|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
11-19-2014, 01:44 PM
|
| |
Disappointingly, that chance to take my KM out for one more whirl hasn't materialized. It's been unusually cold for this time of year making for unpleasant shooting... Although I took my K-50 out for about five minutes before freezing my fingers and calling it quits. There's been quite a bit of blowing snow, too — but a K-50 with the WR kit lens can handle that without any problems! I hate to admit it, but I might be a Pentax fanboy.
And I'm glad to hear your KX can survive a trip to the icebox (I'm not at all surprised given how well these things are built). But would not a CLA have also done the trick? Cheers.
As for our botty friend: he (it) does seem to be a spam bot; my reasearch indicates this particuar incarnation began life sometime earlier this month as NoorAlamShahzad and adopted its current name, RobertColes, in just the last few days. Posts getting scattered in several forums suggests it just mimicks what someone already wrote, but in language similar to broken English (as if the human language was translated into an intermediate language, then re-translated into English). Not quite at the level of Nexus 6 yet, but its interests are certainly varied! Alright, I'm over him now :)
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
11-19-2014, 05:39 AM
|
| |
Yes, what he said :) Wait a minute... didn't I already say it. Hmmm, I don't remember.
---------- Post added 11-19-14 at 06:12 AM ----------
Last time I had found persistent message, immature bouquet fabricated by your hands. Future consequences uncertain but surely at least your name to be erased from corkboard. Enjoy outdoors, make your secret place and engage your own passions.
Salaam Alekum.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
10-15-2014, 11:00 AM
|
| |
Salut, encore du Manitoba!
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
10-15-2014, 08:13 AM
|
| |
Incidentally, I think your scan looks great. In fact, it's much better than the so-called "hi-res consumer-grade" scans I got done professionally.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
10-15-2014, 05:43 AM
|
| |
Arista Premium 400 ... Type that into Google and you should get dozens of people claiming it's just rebranded Tri-X 400. That's what the guy at the camera shop told me too, but I'm new enough to the world of film to not know any better. But to my eyes, the two bear a striking resemblance when scanned.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
10-14-2014, 08:37 PM
|
| |
Thanks a bunch for clarifying! I'm really liking the camera mounted with a classic 50mm f/2.0. I think there's enough time for another roll before the cold fall weather sets in :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
10-14-2014, 08:03 PM
|
| |
Pentax K-50, Pentax DA-L 50—200mm:
Pentax K-50, Pentax DA 50mm f/1.8:
 |
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
10-14-2014, 07:26 PM
|
| |
Pentax KM body
Pentax SMC 50mm f/2.0 lens
Arista film (same as Kodak Tri-X)
and an exquisite model!
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
10-14-2014, 07:15 PM
|
| |
Hello... I just bought myself a Pentax KM film camera, a model very similar to the K1000. At the bottom of the camera is a button you press before turning the film rewind crank. After shooting a test roll, naturally I depressed the button and found that it sticks in the depressed state until a new roll of film is loaded. This seems contradictory to the manual (I was able to scrounge a K1000 manual online, thinking they're similar enough), which implies that you need to keep the button pressed continuously until you've completely rewound the film. Can someone please let me know whether the button is supposed to stay down on its own during the rewind? The camera has a 3 weeks service warranty and I'd like to get it fixed, if necessary.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-19-2014, 11:28 AM
|
| |
Thanks for a good, straightforward explanation. I had no idea this stuff was in the EXIF! (I oughtta poke around a bit more...)
I know from experience that Lightroom and AfterShot Pro can and do acknowledge those camera-specific "hints," as you say. Maybe one day those converters built upon libRaw/RawSpeed will see them too, and actually give you the option of viewing the image without any interpretation (as they do now), or viewing it with a 'hint-aware' profile. (I wonder why they chose to ignore those bits in the EXIF in the first place...)
I, as many others do, see the quality inherent in some of the free programs. There are plenty of examples of photos processed with the likes of Darktable, Photivo, RawTherapee, etc. demonstrating their worth.
But, for now, a previous post has convinced me to try something with a VM. I think this will roughly work out for me.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-19-2014, 09:56 AM
|
| |
Yep, the K-50 exclusively uses DNG as its raw format; the problem isn't in getting a Linux-based raw developer (i.e. Darktable, UFRaw, etc.) to recognize and open a Pentax DNG file, the problem occurs when a Pentax-specific option (such as "Highlight Correction") had been enabled when the photo was taken. In this case, the picture appears very under-exposed when compared with a program like Lightroom, or viewing the photo in-camera. This is just one example, and sure to be fixed with time as free converters catch up to the features in the commercial ones.
The DNG specification seems to give each manufacturer a bit of latitude in what information gets stored in the file, despite it being marketed as a 'universal' raw format. This means camera makers like Pentax can save some proprietary bits in their DNG files, and each raw converter needs to recognize these specific bits to render the image accurately (but the DNG-capable ones with no specific K-50 profile will open the image but ignore that critical information, causing problems when treating these files in a generic way). DNG still saves a lot of work rather than coding for disparate and sundry raw formats, but subtle differences do apparently exist — I know because I'm not the only one who's seeing this. For what it's worth, I think that DNG was a solid choice by Pentax. (By the way, the information I have on DNG is based on what I've gleaned from forums, and I have not read the actual specification!)
As for the use of virtual machines (VMs), your arguments have begun to sway my perception in their favour. Clearly there are advantages to be had using them, and I know softwares such as MS Office or WordPerfect will run silky smooth in a Windows VM ... But my concerns have always been: programs like Lightroom or Elements slowing to a crawl, and the laptop overheating when running graphics software in a VM. I could dedicate, say, two 2.4 GHz CPU cores, 3GB of RAM, and run with the on-board Intel HD4600 graphics chip, but will that be enough for Lr? Will that cause the machine to overheat?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-18-2014, 12:17 PM
|
| |
Just trying it out might not be enough for my untrained eyes. There's more I'm concered with than just highlight correction, which is pretty obvious when you see the result. Given my options, I'll just have to take the plunge and give it a try... VMs are another pain I don't have the time to contend with right now.
Trying it just makes sense and, if it doesn't work, at least I have some old Canon files I know it'll process. Thanks to all, for taking the time to air your suggestions. I'm gonna give Dt a shot for now.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-18-2014, 10:20 AM
|
| |
Thanks for the suggestion. I've looked into Darktable, and it seems extremely well thought-out and stable – most of the reviews that I've read are abound in kind words for its output. I'd seriously like to give it a go, but before I invest any time going through all the old images taken with my K-50, I'd like to know how well the latest version of Darktable (now at 1.4.2, I believe) handles those raw files: specifically things like highlight correction bits. The reason I'm so concerned about this is because, a while ago I spent over two weeks evaluating a small raw developer for Windows, only to find that highlight correction threw it off (some pictures had splotches in lit places). I realize Darktable is free, but investing my time is something I take seriously.
I truly wish that good software like Dt had a good, comprehensive list of supported cameras to go with it. So I wonder: what's the K-50's official status is Darktable. If it's supported I'm willing to use it... I'm quite convinced.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-14-2014, 11:52 AM
|
| |
That might be the ticket — it uses dcraw 9.21 (I notice that K-50 just showed up the dcraw 9.20 list. Honestly, I have no idea what that means in reality). But I'm still looking for answers on RawTherapee...I've been hearing so many good things about it that I'd really like to know more. But failing that, it's good to know there's a ready alternative.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-14-2014, 10:59 AM
|
| |
Darktable looks like a very high quality piece of software, too. But it still uses slightly older Raw libraries (Rawspeed and libRaw?), which apparently doesn't support highlight correction on the K-50 (just going by what I've read) – I found that a useful feature on more than one occasion.
Now, the newer raw library apparently supports the K-50 "full"y, but I'm gonna check it out anyway (after the weekend) since the definition of "supported" is scanty. (I've heard excellent things about both of these programs, yet the documentation is scattered compared with Lr. One minus for open source.)
AfterShot Pro 2 is still a commercial option, but I've heard some very mixed reviews... As it stands RawTherapee and Darktable are my forerunners. Hopefully they get their respective updates sooner rather than later.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-14-2014, 10:10 AM
|
| |
Hello... I'm very near having to move from a Windows- based to a Linux- based computer system. Don't get me wrong, I think Windows swell and all, but there are a few good reasons for the switch. Unfortunately, this means I will no longer be able to use Lightroom for processing Raw files from my K-50.
I have been looking at several alternatives to Lr, and have heard some nice things about RawTherapee. My question to those with first-hand experience is whether it will handle the K-50's DNG Raw format, and can it interpret Pentax-specific settings such as highlight correction? As is par for the course, I haven't been able to find a definitive listing of supported cameras for this program.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
08-11-2014, 09:58 AM
|
| |
Reviewed a few more Pentax K-50 DNGs in AfterShot Pro 2, and switching off OpenCL acceleration has seemed to have done the trick. I'll call it problem solved -- or at the least, bug uncovered.
Oh yes ... My system specs are: AMD A10 CPU, 8 GB RAM, AMD Radeon HD 8570 discrete graphics card, Ubuntu 14.04 Linux x86_64, AfterShot Pro 2 X64
Last note: Bug also affects Windows builds of ASP2 on my computer, but a few others with different video hardware have reported no problems.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
08-11-2014, 07:41 AM
|
| |
After some further experimentation with AfterShot Pro 2 (ASP2) settings under Ubuntu 14.04 Linux on my machine, I've come to the conclusion that unchecking (i.e. disabling) OpenCL acceleration under the preferences menu seems to solve the problems of on-screen appearance and final rendition to Tiff and Jpeg formats. The default mode for OpenCL under ASP2 is disabled, but I recently had switched it on to take advantage of my hardware... Who knew the bug would actually alter ASP2's Raw rendition process and affect the actual output files. Be interesting to know if this bug is relevant to other Pentax models and Raw formats...
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
08-11-2014, 12:13 AM
|
| |
I recently downloaded Corel AfterShot Pro 2 (it's currently at version 2.0.3.25) for use with my K-50 Raw files. Initially I was impressed with its renditions, until some 'pixel-peeping' at 200% zoom showed some strange bands or horizontal artefacts occuring in almost all of my images (some worse than others). I also had noticed these lines consistently occurred between about the Y-coordinates 2559 and 2563, inclusive (with the camera oriented horizontally, or in standard 'landscape' orientation). Sometimes the horizontal line or lines spanned the whole picture, at other times broken up into segments ... But always in the same range. At first I made the assumption that there was something wrong with my camera's sensor. But then I downloaded some Pentax K-50 DNG files from imaging resource and, lo and behold, AfterShot Pro rendered them too with the same artefacts! The images were converted to TIFF files and retained the same problems. I then opened the same images in other raw converters, and none displayed the problem that was evident in AfterShot Pro 2.
Has anyone any experience with ASP2 and a Pentax K-50 on either Windows, Mac or Linux? I really like this converter due to its speed, but this problem may be too serious to warrant a change at this time. BTW, I tested ASP2 out Ubuntu 14.04, and am curious as to whether the same problem exists on other platforms as well.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
02-10-2014, 08:51 AM
|
| |
I for one am amazed at most of these shots. The skill of the individual photographer shines through, but one cannot but pause upon the realization that all of these shots were taken with a camera body costing under $600, and a large portion with an 18—55mm 'kit' lens. Maybe I am biased but I like the Pentax product.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
02-10-2014, 06:15 AM
|
| |
Well put 45 Mike, if I may say so.
I didn't want this thread to become an expo of 'fanboism', or fanaticism, towards any particular OS. They all have strong points--Windows and Linux included. I have used both, and frankly I found both to suck or be just too obtrusive in their unique ways (i.e. lack of quality software, bloat, inconsistent upgrades break the system (ahem), licensing restrictions, etc.). Same to be said with Apple's offerings--they are no different and are certainly not immune to anything.
Nothing will ever be perfect in my eyes, nor in the next person's. Just expressing my humble opinion, that's all. But I have been around computers and electronics long enough to have learnt a thing or two. No expert by any stretch, but enough to see what's going on...
The idea that Linuxes play nice with each other is true. But to a somewhat limited extent. Just look at the difficulties encountered by 45 Mike, who posted his grief with dependencies while compiling a program for his brand of Linux. While we can never entirely rid any OS of this problem, I was just mentioning that it would go a long way if the C library versioning were clearly defined for each issue if the LSB. That would force developers to more carefully choose auxilliary libraries for their software and reign in the chaos just a little bit. Right now the eglibc people control this themselves through the very nature of the development model used in the Linux world. OK, so let em do as they please, but the Linux Foundation could adopt 'official' versions from the eglibc source tree and 'make it their own.' Just an idea. It's called standardization.
Same with any other component in the GNU/Linux sphere: you can do what you want with it--and I hope that never changes--but the Foundation could name kernel/library versions for each LSB release and have an on-going branch and one that focuses on compatibility and bug fixes. Distros will adapt to this model in a hurry, I surmise.
Given the GNU GPL, distros can and will never die. But too many brain-farts are coming the fore and then disappearing, giving commercial software houses an impression of flux and instability.
Now Red Hat is in the Wayland camp, and Ubuntu is developing Mir. That looks great, just great.
That's enough for me. Tired of OS talk. On to more enjoyable things,
---------- Post added 02-10-14 at 07:35 AM ----------
This thread has outlived its usefuleness and ought to be closed. There seems to be a kind if defensiveness (re: combative stance) beginning to be displayed by certain posters, and I am sure that there is plenty of room in cyberspace for another thread of this ilk, should anyone put in the effort to initiate one.
Keeping in mind I had originally asked 'is anyone using Linux', and NOT any judgemental statement like 'Linux sucks', I am surprised by the defensive posturing exhibited, considering no one has put down anyone's choice. To each his or her own. But we are allowed to make observations, are we not? And to do so without eliciting scripted and snarky replies?
I hope to see you all in other areas, where the discussion might be kept to a more liberal tone. Remember, "freedom" is just a word without context.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
02-09-2014, 04:46 PM
|
| |
Nah, tromboads, don't get me wrong: I'm not putting Linux down, much less your choice. I'm just sayin it's gotta ways to go before reaching the compatibility – and by that I mean level of seamless interoperability within its own sphere – as Windows hath reached long ago.
I see an OS as a program loader, not something to be fussed on. My primary interests with computing are twofold: running programs, and learning a bit about the underlying hardware; to me, an operating system should be pretty transparent. Linux has not reached the level of transparency it should have years ago. To me it's a software cult, and I'm rather disappointed in how vendors have turned the other cheek (some by choice, others by necessity). Imagine having to test your program on several CPUs, GPUs, and ...Now throw ten distros into the mix and you begin to see why some might eschew Linux as supported platform.
I firmly believe that Linux would benefit by distributing a common C library version sanctioned by the Foundation, and incorporated into the LSB – bug fixes could be tested never break compatibility, and new major versions would only be intoduced iff backwards-compatibility exists, and new features are deemed necessary; this is the first true step in backwards binary compatibility. Without that, everyone is bound to specific repositories for their free software, and are left to hope that commercial options will run on their unsupported distro.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
02-09-2014, 03:46 PM
|
| |
In the past I had heard about "DLL Hell" from Windows users (and those who dissed Windows for no other reason than it was by Micro$oft). But Windows has come a long, long way since the days of 95/98/ME, and Microsoft has made installation of new software simple and standardized. All dependencies are taken care of and they don't conflict. I'm no fan of the corporation, but Windows should serve a model for Linux development in that regard.
In the Linux world there are simply too many incompatibilities across the distros despite that they all use a version of the same kernel, C libraries, user-land tools and X stack! Go figure. Some distros don't have dependency resolution, or even a modern way to install programs...
Heck, compatibility is broken within the realm of a single distro: an Ubuntu upgrade, for example, invalidates a large portion of programs written for the previous version of Ubuntu, forcing a re-compile of the software. As a result users are locked into a specific vendor's (i.e. Ubuntu's) repository. Conversely, most any program written and compiled on Windows XP will run on Windows 7, 8, and 8.1. Should there be any question whatsoever why the greedy software houses won't support Linux (or at best only throw Linux users a bone) ... It would cost them too much money to support their plaethora of offerings on just one distro, nevermind multiple ones.
I know, on Linux we have Aftershot Pro, Adobe Reader and Steam. In reality, this is absolutely nothing, and I mean nothing, nada, nil, in comparison to what's out there. In fact, it doesn't even register on the radar. Again, too may incompatibilities to take care of for the profit-oriented.
Now, I want Linux to succeed. And for that to happen about 99.5% of existing distros will have to fall by the wayside – like it or not. It's for this reason that Windows is back on my primary machine.
Sorry for my long-winded rant. I only wanted to see linux take off for every-day users only to find that's it's still hijacked by idealists who care little whether there's any third-party vendor support, or even if it delivers something resembling a consistent end-user experience (KDE, Gnome, Cinnamon, Unity, Xfce, OpenBox, the Next Supa Dupa Fork of Desktop 23Y12; ahem...). Furthermore, the compatibility goal (even within a single distribution) will be near impossible to achieve so long as the core libraries used by Linux are being developed by third parties who modify them at will. Linux needs more than the Linux Standard Base (LSB) – libraries need to be frozen, adopted and fostered by the Linux Foundation. They should be considered on par with the kernel when it comes to OS functionality.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
02-02-2014, 06:15 PM
|
| |
Just an aside...You mentioned that white balance problems weren't apparent when photographing under indoor light with Canon Rebels. One of the reasons I sold my Canon 1100D (T3) was the orange/yellow cast on all photos taken under incandescent lighting. This seems to be a 'problem' inherent to the Digic III and IV (at least) systems used by Canon, and it is very well documented. Here's just one example: Canon Rebel T3i / EOS 600D Review: Digital Photography Review
Look at the Cons section, and you'll see it's listed there.
Personally, I've had very few white balance issues with the Pentax K-50 under similar conditions. I am very far from being an expert on the subject, but am satisfied with the results out of teh box. But the type of lighting (tungsten, CFL, et al. – as already stated), placement, mixture of ambient lighting, etc. all have an effect... But Pentax nailed it, I think.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-30 & K-50
02-02-2014, 01:24 PM
|
| |
I have researched this matter a bit further by going into a camera store with my K-50 and comparing it side-by-side (so to speak) with the showroom model. I'll to post my (unscientific) results due to the variegated answers and concerns expressed in this thread, and hopefully put it to rest:
To the best of my knowledge and hearing ability, both my K-50 and the store's K-50 sounded almost exactly alike when powered-on; this also proves that this camera is supposed to make a clicking sound when switched on.
I don't know for sure what causes this noise, but after thinking on it a bit, I hypothesize the sound may be coming from the magentization of the floating sensor frame – it's easy to forget the camera has in-body stabilization! That would be my guess.
So to conclude, I was made satisfied (and confident) enough by the results of my little test that I treated myself to a 35mm DA lens (which was on sale...a steal of a deal to boot).
|
