffic if the name muslim is in the headlines
|
|
Forum: General Talk
11-12-2009, 01:28 PM
|
| |
good riddance... his ego swelled much larger than his intellect
|
|
Forum: General Talk
11-12-2009, 01:06 PM
|
| |
The religion really has nothing to do with it. The "radical muslim" is a cultural phenomenon. The religion is used as a means to indoctrinate and to push a certain political or cultural agenda (terrorism etc). The actual religion, when practiced traditionally, is very similar to the other major world religions.
On a side note, no christian can make a blanket statement saying all muslims are radical. Do you realize how many radical christians there have been over the years and how much blood they have spilt?
Hasan was a mental case. His religion was his oasis and he used the cultural radical element of that religion to cover up and supplant his personal inadequacies. He was a 39 year old lonely single man with zero social contact... his religion didn't make him do this his tiny **** did.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
10-29-2009, 03:21 PM
|
| |
Yes it definitely will be able to. You need to make sure you are installing a 64 bit version of the operating system. With 64 bit systems you can run literally more ram than you will ever need. My computer supports 16 gigs of ram (But I doubt I will ever see any improvement after 4 unless doing some hardcore editing which I never do)
Your maximum amount of ram is limited by your operating system and motherboard. See what kind of motherboard you have, how many ram slots it has, and what the maximum amount of ram it supports are. Pm me if you want some help!
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-29-2009, 01:35 PM
|
| |
That's definitely the issue with this shot. Try this suggestion and post some more for a better critique!
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
10-29-2009, 01:24 PM
|
| |
No no this isn't about me wanting anything to be illegal/banned/restricted/ or outlawed.... It's about if there is a right or wrong with regards to street photography.
You mention "class" and "taste" of the board members' photos. What constitutes class and taste?
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
10-29-2009, 12:41 PM
|
| |
This is a good discussion because this raises an interesting issue with photography. From what i've gathered from your last two posts, you do not believe there is an ethical element to street photography... so in other words do whatever you want with your camera in public no matter what.
How does everyone else feel? Is there a place for ethics in street photography? Or does street photography need only to conform to the laws the street resides in?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-29-2009, 12:14 PM
|
| |
The HSM is nice. It focused great on my Nikon. The only issue with these lenses is the quality control. Some produce tack sharp images from the get go, and others come soft and will need to be sent back for repair. It seems like you either get a winner or a dud right from the factory... and once its taking sharp photos it seems like it will be reliable from that point on.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
10-29-2009, 12:06 PM
|
| |
You are judging her when you say that there is some kind of irony in photographing her when she is doing something that you deem unacceptable. I agree, it is in poor taste to flaunt porn on the street, but its equally in poor taste to stick a camera in her face against her will. As you mentioned it is my opinion, and I am making a judgment just like you are. There will always be disagreement on which instances a photo is going to be unethical or not. The point is that there is an ethical issue to be raised. Not all street photography is morally neutral just because its street photography. I'm not asking people to agree with me that the porn peddler shot is unethical, I'm asking that people acknowledge that there's more to it that just whether its legal or not.
The fact that the woman is in public and can be legally photographed doesn't mean at all that it is ethically sound. Think of all the things that have been legal that are completely unethical (ie slavery, woman's voting rights etc etc). Legal doesn't always mean right.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
10-29-2009, 11:39 AM
|
| |
You didn't read the thread. My issue isn't whether the woman is doing something wrong its whether or not its ok to photograph people against their will. I mentioned the woman and what she was doing to show that the logic of doing something offensive to someone who offends you doesn't make your actions ok.
It's obviously legal, and of course media sources wouldn't care. That doesn't make it ethically sound.
It's status as a "street photo" has no bearing on whether or not its morally acceptable to do.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
10-29-2009, 10:49 AM
|
| |
I definitely will! I'm always itching to meet people in the area that like to shoot. if i find some kind of gathering on here or anywhere else I'll shoot you a PM
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
10-29-2009, 10:46 AM
|
| |
I use an om2 and they are really remarkable. The viewfinder is ENORMOUS and very clear. That's an incredibly fair price for a restored om, someone should grab it!
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
10-29-2009, 10:40 AM
|
| |
What point of yours am I proving? That she was violating people and you are simply following suit by violating her?
My point is that neither you nor her have the moral justification to violate someone on the street. It may not be illegal, but just because it is legal doesn't mean you should do it. She shouldn't be selling porn on the street where your kids can see, and you shouldn't be taking pictures of people against their will with them shielding their face with their hands. There, that's fair right?
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
10-29-2009, 10:13 AM
|
| |
What she is doing on the street is not relevant at all to what we are talking about. If I see someone on the street who is doing or saying something that I personally don't approve of it still does not give me the right to stick a camera in their face to irritate them.
If you feel it necessary to point out that she was violating you and you therefore violated her with your camera... doesn't this prove my point more or less? In that particular instance there was a "violation" of something; in this case revenge on a smut peddler by taking her picture against her will.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
10-28-2009, 04:32 PM
|
| |
I definitely see where you are coming from, and all of your points have merit here. I guess I am speaking more from the perspective of the subject than the photographer.
What we are doing here is injecting a morality into an art form... and there certainly is a dilemma when one decides what is more important: the sanctity and respect of the subject or the art object. Just because the famous street photographers you mentioned took brilliant candid photos on the street does not mean it is ethically sound.
And one can argue it certainly goes on a case by case basis. I'm not arguing that candid photography is universally wrong, I am saying there is a very strong moral issue with capturing images of people in a deceptive way... and subsequently publishing these images without their permission.
The question of how much merit one should receive when snapping photos from a coat pocket boils down to a fundamental issue with art in general: does the author's intention mean anything with regards to the value of their art object? It's very complicated. In my opinion intention matters. it may not matter to people giving out pulitzers or to publishers or to pros trying to make money... but it matters in a sense that it stops becoming art and starts becoming a product when the intent of the author gets thrown out the window. Snapping a lucky frame from your coat pocket is very different from seeing an image and then using your skill to capture it just the way it needs to be captured.
So, I definitely disagree on if how you get the photo matters. I certainly believe it does. For moral reasons as well as whether someone deserves artistic merit.
But... I can hardly say my beliefs are the stone cold truth and I am CERTAIN others hold very different views. It's just my take on what art should be and what the rights of the subject are.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
10-28-2009, 01:47 PM
|
| |
I personally would feel a little violated if I caught someone taking up close photos of me when I was unaware. If I am part of a scene, amidst a crowd, or asked if i am willing to have my portrait taken then its fine... but if someone is hiding a camera in their coat sneaking up on me that is plain wrong. There was an earlier posting of a photo with a woman putting out her hand in front of her face, obviously not wanting to be photographed. Theres nothing artistic about that.
From my experience many great street shots come with eye contact, when the photographer has been given the ok.
Theres nothing artistic or noteworthy in snapping photos at random from a coat pocket. You aren't composing nor are you able to gauge what kind of power your image will have before you snap it. You might get lucky.. but the image will be hollow because it was just luck of the draw.
I will take out my camera in public and shoot crowds getting on the train, or people crossing the street, or a lone person with their back turned looking at something. In these photos though identity isn't important. Otherwise I ask for permission, and my photos surely do not suffer because of it.
If you are taking pictures of a scene and someone happens to look at you or become an involved subject, thats not your fault and its simply a piece of the scene. If you hunt people using gimmicks, then it is exploitation.
Now if you are doing documentary.... thats a different subject that I havent thought about enough. But if its purely for art's sake, don't exploit.
|
