|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-06-2024, 01:53 PM
|
| |
Thanks for the link!
Added to my Amazon "office supplies" list.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-06-2024, 09:55 AM
|
| |
Another RPN/HP user here. My first HP was purchased in the fall of 1983. It very well might be the HP-15C shown below. It was fairly easy to write non-trivial programs on-the-fly when necessary. It seems that programming an HP is a "use it or lose it" type of skill though.
Items on my desk as I write this (picture attached below):- HP-15C
- SwissMicros DM16L (HP-16C clone)
- RPN Calculator App (Pixel 7a)
- Tan Engineer Calculation Pad
SwissMicros (SwissMicros - World's most precise RPN calculators) makes HP clones. I picked up a SwissMicros DM-16L (programmer's calculator) a couple of years ago. I don't really know how to use it to it's potential. It does not see much use but can be handy for instant decimal/hex/octal/binary conversions when programming.
Should the HP-15C predecease me, I would pick up a SwissMicros DM15L in short order.
Sadly, all tan engineer pads appear to be extinct. That very well might be my last pad. The ubiquitous green pad still exists as does a version in white. As Vonnegut would say: "So it goes."
|
|
Forum: Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom
08-12-2023, 05:57 PM
|
| |
Is there any advice you would give to someone without any past film developing experience when attempting to use the Lab-Box with 35mm film for the first time?
I am encouraged by your post as I have a similar setup on hand: ARS Lab-Box with 35mm and 120mm tanks plus the hand crank, Cinestill DF96 Monobath powder, and (expired) Ilford film.
Basically, everything required except courage, experience, and motivation.
Any tips, tricks, or things that you found to be counter-intuitive regarding the Lab-Box are appreciated.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-12-2023, 06:34 AM
|
| |
I am currently using 3 of the Ruggard dry cabinets for both modern and vintage equipment. An image of the "Cabinets of Shame" silently mocking me is shown below.
Discussion of my rationale and experiences including advantages, drawbacks, and storage capacity of the cabinets can be found in earlier thread posts:We are space-challenged in our house. The tops of the cabinets are not shown as every horizontal surface collects "temporary" storage detritus of one form or another. My teen daughter and I could be, charitably, described as hoarders collectors.
My primary motivation for getting a dry cabinet was lack of dust-free storage space. The cabinets are relatively space efficient and humidity control is a bonus. I started with one cabinet, then added a second, and then a third. If I can find the space, a fourth cabinet is under consideration.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-24-2022, 12:26 PM
|
| |
It may not have been clear above, to avoid the cone problem pick up additional step up rings for your eventual target filter size for all lens filter sizes that you already have. For example, if your target size is 55mm: pick up step up rings that are 27->55mm, 49-55mm, and 52->55mm so that you only need one step-up ring.
At worst, it should only take two step-up rings to get from 27mm to 72mm.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-24-2022, 11:56 AM
|
| |
This. I would go a little bigger than what you have on hand now.
When I did something similar, I targeted 67mm initially as that covered most but not all lenses on hand at the time.
The idea was to acquire step up rings from each lens size to 67mm. 27mm is an outlier and was handled separately.
Step up rings to 67mm:- [27] to 55mm
- [49, 52, 55, 58, 62] to 67mm
27mm to 67mm takes two step up rings (e.g., 27mm->55mm->67mm).
49-62mm to 67mm takes one step up ring (e.g., 55mm->67mm).
I also added a set of metal screw-in wide, standard, and telephoto hoods in 67mm as the native hoods probably won't work with some of the step up rings.
Later on, when considering a 10-stop ND filter, I went with 77mm which covered most but not all lenses on hand at the time.
The idea was to acquire step up rings for sizes reasonable close to 77mm (including 67mm).
Step up rings to 77mm:
27mm to 77mm takes three step up rings (e.g., 27mm->55mm->67mm->77mm).
49-58mm to 77mm takes two step up rings (e.g., 55mm->67mm->77mm).
62-72mm to 77mm, takes one step up ring (e.g., 62mm->77mm).
I also added a set of metal screw-in wide, standard, and telephoto hoods in 77mm.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
07-13-2022, 07:27 AM
|
| |
If I'm not mistaken, the profiles linked above extend the White Balance range for Lightroom/Photoshop. The issue addressed with Lightroom was that the desired WB temperature could not always be achieved via the slider. I have a similar profile for the K-01 that extended the WB range when Lightroom was used.
For False Color images, the red/blue channels will still need to be swapped which I don't believe is addressed in the profiles linked above. It's not really an issue if conversion to B&W is desired though.
As always, I could be wrong.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
07-13-2022, 05:11 AM
|
| |
The False Color look typically requires a Red/Blue channel swap which is not as straightforward in Photolab (although I haven't tried it in quite awhile). The easiest way to get started is to use a DCP profile in which the Red/Blue channels are swapped.
Despite Lightroom in the title, there is a Red/Blue channel swap DCP profile for the K-01 than can be used with DxO Photolab:
Red/Blue Swap in Lightroom for Infrared Photography
The download is in the middle of the page:
redblueswap_20150909.zip
The profile PENTAX K-01 RedBlueSwap.dcp is in the zip file.
Importing the profile in Photolab:- Expand the zip file.
- Open Photolab and select an IR DNG image
- From the color tab in Photolab and the color rendering settings;
- select category DCP Profile
- select rendering Import DCP Profile and then find PENTAX K-01 RedBlueSwap.dcp from the location that he zip file was extracted.
Once the profile has been imported once for an image, it appears in the rendering drop-down list (i.e., it should only need to be imported once).
The Photolab RAW While Balance settings for one of the IR 720nm images used to test the steps above were: temperature 2520 and a tint -165.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
05-22-2022, 08:53 AM
|
| |
Hopefully, an expert user will offer up better advice.
I am not familiar with PureRAW as I've owned PhotoLab going back to when it was called Optics Pro 9. I don't have a need to own both so never paid much attention to PureRAW. My understanding is that PureRAW provides noise reduction, optical corrections, sharpening, etc and is intended to be included as one component in established workflows (Lightroom, Photoshop, etc) from raw to finished imaged format. When using other software to process the exported DNG, some corrections might need to be disabled in the other tools so they are not applied twice (e.g., noise reduction). From a sales standpoint this makes sense, leverage the existing technology used in PhotoLab and make it available to those that would never purchase PhotoLab due to an existing workflow with other tools.
If you don't want/need PhotoLab as a standalone editior, then PureRAW makes sense. If PhotoLab offers compelling enough standalone editing functionality then PhotoLab would be a better choice. It really depends on investment in other tools and your preferred workflow.
I am a fan of the deepPRIME noise reduction and optical corrections. As someone who captures all images with raw+jpeg, I'm aiming to get it right in camera most of the time. PhotoLab works for me as a rank amateur but may not be for everybody. For images taken at my daughter's school in low light and high ISO, I'm happy with the DxO corrections. For what it's worth, I tend to go from the camera produced DNG to jpeg bypassing the intermediate DNG. However, if storage were not a concern, I could see where batch processing the noise and optical corrections overnight to (corrected) DNG files could be a useful time saver. I believe the processed DNG option was introduced in PhotoLab 4 (the previous version) and have not had a compelling reason to use it yet.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
05-22-2022, 05:57 AM
|
| |
In Photo Lab, deep prime renders in earnest upon export. The processing time becomes more noticeable when exporting corrections for multiple files. Perhaps it is worthwhile in Photo Lab to export to TIFF/JPG/Other for comparison if you haven't done so already.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
11-13-2021, 12:46 PM
|
| |
Between slide lite and leash, I would choose the slide lite.
My daughter started out using the leash with a K-3 and 18-135mm. We upgraded to a slide lite which is more substantial than the leash for that combination. The leash is like a really long cuff.
The image contains the following Peak Design straps from top to bottom:- Slide (Original?)
- Slide Lite
- Leash
- Cuff
I too use the slide with most all of my cameras.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
06-24-2021, 01:40 PM
|
| |
I am attaching new builds of the dcrawps windows binaries.
The archive file contains builds with mingw-w64 gcc 11.1 and msvc 2019. 32-bit executables were included for both builds. Locally, Bitdefender quarantines the mingw 32-bit build but not the msvc 32-bit build.
Minor changes to support compiling with msvc have been made locally and have not been submitted to the dcrawps github repository yet.
A minor issue was revealed when compiling with msvc. A one-line change has been merged in the dcrawps github repository which motivated the new builds.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
06-23-2021, 05:25 PM
|
| |
Sure. It would be a good idea to exercise the executables with some test images first though.
Within the last week, I have built versions of mingw-w64 v9.0 and gcc 8.5, 9.4, 10.3, and 11.1; all of which are fairly recent releases.
GCC/MIngw-w64 release dates:- GCC 9.4 (June 1, 2021)
- Mingw-w64 9.0 (May 22, 2021)
- GCC 8.5 (May 14, 2021)
- GCC 11.1 (April 27, 2021)
- GCC 10.3 (April 8, 2021)
GCC 11.1 is the first 11.x release and has only been out about 2 months.
Would you prefer binaries built with a different/older version of gcc or is 11.1 OK?
Joe
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
06-23-2021, 01:18 PM
|
| |
I have attached dcrawps64.zip which contains the following windows executables and build logs:- dcrawps64.exe: built with gcc -o dcrawps64.exe dcraw.c -O4 -lws2_32 -DNODEPS 1>dcrawps64.txt 2>&1
- dcrawps64.txt: compiler output log
- dcrawps64amd.exe: built with gcc -march=native -o dcrawps64amd.exe dcraw.c -O4 -lws2_32 -DNODEPS 1>dcrawps64amd.txt 2>&1
- dcrawps64amd.txt: compiler output log
The executables (dcrawps64.exe and dcrawps64amd.exe) were compiled with the same command-line arguments as contained in build.sh in the github repository referenced above.
Notes:- The 32-bit executable was not included as it was flagged by multiple engines when uploaded and checked on VirusTotal.
- The compiler used was a recently built (and untested locally) version of gcc 11.1.0 with mingw-w64 runtime 9.0 using the mingw-builds scripts.
- Neither executable was tested with a pixel shift image.
- Both executables were uploaded and checked on VirusTotal. None of the engines flagged either executable.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-10-2021, 01:36 PM
|
| |
I added an a7ii for the same reason. With fading mid-fifties eyesight, I find the in viewfinder zoom magnifications (x5.9 and x11.7) really helpful as well.
On my a7ii, button C2 is configured for "focus settings" which allows cycling between zoom magnifications easily while looking through the viewfinder due to the close proximity to the shutter button. For me, this has increased the likelihood of "keepers" when using m42, K, M, and A lenses.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-10-2021, 08:03 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-09-2021, 01:26 PM
|
| |
UncleVanya is correct. It is purely mechanical and low-tech. The attached picture shows the tab that rotates to physically engage/move the aperture lever when the knurled ring is turned.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-08-2021, 07:36 AM
|
| |
Two pictures showing the DFA 100mm macro WR mounted on a Sony A7ii via the Novoflex adapter mentioned above are attached. I have never actually used this lens on the Sony.
Turning the knurled blue ring on the Novoflex adapter will open and close the aperture from fully closed (leftmost position) to fully open (rightmost position).
The first picture shows the adapter in the wide open position. The second picture shows the adapter lens aperture somewhere between fully closed and fully open.
There are no "click" stops so it is a guess as to what the actual aperture might be.
Additionally, sometimes it appears that the knurled ring rotates some small amount prior to the aperture changing (i.e., there is some ring travel before engaging the aperture lever).
Postscript: I am another member of the club that has a Sony body and does not have any E Mount lenses.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
12-27-2020, 01:45 PM
|
| |
There have been plenty of excellent responses already addressing the humidity concerns. I have found a couple other tangible benefits to using a dry cabinet aside from humidity control: they are dust-free and can be very space efficient.
I now have 3 of the Ruggard 120L cabinets that were all purchased on sale from B&H over the years. Some of my observations after adding the second cabinet can be found in Electronic Dry Box - PentaxForums.com. My primary concerns are dust-free storage, maximizing the storage contents, and minimizing the amount of physical space required. Humidity control is a bonus. The current approximate dimensions for all three cabinets side-by-side are: 47" wide, 40" tall, and 17.25-20.25" from the wall (depth). One cabinet is further from the wall due to cable and network drops.
The 120L has the approximate footprint of a mini fridge and is just under 40" tall. The pictures of the 30L unit above in post #8 by ramseybuckeye shows one adjustable shelf. The 120L unit has 5 adjustable shelves. The holes in the supports to adjust the shelves are slightly less than 1 inch apart. The closest that two shelves can be set allows objects approximately 2 inches tall. The bottoms of each shelf are approximately 12.75" wide and 12" deep. The usable space is slightly larger than the dimensions of the bottom of the shelf. Due to the "boxes" mounted on the back of the inside of the cabinet (see the third picture in the post above), not all of the shelf mounting positions are feasible. As the shelves pull out, the shelves can be configured to minimize unusable vertical space. All of my lenses are stored standing up to maximize shelf contents.
To give an idea of the space efficiency, here are a few examples of what can be stored on a single shelf:- 4-5" tall: 16+ (4 rows of 4) compact lenses (e.g., m42/k/m/a/f/fa/da primes) and teleconverters.
- 6+" tall: 9+ (3 rows of 3) larger/fatter/newer lenses.
- 5" tall: 6 digital bodies (K1, K3, K3ii, 2xK01[IR], A7ii) and a Panasonic superzoom
- 4" tall: 4 flashes (lying down without stands) and 3 triggers
- 2" tall: 18 batteries (cameras and camcorders) plus other miscellaneous flat items
The bottom of all three cabinets is used to store taller and/or heavier lenses. The bottom shelves (i.e., the distance from the bottom of the unit to the underside of the first shelf) range from 9-11.5" tall and hold between 9 (3 rows of 3) and 12+ (3 rows of 4) lenses. Access to items stored on the bottom shelf in the back typically require pulling out two or more lenses for access.
As the adjustable shelves are made of plastic, they can sag/deflect in the middle of the shelf due to the weight of the lenses. Careful organization and placement of lenses can mitigate this problem (e.g., heavier lenses on the sides and lighter lenses in the middle.
If you decide to go with a dry cabinet, I suggest going with a cabinet that is a little larger than your current needs to allow some room for growth if your budget allows. In addition, the more adjustable shelves there are in the unit the more options there are in configuring, and then later reconfiguring, the available space.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
11-03-2020, 01:07 PM
|
| |
I downloaded and installed the windows version from Google Drive yesterday. Following installation, I had a similar issue with the first image that was tested: the save failed. Selecting a an existing folder for the output location folder for the queue solved the problem. I don't remember what the "default" folder location was before the change. I don't know if it matters, but I tend to install new builds in separate folders rather than overwriting an existing installation.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-09-2020, 03:51 PM
|
| |
 Quote: I used Loctite Clear Silicone Waterproof Sealant. It is an adhesive that creates a waterproof seal. I am pretty sure that I already had it on hand.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-03-2020, 06:50 AM
|
| |
I chose the baffle with the circular opening. I did not want to deal with having to properly align the cutout in the more complicated baffle.
I can't remember the reasoning and am guessing it was based purely on price.
This morning I looked at the prices for the circular baffle project on Sculpteo:- Multijet Fusion Nylon PA12: $6.62 raw, $8.86 black color resist dye
- SLS Nylon PA12 60u: $13.24 raw, $14.92 black color resist dye
If I remember correctly, there was a minimum cost of $15.00 for the dyeing process. If that is no longer true then it probably doesn't matter much. With the minimum dyeing cost, I decided to order two of the multijet circular baffles (just-in-case). For two pieces, the prices would be approximately $18 (multijet) versus $30 (sps 60u). Not a huge difference, but I was trying to keep the price down in case of an epic fail.
The baffle with the cutout is no longer in my Sculpteo account. There might be a chance that the price per piece meets the minimum cost for the dyeing process with SPS 60u.
As described in the other thread, it did take some effort to get the multijet circular baffle to fit. I don't know if it was due to the process, material, drawing, or a combination of all three. I have no idea if the experience would be the same with the SLS 60u. If the baffle had "snapped" into place the first time it might have been worth the price difference though. In the end, I was glad that is was slightly too big rather than slightly too small.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-01-2020, 03:37 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
05-05-2020, 02:25 PM
|
| |
I have the 410 with the Hejnar Extended Plate with F63 Clamp:"Clamp center is located on Manfrotto 410 camera/lens mount axis and it is the same as the head panning base. When the head is panned both the head and camera/lens rotate around the same axis."
Extended Plate With F63 Clamp for 410 Gear Head
I mounted the 410 on a Platypod Max and used a K-1 with RRS L-bracket for the knick knacks up close contest picture.
|
