Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
12-30-2007, 06:18 PM
|
|
After I took a series of pics with my homemade pinhole lens, I noticed that there were big chunks of crud on my sensor/filter assembly.
(Taking an overexposed shot of a blue sky at f/22 or higher is a great way to see sensor crud. The pinhole lens is about f/145, so it shows any crud REALLY well.)
I tried using the sensor shake, but it doesn't always work, and it didn't budge the crud on my sensor.
I ordered a $22.50 cleaning kit formulated for the tin oxide sensor the K10D uses from an online site, but in the meantime, I found the old blower I got with an HP 20 film scanner, and after a few tries and test shots, got all of the crud off the sensor/filter without having to touch it. Wew!
Grinding my own telescope mirror has taught me to keep my hands (and anything else) off the optics unless the crud can't be removed any other way.
Just because a cleaning kit costs $100, it doesn't mean it will leave you sensor/filter better off than not using it.
Make sure you have a clean "dust-free" workspace, strong battery, keep the camera pointed down, lock up the mirror for cleaning, blow up with the blower, but make sure the blower tip never gets close to the sensor. Remember the image view is reversed and upside down when aiming the blower at the crud.
So, the little case with ewipes, E2 fluid, and sensor wipes, is tucked away in my camera bag.
My plan is to never use the cleaning kit unless the crummy old blue bulb blower doesn't work anymore.
:o
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
12-12-2007, 04:29 PM
|
|
The biggest fish I caught in the last twenty years. :)
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
11-11-2007, 03:49 PM
|
|
I repurposed a body cap into a pinhole lens by drilling into the body cap a central hole, then installing a piece of aluminum foil on the inside of the body cap, and then pierced the foil with a #10 needle.
I will probably make another one, and try a smaller hole, probably on something less reflective than aluminum foil.
I was surprised at how long the focal length was, and also by the diffraction grating effect whenever the lens was in direct sunlight.
Here is the best pic so far, sans dust bunnies!
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-24-2007, 10:41 AM
|
|
I can fix the horizon, but I can't add any more lighthouse without returning to Little Point Sable.
But, I can take away lighthouse.:D
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-23-2007, 04:27 PM
|
|
The first shot is great! The highlights on her hair, and arms, and the slightly sideways glance, make her stand out. The skin tones look natural.
The model's pose (leaning forward) shows and creates interest. The red chair and dark blue/black background work to add depth.
The second shot, while nice, (and with a good facial pose from the model), would have worked better with more contrast between model and background.
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-23-2007, 03:57 PM
|
|
This was my favorite shot from a recent vacation to Michigan. I like the way the top of the lighthouse frames (or obstructs) the top right part of the picture, and how the waves curve away into forever at top left. I like how the girls in their bathing suits set the time and the place, and how the little ant like people on the ground echo that setting. But enough about me - what do you think?
|
Forum: Monthly Photo Contests
10-23-2007, 08:16 AM
|
|
In my opinion, cityscapes should have people in them, and none of these finalists meet that measure.
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
10-08-2007, 10:09 PM
|
|
I took aurora pictures with a point and shoot camera whose maximum exposure is 16 seconds. Some of them turned out OK.
Northern lights are very rare at 40 degrees N latitude (south of Chicago, IL).
So, I don't think they are close to impossible to take, just impossible to schedule! Aurora wee hours of November 8, 2004
Duplo,
Great shots! I am very impressed at how you combined the natural light and the flash to get such nice images.
Sorry for hijacking your thread.
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-20-2007, 03:44 PM
|
|
Thanks for the feedback.
In the first 4 hours of use, the focus scratchiness has gone away.
Perhaps the lubricant had dried out or wasn't applied everywhere it needed to be.
The 18-55mm lens is very light weight compared to my old non-autofocus 40-80 f/2.8-4 macro zoom.
The old zoom cost me $159 in 1980. Taking inflation into account, that's worth $440 in today's dollars. Probably not many people would pay that today!
Maybe plastic lenses are OK, even if they aren't as durable? (and, the newer lens doesn't have to illuminate a full 36 x 24mm frame,)
Guess I'll have to take some pictures with both and see how they work.
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-20-2007, 11:25 AM
|
|
I just bought a K10D with the kit lens. I find that the manual zoom makes a scratching sound when I manually focus the lens. Is this normal?
It is making the kind of noise that I have heard after accidentally drop kicking a lens :( , but not as bad as burying a lens in the sand.
I have to say, I haven't bought a new Pentax lens in over 20 years. I have never had a new lens that would make this kind of noise, but maybe they aren't as smooth as they were in the distant past?
Is a scratchy sound and feel normal when manually focusing?
|