|
Forum: Lens Clubs
09-11-2012, 06:20 PM
|
| |
Best of luck unbolting the 800lb safe from the concrete floor and hauling it upstairs, not to mention getting into it. :D
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-18-2009, 12:23 PM
|
| |
The reason for the classic 75 to 100mm portrait lens was to capture a head and shoulders FF 35mm image and keep the photographer within an intimate talking distance which is an important aspect of portraiture. The subject size remains the same on the C sensor at the same distance but with the angle of view you now have just the face. With a 200mm lens on a C sensor you'd have to shout at the portraitee, and with a 300mm lens you'd be next door and have to use a phone! I would choose the DA* 50-135 to give me more options (head and shoulders or face). Some 3-D effect is necessary for a normal view also. Too much flattening would be unflattering. Just my ¢¢.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
03-08-2012, 11:19 PM
|
| |
Have we not figured this out yet? I was shooting Canon when Canon was the poor cousin for anything but sports, (when shooting sports meant you had to have skills like focusing and reloading)
There are matters of degree, but if the average passerby doesn't see competence and maybe therefore think whatever's in your hands must be just the right awesome thing for the job, it doesn't matter *what* nameplate is up front. Superficialities do actually get silly in the 'pro' world, but the fact is, if you don't look like you know what you're doing with a P&S, a D700 will not help you, either. People do not know the difference. My first digital, people were 'Where do you get a special camera like that,' and I was like, 'Actually, you can get better than this model up at Wal-mart for a couple bills. I like em though"
Brand-snobbery's been around for ages. People used to see me with my old rig and say, 'You can't shoot this gig with that, missy,' and I'd just be like, 'That's not what he says...' point elsewhere and be gone by the time they looked back.
Whatever, you know? Status BS. Sure sign of a poser was always "I want the pro brand." 'For what, job, sir?'
Yadda, yadda.
Kinda like Pentax's still-not-there automated flash system.... People wanted a 'pro flash' it'd be the 283 or 285... not a compurtterized thing that cost like a good lens. 'Why' It passes the drop test.' ' What's the drop test?' 'If you drop it on the floor are you losing money tonight?' Yaknow?
And callme a crotchety old cripple, but AF is a crutch, anyway. Just give me an accurate focusing screen and I'll turn AF on when I need it. *creak* Rule One: Get the shot. I don't need 18 frames a second, I just need a moment. And a followup.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
03-08-2012, 07:00 AM
|
| |
How did they shoot gymnastics before AF ? I guess if I get a $200 pair of basketball shoes I could play with the pros. |
|
Forum: General Talk
03-07-2012, 12:41 PM
|
| |
Well since the lenses / flashes / batteries etc., are not interchangeable then that is hardly a reason in itself (unless we are talking very large companies with multiple togs of both brands). And shooting in DNG is not going to cause any issues (less than NEF) !
Nope .. sounds very much like someone ignorant of other brands or just being a brand snob. There are many Canon / Nikon cameras that are well below the quality of the K5.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
03-07-2012, 10:43 AM
|
| |
Funnily enough, the studio that I worked at (we just closed) didn't care what camera was used as long as the results were there. There were a number of occasions where I was asked to shoot specific jobs because of the quality of the Pentax glass that I was using compared to the Nikon glass.
My using SD cards was never an issue, I could perhaps see it in a Sports Illustrated sized pool, but for a small company, that would be a specious excuse at best.
Elwood's friend is a camera snob who doesn't know what she is talking about.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
03-07-2012, 11:04 AM
|
| |
Work-flow my A$$. Using programs like Lightroom or PS is very format agnostic. It takes ZERO effort to load in and work on a PEF compared to NEF or whatever those other guys use. That's an excuse brand-snobs use. They figure you can't get professional results from other brands so they use the "workflow" excuse. Doesn't wash with me.
- Andrew
|
|
Forum: General Talk
11-11-2011, 01:04 PM
|
| |
You guessed right.:)
Bad spelling is one thing that bothers me on professional signs and official documents as well as newspapers.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-04-2012, 02:38 AM
|
| |
I call TROLL, not getting paid, but Pentax has ruined OP's reputation. IMO OP has done quite a good job of that with no help from Pentax. YMMV
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-03-2012, 10:13 PM
|
| |
Forgot to mention; When Auto compensation was on, my ISO would indicate what I had it set at(200)before I took the shot. When I took the shot however, in that millisecond before the mirror slapped, the ISO would jump to what the camera wanted(1600). From the story you gave, this sounds eerily similar.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-03-2012, 09:03 PM
|
| |
What, you couldn't tell your shutter speeds were through the roof for the lighting situation you were in?
I think having a broken light meter on my first Pentax film camera was a blessing because I got used to the Sunny 16 rule fast. Now indoors is tricky, but I can still pin point it to within a stop or two.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-03-2012, 05:31 PM
|
| |
I'm afraid I agree with Medium Format in that any important work needs to be checked before moving on to the next scene/assignment, paid or unpaid. Previewing one shot from each pose/setup series would have ensured that you get what you expect from the exposures. I have never heard of any normally functioning Pentax camera doing what yours allegedly did. In all my experience with 8 different Pentax dSLRs, I can say assuredly that nothing like this has happened when it was not my own fault. But categorically saying that Pentax sucks is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I'm sure there was a logical explanation for this, even if for an electronic malfunction in the camera. And, it's also possible that an inadvertent hit on the green button might have set the camera to believe it needed to bump up ISO to expose for ambient light with the other settings you had on the camera.
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
02-13-2012, 07:50 PM
|
| |
"Big Gulps, Eh?!"
Here is another, or maybe the same Kestrel this time with a mouse and blue sky.
 |
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
10-26-2011, 12:09 AM
|
| |
I have read this thread through and even though it started out in good manner, it has now seemed to degenerate into a rather a " I said, You said" slanging match.
To avoid any further sinking into the mire, the thread is closed, as it appears to be serving no productive purpose.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
10-25-2011, 10:23 PM
|
| |
Just an old troll that jumps at whatever chance to spin a simple thing as a camera failure to another one of those Pentax bashing threads and spread fear of the brand.
where I come from, its 10yrs detention without trial for you!:lol::lol:
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
10-14-2011, 11:17 AM
|
| |
Its just my opinion, but you have everything you "must have". Just go out and shoot things that strike you as interesting. From that you will develop on your own, what you feel you may be missing. For instance - lets just say for the sake of argument, you just have the kit lens, however - when shooting you always want to get closer. Then you need something of a telephoto. From that, you can post - I need to get closer, what are my best options?
What is a must have for me, might not be a must have for you. Right now - you have no idea as to what you want to do. Its like walking into a car dealer asking what you must have, then driving away in an Austin Martin to pick up groceries....
Shoot, shoot and shoot some more. Take a look at the images and see what you like and what you dislike. On the ones that you dislike, why and what can you do to make it better? That is another question to ask here.
We love spending money, especially when its not ours. We can spend you directly into the poor house.
Edit - I rarely shoot with a hood - but then again I shoot in the evening/night and really don't need one. I also shoot wide angle, and polarizes for me make the sky very uneven. So, from this you can see that its not a uniform set of "must haves", its all based around how and what you shoot...
:cool:
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
10-21-2011, 02:09 AM
|
| |
Did he really say that? It's like cursing in a church.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-27-2010, 09:18 AM
|
| |
It does seem that Pentax cameras get compared in any given area with a whole bunch of different models from different brands: I've had the impression that the Canon 't' series and Nikon four-digit ones are basically entry-level still cameras built around serious video with, tons of bells&whistles, and the Pentax ones are serious still cameras with real prisms and controls and weatherseals, with some pretty nice added video capability that hopefully won't get in the way or force compromising the primary job.
Frankly, I could take or leave the video capability: upon eventual upgrade, I'll probably have some fun with it, but if someone said, 'You can have a K-5 with an absolutely incredible viewfinder and no video' that's where I'd go. :)
|
|
Forum: General Talk
03-26-2010, 10:40 AM
|
| |
Maybe he figured out that hitting himself in the head with a hammer to or three times a day was simpler, less time consuming, and yielded the same result. :D
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-24-2010, 10:18 AM
|
| |
Like I said earlier, I guess it depends who's shooting. I'm sure there are plenty of people who would gladly give up the f/2.8 to have a smaller package. And in a perfect world, they would make both lenses and we could all be happy. I would probably even want both. But from my perspective as a pro, I would gladly take a hit on size, weight and cost to have the capabilities of f/2.8 at that focal length. That's not to say that I wouldn't sometimes want a smaller version. That's why there is the Canon 16-35/2.8, and 17-40/4; and I know quite a few people have both. But all in all, if I could only have one, I would rather have the faster, bigger lens. But something I've found from my experience shooting professionally, and I found the same thing to be true when I was an auto mechanic, is that 90% of the jobs can be pulled off with 10% of the skills, knowledge and equipment that there is. Being pro is about having the other 90% of the skills, knowledge and equipment to pull off the other 10% of the jobs. I think that's most likely true of just about anything.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
10-21-2010, 06:56 PM
|
| |
Welcome and thank you for sharing your knowledge and insight on what seems to be a much better/much more realistic way to implement HDR.
Alex, you have done some of the first/few HDR images that I can honestly say DO NOT look unrealistic. I am not saying all of them are realistic looking, and your implementations are definitely some of the best ones I've seen!!! Your artistic side is very well done and I agree with your comments about flexibility, etc. and thinking outside the box for image perspectives that are different. Chapeau good sir, because there's a lot of HDR imagery out there that I find "over the top". I believe this serves to inspire folks to give a more even handed approach.
Just so you know, as an aside: I am someone who does not normally advocate or really use HDR in any way, shape or form because of the primary subjects I shoot (nature). As an example, to even presume such a thing (using HDR) in a nature competition submission is pretty much a guarantee automatic disqualification of the image - single image only, etc. Such are the constraints of that genre, not leveled at your work or HDR imagery in general.
I hope the two previous paragraphs make sense and does not offend. Again, welcome and I can assure you it's a warm one - thanks for posting and I do look forward to more.
Regards,
Marc
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-01-2011, 01:57 PM
|
| |
It's the easiest way into professional photography. Anyone with an entry level SLR with a kit zoom and a shoe mount flash can be a wedding photographer.
Now by the same token, anyone with a hockey stick can be a brain surgeon, there is a difference between what a person calls themselves and what a person can do with some level of competence.
Wedding photography is often viewed as easy money, and it is, providing you don't care who you are ripping off.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-13-2010, 05:32 PM
|
| |
This get repeated over and over. You do not get more control over DOF with FF. You just get shallower DOF at the same angle of view and aperture. Generally in photography, control over DOF is those systems that can get the most into focus; thats why large format was DOF king with film. All current SLR systems can provide shallow DOF.
The image below is an example of control over DOF. It may not be great but it illustrate that everything in the image from the front of the lens to infinity is in focus. This image is impossible to shoot on FF without a tilt shift lens. This is the realm of large format photography in the film days, but this one is shot with a K-7.
|
