|
Forum: Sold Items
01-04-2016, 05:35 AM
|
| |
Goodness, I wish I had seen this Saturday! I broke mine while trying to "fix" it and I have a lot of accessories-I'm even in Massachusetts! But I already ordered a new camera.
|
|
Forum: Monthly Photo Contests
08-01-2015, 05:07 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
02-16-2013, 01:14 PM
|
| |
I bought one a while back-it is true, 6 MP is plenty, and easy to work with. I won't replace it unless it breaks. Some of the nicest photos I've made in years.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
02-08-2013, 01:39 PM
|
| |
I was really going to drop it- I mean, it isn't a big deal-but Tahoe Jeep Mom, I read those, tested and just found that they overstate their case.
Dave, thanks for posting that, it isn't the kind of thing I have ever tried-and though my results don't look exactly like yours, I got kind of close in PS Elements 2 within a very short time.
Besides, the concept and execution of your photo is what makes it great-not the file format or processing software.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
02-08-2013, 10:29 AM
|
| |
I think some of the perceived differences are coming from the editing software-all those luminance features are not part of raw, but are actually editable in jpg as well.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
02-08-2013, 05:09 AM
|
| |
Yes, I took a picture of a large, black bird on snow, knowing I would have exposure issues. The JPG adjusted fine.
I took a bunch of photos with white balance set to incandescent, and checked after a few only to find the photos were blue. Switched to auto WB and continued.
On viewing, one click with the appropriate tool and the "blue" JPGs were indistinguishable from the correct ones.
I just haven't found the photo where raw helped-maybe because I spent so much time adjusting film scans previously.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-07-2013, 04:53 PM
|
| |
GIMP comes with UFRaw. It will read PEF files.
If you have a Mac, Preview and iPhoto both will convert raw as well.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-07-2013, 04:51 PM
|
| |
Thank you for the images and tests, Norm.
As to proving my point-I have, to my satisfaction. I am not here to convince anyone of anything.
As to your excellent comparison, it brings up one reason to use raw-if the noise reduction of your camera obscures detail, AND you feel you have an alternate method of noise reduction in your workflow-and find the difference worthwhile.
I generally shoot low ISO to avoid noise, with a non-Pentax camera. So far the Pentax has done just fine for my personal shots-my clients ( such as they are) couldn't care less about any of this!
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-07-2013, 05:46 AM
|
| |
Blown highlight is blown highlight-the tiny bit of headroom some folks think they see is not significant.
The banding issue on a heavily manipulated JPG comes from trying to over-expand the dynamic range, using Auto-Levels or some such. This comes into play if you are way, way off-but can be helped using a layer/screen workflow, assuming you are not trying to salvage a real stinker-in which case not much will help in raw, either.
As noted, many raw converters use dcraw as the main engine-some use Apple's built in conversion, and some use Silkypix-but they all mostly use the same algorithm, and you can actually PICK the one to use in UFRaw-the differences are in the JPG converters and presets.
Yes, I have 6 different raw converters.
As to white balance, I can change it fine on a JPG, but I've taken some time to know how my cameras' settings affect the image.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-06-2013, 06:35 PM
|
| |
Not superior, may not even be different. Without corrections, you are just trading one set of presets for another.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-06-2013, 05:14 PM
|
| |
All my color work was Kodachrome and Ektachrome-I suppose that both dates me and shows where I come from, but of course, I always exposed for highlights using color.
Please do not take any of this as a criticism of your workflow or your enjoyment of it. I like making photographs, and I try to eliminate any work that isn't fun or necessary for me to do so. I certainly can see the attraction-it's just that for me, I can't see the point.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-06-2013, 04:07 PM
|
| |
I fear I may be banned for this, but here goes.
Shooting raw, in my experience and opinion, is a lot of hooey. JPG losses are exaggerated to the point of myth if you use max quality in camera and editing software. The idea that you will need to use the "greater bit depth" to somehow magically make a bad exposure good (which implies, of course, that you are incapable of making a good exposure) is one that wastes the time of photographers worldwide.
Do not take anyone's word for this, mine included. I spent HOURS comparing the "losses" in JPG files to raw and TIFF, making 500 edit/save cycles, pixel-peeping all the while. The difference? Nothing.
Exposure compensation? Assuming you have an occasional missed exposure-and you try to fix it in post-processing by hitting auto-level or curves-that may cause you an issue regardless of file type, but there are better ways. One, of course, is to not miss the exposure in the first place. We seldom did in the match-needle metering days, why should it be so hard to get it now?
I see SO many articles on editing where the photographer spend a lot of time with esoteric editing workflows to end up with something that looks so...well, so much like the starting point, with subtle differences-not improvements- that no one else will notice.
If you enjoy the process, I think that is great. But if you think your CAMERA is taking a lot of time to WRITE a raw file, imagine how long it will take you to process it-all to end up with something that looks like the JPG you could have had in seconds.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
01-05-2013, 07:33 AM
|
| |
My opinion-the camera that felt good in your hand , with a cheap lens, will work better for you than a camera that you don't like, with a great lens.
Besides, you can find other lenses.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-01-2013, 08:42 AM
|
| |
Regardless of what may have been seen as the same settings, the exposure on these is very different. Or, some processing setting is in effect on one or the other causing a change in white point.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
12-20-2012, 05:44 AM
|
| |
The Cowboy Studio units are radio. The Vivitar 285 has a bounce head, and manual control.
|
|
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio
12-19-2012, 07:34 PM
|
| |
A couple of cheap auto flashes and Cowboy Studio wireless triggers will do-the triggers and 2 slaves cost me about $20, and auto flashes can be found used for super cheap.
I use a Vivitar 285 and a Pentax AF200 (I think), with diffusers the sensor will get covered, but play around and you'll get it dialed in in advance.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-19-2012, 04:16 PM
|
| |
OK, I have to say-depending on what you want to do, a compact may well outperform a DSLR. Besides being able to carry your camera with you everywhere, many decent compacts will focus almost as fast, and often more accurately, than many SLRs.
Nothing does real macro like a good compact.
Prints of shots of people, fairly close up, will be pretty much as good with compact or SLR.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-16-2012, 01:35 PM
|
| |
Pewter, the LX5 holds up well. I will keep mine until it stops working. I sure do like using the SLR, though.
Blue, I think I was redlm, but my hard drive crashed 3 years ago and I lost all the passwords.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-16-2012, 09:41 AM
|
| |
Thank you all for the warm welcome.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-16-2012, 07:24 AM
|
| |
I was a member of Pentax Forum about 5 years ago-things sure look different!
My name is Aaron-I chose "luker" as a user name because I kept getting "Hello lurker" messages and I misread one to say luker.
My Pentax history-started with an ME-F (still have it) as a replacement for a Fujica ST701-and I picked up an MX in 2006.
In my digital life, I've been using a Panasonic LX5 but wanted to shoot more SLR work-then found a light leak in the MX.
I almost bought a K30, K-01 but chose a K100D as my first DSLR. I want my life simple, and the small file size appealed. Plus the praise for the colors, and the VERY low price.
thank you, and happy Holy Days!
|
