|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
03-05-2010, 10:07 PM
|
| |
Well I don't have to pay for any of the upgrades nor did I have to pay for the original copy, my school paid for it for us. The upgrades are paid for by my Wife's business, so no worries there either. :).
Don't get me wrong, I have used GIMP and still do sometimes, use RawTherapee, DCRAW, and a few other nice opensource and/or freewares. But I have so many years experience in Adobe and even writing scripts, actions, and programs for it, so there is not really anything I can't do with it and do so quickly. GIMP also doesn't have all the goodies for my Wacom Intuos3 either. :(
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
03-03-2010, 03:49 PM
|
| |
Who spent hundreds on software that may or may not do what I need it to? I've been a paying PS user since like v5 I think. I tried the trial and knew it did exactly what I needed. I have been to school for PS as well in my college career. PS does everything and anything and allows the user to do it in a quick and simple manner, hence why it is always a safe choice to work with/purchase. Since upgrades only cost $199, it is a no brainer, I upgrade every other release. :).
SageEditor is less then $40, and is quite comparable to Lightroom so far.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-30-2010, 10:02 AM
|
| |
Yes, the 200mm f/4 macros are about the same as the Sigmas. Also, yes, the 150mm is a tad better then the 180mm, but it is not actually sharpness, it is contrast(local) which to the human eye is translated as sharpness. ;)
As for the Canon MP-E 65, not all that great IMHO. Never liked it at all. Too much of a PIA to use except under studio controlled type situations IMHO. I much prefer using bellows and extension tubes for greater magnifications, much more convenient as well as versatile.
The absolute best for macro, for prints 11x14" or smaller and internet usage, is either a Panasonic FZ28/35 or LX3 + Raynox add-on macro lenses. Much easier to control and greater DOF over a dSLR for starters. If combine the Tele Macro mode of the FZ with the Raynox MSN-202 one can reach magnifications of close to 24x(24:1)!!! And again, much more versatile and easier then the MP-E 65 lens!
Done with the older FZ8K + Raynox:
A tiny crystal face on a 2mm long green moissanite crystal:
P1010248sm-1 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Quartz crystal from inside a Keokuk Geode. It is iron stained and has inclusions. Crystal is only around 1mm in length. Image is a stack of 2 shots to get enough DOF.
Iron Stained Quartz Crystal on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Raynox MSN-202, tiny crystal inclusions inside a 5-6mm round spessartite garnet, not visible with naked eye:
GemAddicts.Com Copyrighted Image on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Locust:
P1010739sm on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
100% crop of locust's eye:
Lastly, a shot using a bellows + stacked 68mm ETs + 35mm Zeiss lens:
hdr2sm_2 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
P1010752sm on Flickr - Photo Sharing! |
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
01-30-2010, 09:46 AM
|
| |
All I can say is phooey! lol. I still had my Canon gear when I bought my K10D and I tested, side by side, Canon's in lens IS in L glass(300mm f/4 IS USM L is only one I had left) to the K10D using a Novoflex 400mm f/5.6 and there was no real difference in performance that I could notice. The only main and noticeable difference was the lens IS you could visually see, and it always made me feel seasick, rofl. I even went as far to test the in body IS in the K10D up to 1200mm by adding a 3x TC onto the Novoflex, and low and behold it worked darn well and gave me a usable shot for at least 5x7" prints, not bad for a 3x TC, lol.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-30-2010, 09:40 AM
|
| |
Here are a few taken with mine on my SD14, only processing done was a little USM + local contrast enhancement to recover that which was lost during resizing for the web. But now keep in mind that the SD14 images, natively, will be sharper then any Bayer based sensor due to the design.
 |
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
01-30-2010, 09:25 AM
|
| |
Yes, I am aware of other ways, but they are far too much of a hassle IMHO. I don't have the extra time to be bouncing all over the place, hence why PS is the only real choice. :(
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-29-2010, 07:29 PM
|
| |
I wasn't aware that the lens was discontinued!?:mad:
If so, I am sure they will either be replacing it or making all mounts in the 150mm version, which is slightly better anyway. The 150 and 180 are the two top macro lenses ever and currently made, seriously. I have used just about every macro lens out there past and present and the only one that came close was the Yashica/Tomioka 55mm macro and it didn't have the reach. :(. The Canon 180mm L comes darn close or may even be as good, hard to tell honestly, but the Sigmas win out due to being half the price and performing at least as well.
I've been pinching pennies and sorting through equipment in order to sell some to get this lens for my Pentax, grrrr... May have to break down and snag a used one for my Sigma SD14 after all. :(
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
01-29-2010, 09:48 AM
|
| |
I use Adobe Photoshop CSS2 & CS4.
Dynamic Photo-HDR
ImageMagick
DigiTools for Photoshop
FastPicture Viewer 64
LightBox 2.0
NeatImage
I also use GIMP and/or Paint.Net on occasion. But a majority of the work I do ends in print, so I really have no choice other then Photoshop since it is the only software with soft proofing and totally profile aware.
If not going for print, GIMP or Paint.Net offer pretty much everything PS does, but both cost nothing.
The newest program I have been toying with is LightBox. v2.0 is free now with v3.0 being sold for a discount currently at $39.95(saves you $10). So far it is a nice software. Very much reminds me of Adobe LightRoom! I am thinking of purchasing v3.0 as it is fully profile aware which means it will be suitable for editing for print and it edits natively in 48bit!! I don't always need all the benefits of PS and LB is quicker to load and faster to process.
Sagelight 48-bit Image Editor 3.0 |
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
01-29-2010, 09:47 AM
|
| |
Welcome aboard neighbor! Well, maybe not neighbor, but fairly close, lol. I am outside Gettysburg. :)
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-28-2010, 08:43 PM
|
| |
I love the Bricks!! I own like 8 C-3's different versions/years models as well as 2 C-2's. Always a conversation starter when out shooting them too, lol. I just love the lenses on them and on just how challenging they are to shoot with! No electronics, no film advance except you turning a knob and making sure not to turn too far, lol. I have always loved the old rangefinders like the Brick's and GS/GSN's. Here's a partial list(not current, lol) of my RFs I currently own and all are usable as well. Some of the C-3's suffer from the higher speed shutter issues, but typically not an issue anyways.
Yashica GSN x2
Yashica GS x2
Yashica G x2
Yashica Minister D
Argus C-3 Brick (1948) x4
Argus C-3 Brick Colormatic (1956ish) x3
Argus C-2 Brick
Konica C35 Automatic
Mamiya 135 EE
Argus C-Four
Konica C35 Auto + Flash Unit
Konica C35 EF
Minolta-16 MG and accessories
Ricoh 500FM RF 45mm
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-28-2010, 12:44 AM
|
| |
I have the 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro for my SD14 and love it! Razor sharp throughout entire aperture and focal range until hit 70mm then need to stop down to f/4 for razor sharp but even @ f/2.8 the results are quite good. It is one of my favorite lenses! I did like my Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di lens slightly better only because I had gotten a phenomenal copy that many time required me to soften the shots a bit as they were too sharp, lol!
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-27-2010, 09:54 AM
|
| |
That is quite the decent lens too, produce very nice IQ.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-27-2010, 09:53 AM
|
| |
I am an ex-pro that is hobbyist only now. I am also very frugal, even when I was a pro. My equipment wasn't supplied by anyone, so it came out of my own pocket. That meant if I wanted the utmost return on my investment I had to keep costs down. Hence my frugality, lol. But one thing I never did, and will never do, is sacrifice quality to go cheaper!! One can still be frugal and buy top performing equipment. It just takes more research, more patience, and tends to require more skill and effort on you as the photographer instead of relying all on your equipment to do it for you.
I kept frugal by going with older M42 MF lenses, worked well since I already had quite the lens line up from shooting M42 & K mount film cameras too. :). One big way I kept frugal was by selling all my Canon equipment and switching to Pentax with the release of the K10D. No longer did I have to spend hundreds to thousands of $$$$ extra for IS on lenses, this alone saved me a fortune. Even with AF lenses, I did my research and tested many lenses and worked up a list of top performing 3rd party AF lenses like Tamron, Tokina, and Sigma that performed as well(sometimes even better) as OEM lenses. I even went as far as comparing their results in large print form and this is where I realized that even if one can see a slight difference on the PC at 100%+ viewing that in print many of the 3rd party lenses look equal to the more expensive OEM lenses! So, yet another way I saved lots of $$$$.
I also tend to purchase as much used equipment as I can. You would be surprised how great of deals one can get on practically new equipment! I picked up my Sigma SD14 for $400 brand new in box with full warranty! Snagged many lenses, Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro $120 shipped all but brand new, Sigma 170-500mm RF for $250 all but brand new in box, Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro + Sigma 24mm f/1.8 DG Macro + 2x Sigma TC + Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX 1:1 Macro for $500 all practically brand new. :). I bough my flashes used and went with older ones that I found that perform excellent.
Could I go spend a fortune on equipment again, like I did with the Canon? Yep, could, but chose not to, as there is no reason to IMHO. I don't need the latest and greatest. I don't mind having to work a little for my shots. As long as the equipment can pull its weight is all I care. :).
After all, it is NOT the equipment that makes the photographer, but the photographer whom makes the equipment. :)
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-27-2010, 09:39 AM
|
| |
Yashica GSN, Kodak ISO400 B&W C-41, product shoot for a salon product line
897251R10442sm on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Argus C-3 Brick, Sach's Bridge, Gettysburg, PA Civil War Battlefield, Kodak ISO400 B&W C-41
sachs6sm on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Canon, Gettysburg, PA, Civil War Battlefield, Kodak ISO400 B&W C-41
canon2sm on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Argus C-3 Brick, Sach's Bridge, Gettysburg, PA Civil War Battlefield, Kodak ISO400 B&W C-41
sachs1sm on Flickr - Photo Sharing! |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-25-2010, 10:06 AM
|
| |
I know, sadly. :(. The best 300mm lens ever made too, IMHO, is as sharp as 300mm primes. I even inquired to Sigma if/when they are planning on a Pentax version and their response was that there are currently no plans on one. :( :eek: But luckily they do make it is the Sigma mount, lol.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-25-2010, 10:01 AM
|
| |
Hence why I stated 150/180. ;).
FYI, for the person scared of Adorama, no reason to be! Excellent company with superb CS. Been dealing with them for years with no troubles at all! After all the BS I dealt with using B&H over the years I no longer use anyone but Adorama in that area now. Always been superb with fast shipping, awesome CS, well above and beyond what they need to do!
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
01-25-2010, 09:58 AM
|
| |
It all depends on what type of IR you want to shoot. The 900nm+ filters allow only B&W IR imaging. The 700/720nm filters allow the B&W as well as color IR imaging.
P.S. I own both types.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-25-2010, 09:56 AM
|
| |
The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is a rocking lens!
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-24-2010, 07:35 PM
|
| |
Spiratone also makes an awesome 135mm f/1.8 lens, very rare, but awesome IQ.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
01-24-2010, 07:32 PM
|
| |
It all depends on what you plan on using the 2nd camera for. I went with a Sigma SD14 simply because I can use my Pentax glass on it, I can convert it to full time IR in seconds and then back to color in seconds, I needed 100% true and accurate color reproduction(especially in reds and greens since a simple fluctuation in tone/shade can equate to hundreds to thousands to even tens of thousands of $$$$$/carat) for gemstone & mineral & inclusions photography for sales & research materials as well so I had to go with he FoveonX3 sensor and since Sigma is only one using it... I got stuck with the SD14(not really complaining, excellent camera just some quirks wish they would fix), for the same reasons prior I also needed better DR and I didn't want to step up to a MF due to loss in DOF, and a few other reasons. I also needed the resolution of a FF sensor, which the SD14 does produce enough data to equal the Canon 5D FF camera in print. Other then these, I simply would have snagged another Pentax.
I have a few friends that own a Canon or Nikon FF because Pentax does not offer one. And a few that own 1Ds or D3s for sports due to the super high fps. And a few who owned lower model Canon for the high ISO imaging but have since(or are going to) switching to the K-x since it is actually even better.
I plan on getting either the next Pentax body or a K-x due to now needing a higher ISO camera as well.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
01-24-2010, 07:23 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
01-24-2010, 07:19 PM
|
| |
Amazing shots everyone!
B&W and toned IRs
Far from perfect, but first time ever tried a pano stitched using IR, lol, still happy with it:
 |
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
01-24-2010, 07:14 PM
|
| |
Takumar 135mm f/2.8 M42
 |
