|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-05-2016, 06:21 AM
|
| |
What do you want the camera to do when the light gets low and shutter speed gets slow?
If you answer "increase the ISO", you can try to experiment with the different "slow, normal, fast" options in auto ISO. They do exactly what you ask for.
You don't set a fixed shutter speed limit, the limit is set in relation to the lens focal length, so as you zoom, the shutter speed limit changes.
Regards,
--Anders.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
10-04-2015, 11:05 PM
|
| |
16bits, 14bits, 8bits, have nothing to do with spacial resolution. 8bits jpeg means that the luminance of each RGB pixel is quantified with 8 bits i.e binary values from 0 to 255. JPEG standard was defined based on human eye perception, where 8 bits of depth was estimated to be good enough. The 14bits of RAW coding (or 16bits for TIFF) is to provide more than 8 bits dynamic range during raw to jpeg conversion. So, when using pixel shift in raw (14 bits), the amount of data is huge, but due to data redundancy (coding several time the same information), the actual amount of information is not proportional to the size of the file. You can have a 45Mbytes file which, once printed, does not look better than a 6Mbytes JPEG.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-09-2015, 01:30 PM
|
| |
 Originally posted by starbase218  .
Btw, the 50-135/2.8 is not equivalent to 70-200/2.8s. It's equivalent to 70-200/4s (on fullframe anyway).[ Let's not get started on this 'Equivalence' baulderdash, Starbase. 😁
If you shoot at f4 when we shoot at f2.8 the FF will be *underexposed* by a whole stop.
F4 zooms would be too limiting for most event and portrait photographers.
F2.8 is the pros' way, and that's why such a 70-200 was built to accompany the Pentax FF release.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
07-09-2015, 08:00 AM
|
| |
My first predictions on the long tele were a bit off, due to the FF/ length/ glass required skew I didn't see... so my 138-380 (67mm) APSC thought became 150-400 (86mm) and FF (in real life)... So much for that idea....
As a lifelong student of global Biz and having worked at the top one of the great Japanese firms as a gaijin, IHMO we are watching a war come (in VERY slow motion). RICOH is a truly well run company, with exceptional leadership. Kicked Canon and Kyocera quite a bit, chewed up Xerox and other wannabes (quality and performance). Pentax was a natural deal. Ricoh will have similar capabilities and offerings as Canon (copiers/ optics/ photo, reproduction, etc.. Nikon will shrink. In 15 years, Nikon will look like Hasselblad and Mamiya. Olympus and SONY (cameras) will have different businesses/owners or be gone...
The Ricoh-Pentax CEO was remarkably blunt when he said they had a plan and strategy to become #1 in DSLR/High end in two steps over the next 20 years or so. The majors have share, and brand (at significant costs). Nikon has MASSIVE financial problems (as does SONY Camera- not sensors), and a major piece of a specialized niche. Canon has diversified economic power but (like Nikon) a big COGS/SGA problem in photo. Advertising/ promotion costs for them are silly high... Pentax learned by watching them play leapfrog, while charting course... Then Ricoh stepped in....
I see RP leadership comments suggesting:
Seizing the leadership position in high end APSc (wildlife, etc. as a market focus already stated). Their dominance in high end APSc lenses is more powerful than some think. More bang, less weight, less cost. As the "follower" they have accelerated innovations during the past 5-6 years. K-3 WAS a huge shock to CaNikon. A year earlier, they were singing the death of APSc and in 2014 they both had multiple iterations of their higher end APSc's. In Japanese management, this was total panic.
The empirical threat of several truths... FF has weaknesses... Size, weight, required glass, cost, processor limitations (file size driven). Now for a very scary thought... Take 4/3 pixel pitch and build a better APSC higher res sensor (36mp+) ? FF at less than 50MP becomes the landscape/architects/ real estate and boater's sales rep's camera).
Whacko predictions anew ... Ricoh-Pentax buys Leica, SONY Camera (not sensors) or Olympus (next 3 years)... If SONY or Olympus, keep the good stuff (like ROKKOR-Old Minolta glass plants and Olympus medical), dump the rest after refreshing small and MILC add ons...
OK, next nonsense... Within 2 years most PTX launches an APSc at 32mp or better, raising the FF bar to 64MP, which bounces up against glass/coatings again. APSC size/cost for performance shoves FF hard to an extreme niche (4 years). CPUs get fast enough and pattern recognition software advances to allow a "mobile" but effective iteration of pixel shift 4 years). OVFs end up with sufficient technology to measure eye movement to lock a single/packet of AF sensors for wildlife, basically driving fast moving AF by where the eye is looking. Will take 10 years to perfect that one beyond a gimmick...
Just a few ramblings
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
07-02-2015, 01:31 AM
|
| |
Why didn't the manufacturers use full frame sensors as the mainstream when digital SLRs first came out? ;)
I mean the 35mm film cameras both cheap and expensive use full frame. It makes one think that manufacturers are using APS-C just to save money.
Just to be clear, I am NOT saying that APS-C sensors are bad. I am also NOT saying that FF will make our photography technique and photographs better.
I am just saying that FF sensors should be the sensors that must be inside when the first Canon, Nikon, and Pentax digital SLRs came out and from the first models, we all SHOULD have FF sensors in our K-5's, K-3's, K-01's, D7xxxx, D40's, D300, 7D's, 60D's 70D's, etc. because these cameras are supposed to be the digital equivalent of the film cameras of old (are they?).
Forgive me if I am ranting but it is also my observation that I can't help keeping. Okay, educate me now or scold me even.:confused:
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
04-24-2015, 05:26 AM
|
| |
What matters is not mAh but Wh ( or VAh if you prefer). 3.7V with 2.5Ah gives 9,25Wh. 7.2V with 1.86Ah gives 13.4Wh. this means that the 7.2V battery packs about 45% more power than the 3.7V battery.
Battery size is a function of Wh not A or V alone.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
04-24-2015, 05:41 AM
|
| |
In theory, we assume that pixel shifting in 1.5 pixels steps in x and y directions (assuming the sensor shift can accurately controlled within 1.95um in X and Y direction...which I highly doubt) would be equivalent to 2x oversampling. However, in practice the image falling onto the sensor is already band limited by the lens, so increasing the equivalent resolution of the sensor does not help as much as we may think (basically, what is oversampled is already having low contrast due to at least diffraction from the lens). According to simulations, pixel shifting increases resolution by 12% @f2, 8% @f4 and nearly 0% at f8 (that's why the DA*55 f1.4 lens is used to capture the pixel shift sample images on Ricoh web site). Now, lets assume that the lens out-resolve the 24Mpixels sensor. If what is advertised by Ricoh (the shifting is done in steps of 1 pixel) is true, this means that the spacial resolution is not increased. However, for sure the noise will be reduced, which give more room for sharpening, or more refined image. I'm eager to compare a 4 x16bits TIFF stacked and sharpened image from K-3, with a K-3II pixel shift photo in the same conditions (same lens, lighting etc..). This does not make the K-3II "pixel shift" unattractive, the advantage of the K-3 II is that you have the sharper image already boiled for you, hopefully available in raw. I look forward to do a comparison.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
02-14-2015, 07:49 AM
|
| |
This post from dpreview seems to explain the ethos behind C1 very well.
I will play around with it and Lr5 some more next week, at this stage they are both neck and neck. I may have to get both.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
04-05-2015, 01:14 PM
|
| |
Getting back to the original topic, I would say that there are many alternatives to full frame, Pentax or not.
I'm speaking as an experienced professional FF user. My first FF camera was a Kodak DCS Pro 14n that I used extensively for several years before retiring from my professional job. A major part of my career (20 years worth) was production of large images for museum exhibits as well as a great deal of work for magazines and books. I also did a lot of technical work, mainly artifact photography.
After retiring I worked with a K20 for quite a while, then moved on to an A7r about a year ago.
With the K20 I made many images that I consider suitable for printing up to 2x3 feet. I am picky about sharpness and detail, which are essential in the type of landscape work I do. The prints sell well in galleries.
Most current interchangeable lens cameras, whether micro 4/3, APS-C, or FF are better than the K20.
With the higher dynamic range and resolution of the A7r, I find it substantially easier to produce large prints. K20 files require careful sharpening for 2x3 foot prints and are challenging in terms of tonal range. They also require more noise processing. A7r files require minor, simple sharpening for that size, and are much easier to deal with in terms of tones.
However, from my perspective the difference between the files from the two cameras is incremental rather than life-changing. A lot of that difference can be covered up through proper technique and processing.
I recently made a presentation to a local photo club in which I displayed two 2x3 foot prints, one from the K20 and one from the A7r. The A7r print had better detail, but the K20 print looked perfectly respectable in side-by-side comparison. People did not get excited about the difference between the two.
Given that most current cameras are better than the K20, there is nothing to stop people producing excellent results with formats other than FF. I see a lot of arguing about DOF issues, but really: things that are negative in the eyes of some users are positive in the eyes of just as many.
My observation is that for most individuals the limiting factor is skill rather than equipment.
My reasons for going FF included factors such as having a bunch of really good vintage lenses that won't adapt to K-mount, and the fact that I am an old geezer being self-indulgent using lenses as they were designed,
As I've said elsewhere, starting from scratch I would happily work with a K-3 and some good lenses for general photography.
I will point out that if I were wearing my technical photographer hat, there are some situations in which I would go for higher resolution than is now available for APS-C and smaller formats. Those are pretty specialized cases, however.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
06-04-2012, 12:24 AM
|
| |
Semantics: Magnification happens before you snap the shutter. Enlargement happens after you snap the shutter. I don't know a plain Anglish word for magnification+enlargement.
Optics: Magnification is independent of frame size and resolution. 1:1 is 1:1 whether the frame is 9x6mm or 9x6cm or 9x6in, whether resolution is 1000dpi or 100dpi or 10dpi.
More optics: AOV is 2-dimensional; an viewed angle depends only on frame size and focal length. FOV is 3-dimensional, and depends on AOV and lens-background distance.
More semantics: I detest the term crap.factor. I much prefer the German format.faktor, which expresses a bit better that the frame, as well as the lens, are what determine AOV.
Fantasy: Wouldn't it be nice if photographers were licensed, with a license test covering basic optics, focal length / aperture and exposure relationships, and photo jargon?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-10-2015, 10:17 AM
|
| |
Isn't it this interview on Imaging Resource but of Mr Kazuto Yamaki, Sigma CEO, not a Ricoh official:
Sigma Q&A with Kazuto Yamaki: Why no Micro Four Thirds lenses, and is a full-frame Foveon feasible?
Excerpt cpncerning the possibility of a mirrorless version of a reflex lens, in this case their 18-300 mm:
"No, because it's made for the conventional DSLR. If we made it for the mirrorless or compact system camera, we'd have to change its optical design for focus tracking. (...) [the focus system] would have to be a stepping motor or voice coil motor. (...) In the case of the mirrorless camera, the focus has to always track the subject, because of the "wobbling", always moving a little bit. In this case, the focus glass must be very lightweight. (...) there are not many motors which have both strong power and compact size, so the lens element has to be very light." and therefore "it [would have to be] totally changed, a different design and construction."
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-10-2015, 04:35 PM
|
| |
It is the same conclusion. Ricoh representative said the same by stating that current lenses won't work on a mirrorless K-mount camera.
He is right; CDAF is more lens-exhausting approach. I look forward to see users replacing first their mirrorless cameras because of the EVF that evolves, then their optics in a few years time, which will start to rattle like a broken car. Lens cannot be made in an old-fashioned way and with excellent construction because design demands otherwise — everything must be feeble, very light and made from plasticky materials.
When I held some of Oly's lenses, I was afraid to sneeze.
The whole mirrorless-system concept is a failure, from compromised optical design to everything else. It is built not to last because it cannot.
A waste of resources and people's money. It is a sad state of affairs of optical industry indeed.
That Sony is dabbling into it I can understand because they are not optics company so they don't care. But Olympus really makes me sad; how mighty have fallen, in every principle they once held dear. It would be better for them to completely exit their unfortunate venture and save the money. They cannot innovate without terrible compromises.
But Pentax can.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
02-25-2015, 02:14 PM
|
| |
I do, and I didn't. It's not the body cost, it's the glass cost.
I have probably 25-30 lenses in K and m42, and 3 645 for my N film body. Not all are stellar; probably 5 or 10 I wouldn't miss. I was looking at the 645Z and decided to wait 'just a bit' to see if there was a FF, as some of the members here had strongly hinted there would be.
Why didn't I switch to Canon? I held a 5DmkII once - it felt like a plastic toy, and unnecessarily bulky for it's limited features (compared to the K20D at the time). And their ergonomics are just ... yech.
Why not Nikon? The D800 felt nice. Lenses? I could by a new car for the replacement cost.
$3k for a FF instead of $10k for 645? That might be the best compromise between 645, FF, and APS-C. Waaaay back when they chose 135 as a good trade-off for a reason (including available film stock). Big enough for good IQ, small enough lenses to be portable.
But a 'surprise' that Pentax may pull off is to price it low enough to get enough bodies out to folks like us to make a difference in market opinion. FF body #2 may be more of a 1D/D4 once folks know to take them seriously, and they know where to put it between FF#1 and the 645 series.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
02-24-2015, 09:43 PM
|
| |
It does seems quite low.. but i dont think that Pentax will compete with Canikon head to head just because they cant.. and is foolish.. what will happen if Pentax releaseas a FF similar perhaps a little better in aspects and price to for example D810 ?? Nikon will simple release another body better than the one Pentax just released, perhaps Canon too, and they will do it simply because they can do it, and I really really REALLY doubt that Pentax will release another body just to compete with the one that Canikons released because its too much money for a really little market share.
There are NO PRO that are using D810's or MK3s that will switch to Pentax just because Pentax have some extra features that "they dont", and i say they "dont" because in a few months they will have them too. No body is going to sell all their PRO equipment just because Pentax have a new FF and they want to "try it". that is the truth.
What is a smart move? Build their own FF user base, with people that are using APS-C and will like to jump to FF but not to the high end models.. something for the average costumers that cant take $3000+ out of their pucket just because they want a FF... I bet that most pentaxians that switch to other brands didnt do it to buy a D810 or a 5Dmk3... most of them did it to buy Sony A7's and D610's .. perhaps some D750s.. THAT is the target that Pentax will have to retain.. and in a few years, this target will want to upgrade their body do a better one.. and that is when Ricoh can release a better body similiar to Canikons flag ships...
So people might say.. yeah but the lenses that they release are not "average" price, and that is truth, because Ricoh is not thinking in todays market, they are thinking in releaseing a lens that will last several years and will be use for all the Pentax FF users that will like to use a pro lens... What is everybodys advice when somebody sais about if buying a lens or a body??? most people will say LENS, think about the glass and then the body, so this is what Ricoh is doing, releasing a GOOD GLASS so all the people that will use the FF body can buy in the future ( or if they have the money in the present ), a glass that will deliver great images with this new glass.
With this price ( around the $2000s ), Ricoh can get the attention of APS-C Canikons that want something better than the D610s or the 6D, people that dont really mind selling all their investment in equipment ( APS-C glass, body, etc ).
But we will see.. as i said in other topics.. i expect something between $2000 and $2300.. Pentaxeros people sems to really trust the Pentaxeros store price, and the guy that runs the store claims to have the info of price and date. and also lets not forget that in Spain Pentax is not that bad. If they said that the price is going to be around the 2000 euros is because the price is going to be close than that, and if is like that, the Pentax FF will cost even less than that because of the sales tax ( 21% in spain ).
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-21-2014, 05:59 PM
|
| |
I am new here like to say hi. I first got on here to research about the k3 because I am thinking about leaving nikon and get me a pentax. Well the reason I am posting here I was looking at the white pic of the ks1. I asked my son that can't stand photography what he thinks of this camera. He said that is the best looking camera ever made (I all most fell out of my chair) I asked why do you like it. He said it's modern looking don't have all them ugly buttons all over it. Now this is from and 18 year old that has never even looked at any of my camera's. I guess pentax new what they where doing when they design this one. It's not for me I am getting the k3 but when this hits the market my boy will have one.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Lens Articles
02-20-2013, 02:40 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-29-2013, 12:36 PM
|
| |
He, just like any other member, is welcome to post, within forum rules, whatever he wants.
It could well be argued that your post is inflammatory and rude; therefore in violation of forum rules. ;)
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
07-18-2013, 09:05 AM
|
| |
Having teenage daughters, I find that following them on Twitter winds up giving me more information about their lives than they share with me sometimes. I also find it very helpful in getting insight about the friends they hang around with. In looking through Twitter the other day, I found myself amazed at how interesting the pictures are that they and their friends post. Especially profile pics. I found myself thinking that’s a great shot of Jane, or Erin, or Emily.
All of these pics are taken with iphones or other camera phones, and many of them are great. Great because they convey emotion, mood, or personality. Not because they are shot at f 1.4 with amazing bokeh. Not because they used a beauty dish, softbox, or full frame. I have been trying for a while to figure out how to afford an FA 77. Instead, I need to figure out how to capture emotion, mood, or personality with the gear I have.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
05-06-2013, 02:57 PM
|
| |
That's the location of the sensor inside the body -- the image plane. So that's where the image focuses, and if you are setting focus by using a tape measure (for video work, for instance), that's where you'd measure from rather than from the end of the lens, which some people mistakenly do...
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
05-06-2013, 02:57 PM
|
| |
It's exactly what the title of your thread says it is; although Sensor Plane Indicator would be more accurate.
It's purpose is to allow focusing by measurement, rather than visually when necessary in macro photography.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
03-21-2013, 03:27 PM
|
| |
I use them almost exclusively. I would never choose strobes over continuous light. I don't like the light strobes make much for one, and I like being able to see exactly where the light falls. (Also they give me a headache just being in the studio with them for a few hours. I don't know why, but strobes can send me right into a migraine.) I can always add a light or a reflector panel as I need to or take it away as I need to. I'm actually a natural light freak. I use artificial lighting when I absolutely have to but mostly I'm all about directing natural light to where I want it. This photographer and I are kindred souls when it comes to lighting. If you can watch a couple of her videos. You'd be amazed at what she does with a few pieces of white board, some reflectors and a window...
Sue Bryce Portrait | Australian Portrait Photographer of the Year 2011 & 2012
http://www.creativelive.com/courses/glamour-photography-sue-bryce |
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-24-2010, 11:12 AM
|
| |
Thanks for the effort, truly appreciated. Unfortunately, it won't work for Pentax. They refused to offer me the K5. They only offered me a Pro discount.
Best
Ben
|
