|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
01-28-2017, 11:46 AM
|
| |
A ten stop will almost always result in a >30s exposure meaning you can't use pixel shift with it. And if not, it would almost certainly affect the sharpness, it's an extra piece of glass/resin in the way. My Lee 10 stop certainly affects picture sharpness to some degree. More expensive ones like the Singh-Ray mor-slo might affect the sharpness less.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
01-18-2017, 03:13 PM
|
| |
RawTherapee processing looks nice! I might have to try this.
---------- Post added 01-18-17 at 05:29 PM ----------
Another pixel shift. this time with HD DFA 15-30mm. processed only in Lightroom (no PDCU).
Coal Mine Canyon Arizona. 1/180s, F14, ISO100.
Can you see the light? by Sky Matthews, on Flickr
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
12-23-2016, 08:35 AM
|
| |
Totally agree. Allows me to underexpose so I don't blow any highlights and still pull incredible amount of detail from the shadows with little noise. In practice, it means I can often get away without using graduated ND filters for sunrise/sunset.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
12-22-2016, 01:25 PM
|
| |
Great pics Rondec! I like the sunrise shot in particular.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
12-06-2016, 09:12 AM
|
| |
Sometimes Pixel Shift artifacts can be cool. Use PS to make your own northern lights!! Just for fun...
Peggy's Cove Lighthouse, Nova Scotia. With some PS special effects courtesy of Pentax and Adobe Lightroom :p
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
11-30-2016, 06:02 PM
|
| |
Thank you both, very nice feedback. When run through DCU, it does tend to have a very sharpened look and I use only the default sharpening in DCU, but the level of detail with PS really is phenomenal. To be honest, I waffle between thinking it looks good and thinking it looks over-sharpened. But I'm starting to get comfortable with it.
And Lunenburg really is a beautiful little fishing village. Nova Scotia as a whole is a great place to visit.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
11-30-2016, 02:53 PM
|
| |
K-1 and Pentax 24-70 f2.8 @70mm.
Pixel shift with 2 exposures merged. Lunenburg NS Canada.
WIshed I'd had the 70-200 to reach further over the seaweed in the foreground. Oh well. Pretty happy with IQ from the 24-70 with PS.
Maritime Adventures by Sky Matthews, on Flickr
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
10-08-2016, 11:37 AM
|
| |
Normhead, completely agree with your assessment of DCU. It's awful. Like something created in Windows 3 era. I only use it to open and save out the MC-PS TIF and thats it. Still stupid.
But the result on a good image is quite noticeable improvement in detail and color to my eye. The rebel in me also loves putting out an image from my weird cheap Pentax that the Canikons cannot match (technically speaking) at twice the price. I personally love PS and use it quite regularly. Even though it is a PITA to process.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
10-04-2016, 02:29 PM
|
| |
That's really cool, love the ghosting.
---------- Post added 10-04-16 at 05:39 PM ----------
Pixel Shift in Oneonta Gorge OR. D FA 24-70 with B+W circular polarizer filter. Surprisingly DCU handled some of the movement artifacts here very well. Other scenes I shot with waterfalls and leaves out there required some hand editing. I did find a few hot pixels (random pixels of red, blue, etc.) scattered around. There may be a few still hanging out in there...
 Wordless by Sky Matthews, on Flickr
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-28-2016, 05:11 AM
|
| |
Very awesome image! Amazing detail. PS is a fab tool, I love having that in the toolbox. Kinda enjoying making my D800/D810 owning friends jealous.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-17-2016, 05:38 PM
|
| |
Excellent! Looks like FA31 from the flickr page.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-17-2016, 10:14 AM
|
| |
Today I learned! thanks, was not aware of that difference. Makes sense then why DCU would be exporting to TIFF.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-16-2016, 03:13 PM
|
| |
That was pretty ideal for pixel shift. No movement in frame, strong need for best possible dynamic range. I would definitely feel more comfortable if DCU exported RAW (i.e., a single RAW with the merged/processed image rather than the 4 image RAW) rather than TIFF. I don't know if it makes any practical difference in image quality, but there would certainly be a size difference. Maybe that violates the principle of what RAW file is, I don't know.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-16-2016, 06:50 AM
|
| |
One from Steptoe Butte in Palouse (washington state). I took both PS and non-PS shots here, and the PS shows a dramatic difference here in dynamic range, the foreground was pretty dark so there is still noticeable noise from lightening the shadows. But I have to say I absolutely love the quality of the noise flecks in the K-1, they are more fine-grained and so not as distracting to the eye and more like film grain (as others have noted already). This is the pixel shift version:
 Dawn's Early Light by Sky Matthews, on Flickr
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-09-2016, 02:53 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-09-2016, 05:33 AM
|
| |
Use the one called 'MC', which stands for motion correction. If there is any movement in the frame, such as leaves rustling in the wind, you need motion correction. You will also need to process the pixel shift file in the Pentax Digital Camera Utility. That is where the Motion Correction is done. If there's no motion (such as interior photo or in rocky area) MC will not have any adverse effect, so I have gotten in the habit of always using that option just in case.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-06-2016, 10:22 AM
|
| |
Same here, but the lenses were Pentax D-FA 15-30mm and D-FA 24-70mm respectively
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-02-2016, 12:35 PM
|
| |
Pixel shift x2 exposures of Smith Rock OR. The available detail in shadows was awesome. Not really any motion here though I did have MC on (processed in DCU) in case.
 Straight and Crooked by Sky Matthews, on Flickr
Pixel shift of Bridal Veil falls OR. This definitely had motion in both leaves and water and DCU appears to have dealt with this pretty well. I have another of Oneonta Gorge which had quite a few artifacts I had to try to clean up by hand, so leaves are still a bit hit-and-miss. Deals with waterfalls pretty well. Leaves against a brighter background seem to be more problematic than leaves against darker background. It may simply be that the artifacting (which is generally only a few pixels) is more visible there.
 Long Time Coming by Sky Matthews, on Flickr
These shots are both intentionally somewhat dark (for different reasons), but if I'd wanted to I could've brightened them up quite a bit with little noise and no loss of detail.
|
