|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
02-25-2011, 08:24 AM
|
| |
I think the best practice in every acquisition is to never ever buy the very first of the thing you're after. Wait some weeks (even months) and decide. The price is better, and most of the problems are turned out or even fixed.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
01-17-2011, 08:05 AM
|
| |
Come on, I never had problems with eneloops in the cold.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-25-2010, 04:08 AM
|
| |
My thoughts also. Reduce the K-5 picture to K200D size or scale up the K200D to 16mpix. I have a copy of the FA*24/2 too, and I know its flaws, but I just don't care, I like it very much. Why? I like the the FOV, the colors, the build quality, the center sharpness, and so on. I think my sharpest lens overall is the DA* 50-135/2.8, but on f/8 an old Vivitar 70-210/2.8-4.0 is sharper. But I don't care either. I love to use both, in different situations. Thats what this all about, don't pixel-peep all the time, guys, because you'll always be frustrated.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
11-22-2010, 04:09 AM
|
| |
There in the menüs you can use srgb and adobe rgb color profiles, and it saved with dng, as well as the color matrix. I think PEF is a bit more compressed to dng, but not as much, and in the times of 4-16 gb sd cards that is not a big issue.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
11-12-2010, 04:32 AM
|
| |
Just a simple idea. Why these reviewers does not test the camera bodies with a good quality third party lens? There are Zeiss, etc. lenses or even the results should be far more objective with the same type of "lesser" 3rd party lenses like Tamron or Sigma to name the two largest...
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-07-2010, 06:27 AM
|
| |
I can talk about the FA* 24/2. I like it a lot, but some pentaxians can't get over with the corner IQ, which is kinda low. I was never disturbed by this, because some aspect can be easily corrected digitally (CA, distortion). Build quality is really good, It's usable from f/2.4 (f/2 is pretty smooth), and from f/2.8 it's really good.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-23-2010, 09:01 AM
|
| |
My two samples:
Your DNG:
here
The Nikon NEF:
here
I've applied only chroma denoise, developed with RawTherapee - amaze demosaicing, no sharpening.
The only difference between the two sample's developement is that the nikon file has a +1EV exposure correction, while the pentax file has only 0.26EV.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-23-2010, 08:28 AM
|
| |
Falk: did you noticed the GPS data in the EXIF? :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-22-2010, 10:03 AM
|
| |
I've made this for you, pixel peepers :)
I'm pretty much excited about this quality at ISO 6400. Wow.
Processing done with RawTherapee.
demosaicing: Amaze
sharpening: none (!)
chroma denoising: 50 (this removes color noise, not luminance noise, so most of the details are kept - just look at the rasters...)
I just don't do much pixel peeping, for I'm not printing ISO 3200+ shots, but this sensor does the same precious job like I saw on high-end Nikons (D3/D700 are really good examples :)). And don't forget that they are full-frame, 12mp cameras...
fullsize: click here |
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-22-2010, 05:42 AM
|
| |
I don't know that anyone noticed this yet, but the dng file which was uploaded here by falconeye contains a GPS location info of (50.945775, 6.980481). Nice :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-21-2010, 10:25 AM
|
| |
Without getting deeper into techical stuff, the depth of field is depends on some parameters.
One is distance to subject. Get closer, you get more blur on the background. The limit is your lens minimum focusing distance.
One is focal length. Wide angle = more depth of field (less blur) -> narrow angle (70-100 mm+ lenses) less depth of field (more blur).
The third is aperture. Wider aperture = more blur.
The size of the sensor also counts, but not in the way most of the people think. The same lens projects the same image into the viewing plane (take for instance your 28-75), it don't cares about that you're using a 35mm film or an APS-C sensor. What does count is the size of the photosites in your sensor - smaller they are, the more blur you recognize at really small sizes. But it does not affect your image in big way, like the 3 thing I mentioned above.
Also when you compose, you have to think about your subject, and its distance from the background. With a close background (like a wall behind your model) you will get less separation in DOF. You can get separation by colors and texture, but that is another view of the whole thing.
So if you place your 2 people correctly, you can get nice results with the 28-75 on 2.8-4.0 and with 50-75mm.
|
