Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Showing results 1 to 25 of 300 Search:
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 1 Day Ago  
I'm looking for a Mac based photo storage application
Posted By PDL
Replies: 9
Views: 497
Do you need a editor/RAW converter and DAM (Digital Asset Manager) or just a Asset Manager.
Editor/RAW converter options:
Lightroom - requires a monthly subscription.
Adobe Phtotoshop Elements - standalone system not as powerful feature rich as Adobe subscription (Lightroom/Photoshop)
Capture One - Expensive to start off - somewhat limited in support of Pentax cameras.
Media Pro SE - Phase One's (i.e. Capture One's parent company) DAM support - no real editor.
My favorite combination - Capture One and Affinity Photo with Media Pro as a post processed image DAM.
Most of the other image processors are limited in their DAM applications.
Note: I use a Windows based PC, so the Mac environment is not my forte, but Raw Therapee, the Corel products and other systems like DarkTable etc. might fit your needs. You might want to look around here and see what other software some of the members are looking at, plus spending some quality time on bingle (Bing/Google) to narrow down your selection.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 1 Day Ago  
Colour management - browser issue, X-rite vs DisplayCAL profiles
Posted By PDL
Replies: 15
Views: 370
I had the same issue with my ColorMunki Photo which I bought over 6 years ago. I have discovered a half hearted "fix". First, the differences, my device calibrates correctly, it messes up when I try to get it to move to the measure position "screen measure". I have found that if I press on the selector wheel towards the bottom, sort of try and push the entire thing down and back towards the USB plug, it works.

X-Rite has also updated the software supporting the ColorMunki Photo - the version (PC) for the original software is V1.2.4 but I am using i1 Studio v1.1.0 XRD Version: 3.0.17.36. This software is an update from the X-Rite support site. I had answered a few surveys from X-Rite and they said that i1 Studio is free for legacy ColorMunki Photo users and is available on the X-Rite site.
Forum: General Photography 2 Days Ago  
Vintage glass, RAW or JPEG?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 19
Views: 568
I vote for shooting RAW all the time.
It takes a computer to see either a RAW image or a JPEG, something has to process it.
For evaluation - the more data the better and RAW will give you all of the data off of the sensor. With this data you can choose which parameters to manipulate/evaluate in the image.
With JPEG you are leaving the manipulation/evaluation to what some engineers at a single point in time (Prime I, Prime III, Prime IV etc.) engineers cooked into the body.
Forum: General Photography 4 Days Ago  
Detailed explaination of Exposure
Posted By PDL
Replies: 2
Views: 341
Perhaps you should check out the other videos by "this guy".
















You Tube




You might learn something.
Forum: General Photography 4 Days Ago  
Just Jpg Shooters?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 108
Views: 2,912
Another nail in the JPEG compared to RAW conversation.

Why shoot RAW? | Capture One Blog

Just saying:
Forum: General Photography 5 Days Ago  
Detailed explaination of Exposure
Posted By PDL
Replies: 2
Views: 341
I just looked at the video from this web site that goes into a technical discussion of Understanding Exposure. Some, if not most, of the photo geeks on the site will really enjoy it.

A deep dive on the science behind exposure and metering

Please note: I have followed the Phoblographer for a few years now. They really don't care for Pentax all that much and the site's owner is casts himself as a film geek. Some of the articles, like this one, are interesting and some, in my opinion, are a little trivial.

Anyway, enjoy this one.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-09-2018, 02:52 PM  
Capture One and Pixel Shift, I'm confused...
Posted By PDL
Replies: 26
Views: 785
I checked out the site, very cool, although I could not find any mention of RT during my quick look. My first college degree was in Anthropology and the digital storage of information was in its very beginnings. When I received my degree, I bought a TRS-80 Model 1 which lead to my work in digitizing Archaeological information.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-09-2018, 01:04 AM  
Capture One and Pixel Shift, I'm confused...
Posted By PDL
Replies: 26
Views: 785
Thank you for repeating what I said before. I have said several time on this forum and even this thread, Capture One is my preferred RAW converter.
Forum: General Photography 04-09-2018, 12:52 AM  
Just Jpg Shooters?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 108
Views: 2,912
Really? so when Export a 16 bit TIFF from my software and send it to my outside print provider it gets changed to JPEG? On what planet. When I print directly from my my RAW converter to my local printer, you know, the one connected to my print server, it gets converted to JPEG? Just keep smoking what you have and it ain't very good.

I can export images as PNG "for the web" too, ya know the 16 bit version. When I do export JPEG's, I sure as heck don't go off and edit those at all. I do export JPEG's web use by the non-profits I shoot for, but those are pretty low res and going 16 bit format is overkill.
Forum: General Photography 04-08-2018, 08:13 PM  
Just Jpg Shooters?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 108
Views: 2,912
No, you do not get it. Back in the day when I shot only JPEG as a matter of course I only worked on copies of the original JPEG's. SOP in that day and age, but even using lossless formats to work on will not give you back the data discarded in the original JPEG conversion. Eight bit format concerted to sixteen bit format does not result in more data.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-08-2018, 07:58 PM  
Capture One and Pixel Shift, I'm confused...
Posted By PDL
Replies: 26
Views: 785
In terms of "code" are you are assuming that this "code" will work for anything other than Pentax? Does RT support pixel shift on Olympus, Panasonic and now Sony using the same code? Or does this "code" only support Pentax?

If it only supports Pentax, then why would Phase One really care? Maybe, Phase One should buy Pentax from Rioch and eliminate a competitor and gain a IBIS technology that provides pixel shift and we (Pentax users) would finally get a decent default image processing program.
Forum: General Photography 04-08-2018, 12:10 AM  
Just Jpg Shooters?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 108
Views: 2,912
Please quote us where anyone said editing your JPEG image will "ruin" it.

What will ruin it is saving the edited JPEG over the top of the original. Once you copy any adjustments over the top of your JPEG, you can never go back to the original.

With RAW files by convention and for the most part practicality RAW conversion software does not write over the RAW file. In other words, Lightroom, Photoshop, Aftershot, Capture One, Affinity Photo, etc. do not write RAW. (The exception, of course, is Adobe products that will write information back into DNG files, thus writing RAW) Each time a JPEG image is saved, the compression algorithm discards, throws away, removes etc. data - that is by definition. Throwing away information from digital images is not the way to progress.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-07-2018, 11:51 PM  
Capture One and Pixel Shift, I'm confused...
Posted By PDL
Replies: 26
Views: 785
Yes, I read the article when it came out. And I re-read the article and the author is just plain wrong even Capture One says so. On a Pentax pixel shifted image Capture One reads the first copy of the RAW data and Ignores the other three. I have a K-3II and I tested it with a files before and after running PDU on them. Capture One will read a PDU processed file (pixel shift processed into a single image) just fine, but a non-processed (sort of a RAW-pixel shift) image, there is little if any difference between the images except in physical size in terms of processing.

I have had service requests into Capture One for at least since v9 for better support of Pentax metadata. So far, nothing has happened and don't expect much to happen.

As for Phase One giving up on MF cameras, I don't expect that to happen. Phase One, as I mentioned either here or somewhere else, is not solely in the market of selling the FX body and backs. They sell custom cameras for aerial photography including their 4 band cameras, (190MP and they will even sell you a server system, running windows 8.1 and custom software, to store and process the data), cultural heritage (with its own version of Capture One) and their A-Series cameras. I think they make far more money on their cameras than they do on their software. For each single FX camera sold, around 39,000 USD, is 130 copies of Capture One Pro.

They do more than the software some of us swear by.
Watch These:
Phase One Industrial - 4-Band Solution
Videos | DTDCH

Phase One is not just a software company.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-05-2018, 04:09 PM  
Capture One and Pixel Shift, I'm confused...
Posted By PDL
Replies: 26
Views: 785
If Phase One implements a pixel shift like technology of some sort it will most likely show up in their Cultural Resource oriented body. The camera is mirrorless and is an ugly black square sitting behind a large lens. The iXG and its accoutrements are found here: Phase One iXG Camera System The purpose of this camera system is to help reserve museum and cultural objects (paintings, books, prints etc.) in digital form. There is a small, but very expensive, industry built around the digitalization of Cultural Heritage.

Pixel shift would be a logical step for such endeavors, and the new Hasselblad H5D-50c MS and H5D-200c MS use 4 shots and 6 shots respectively in their implementation. With a 100MP back it gives you 400MP images and 600MP images where from what I can tell by looking at the limited information is all contained in the body of the camera, not the back itself. With Phase One/Capture One going toe to toe with Hasselblad, there might be a independent pixel shift solution coming to Capture One. Capture One already has the ability to order images with using the FX automatic focus stack function. In addition Sony and Phase One are hand in had in sensor design so if there will be a pixel shift push it will mostly with an eye to Sony - Pentax will be left out again. In my opinion.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-05-2018, 10:36 AM  
Capture One and Pixel Shift, I'm confused...
Posted By PDL
Replies: 26
Views: 785
Capture One does not support pixel shift at all.
I do not know what the article is talking about. However, when you shoot a pixel shifted image, Capture One will still display it and the default camera profiles in Capture One do have more sharpening than non Capture One RAW converters.

I did have a short conversation while attending a Capture One webinar where I asked if they were ever going to support pixel shift. The immediate reply was no there were no plans to support pixel shift. But as more camera body manufacturers include pixel shift (or something along those lines) there is an outside chance that Sony pixel shift just might get some attention. This could happen because Sony and Phase One are working closely together on sensor technologies for the Phase One backs.

Capture One, which is my preferred image processing program, does not support Pentax to the same degree as other brands. They don't support it because Pentax is, small and Pentax has the 645x camera. Capture One only supports itself in the Medium Format digital world, Pentax, Hasselblad and Fuji bodies are not supported. I think Capture One is shooting itself in the foot, but they are just the software arm of Phase One, whos primary product is the Phase One FX, iXG and A series cameras.

I don't think we will ever see Capture One supporting Pentax pixel shift or tethering. But Capture One beats Lightroom with a stick (Lightroom will not open Phase One 100MP images either)
Forum: General Photography 04-03-2018, 07:38 PM  
Just Jpg Shooters?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 108
Views: 2,912
Actually the light is usually pretty bright so I have to be careful of overexposing the "white stuff". Unfortunately, classically trained musicians wear black and the background is either black or dark brown or some other very dark color. The piano's are black and the other instruments are all dark with the artists and their music are lit by spotlights. With the case of dancers, they run in and out of the lights which vary from almost dark to very, very bright. Dance however, has become one of my favorite subjects to shoot, I really enjoy Master Classes where I get to learn about what it takes to be a dancer.

Anyway, when I shoot a performance, it is usually with either brightly lit subjects on a darkened stage or very dimly lit subjects on a darkened stage. I shoot at other venues too, churches, schools, University classrooms and professors studios when I am shooting for the non-profits. The non-stage stuff is pretty easy for the most part and I shoot my color target to get white balance, the camera is set to daylight. My non non-profit shooting is mostly outdoors where for the most part I really just shoot in AV mode and watch what is going on via the viewfinder making ISO and aperture adjustments as necessary.
Forum: General Photography 04-03-2018, 06:26 PM  
Just Jpg Shooters?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 108
Views: 2,912
Where did anyone say they are using the histogram as the definitive element in determining exposure? I said, in multiple places, that I use it as a "guide" to indicate whether or not the distribution of pixels is so way out of whack that it needs to be corrected. In my experience it does provide enough information to confirm the overall situation. When I am shooting a subject on stage, under spotlights I usually spot meter off of the music or keys on the keyboard on stage to get an idea as to the correct exposure. Once that exposure is measured, I switch to manual and shoot the performance. If I have the chance, which is not all that often, I get out my light meter and measure the lighting, go to manual, set the camera take a test shot and go. I rarely chimp during a performance and I have image preview OFF (house rules - no flashing lights during a performance)

When I am out and about in "normal" lighting I just switch to AV choose the metering mode I think will work the best and blast away. I rarely chimp when shooting in "normal" lighting. When I do chimp out in normal land, I am usually more concerned with focus than the histogram.... Oh now you are going to go off and say that using the LCD to check focus is just as bogus as using the histogram.

So, do I chimp? Yes I do. I have said so in the past and multiple times in this thread. Chimping is a choice on my part and I do it with a purpose. The blinkies on the LCD is a limit cooked into the camera and out of my control, even when I shoot a subject that has no blinkies on the LCD, when loaded into my RAW converter will show large amounts of overexposure when I switch on the over/under exposure indicator. However, I can change those limits in the software to suit my needs.

With RAW I can exploit all 14 bits of information to suit my desires. Just to prove it:
exiftool -G _MUN2883.DNG | find /i "bits per"
[EXIF] Bits Per Sample : 14
Megabytes 34,478,242

A image from the same vacation processed into a JPEG by Capture One (the file name was so I could put them into my calendar by month).
exiftool -G 01-Jan_2017_2.jpg | find /i "bits per"
[File] Bits Per Sample : 8
Megabytes: 2,484,130

Now just which file do you think will give me the most data to work with and the greater latitude to make adjustments with?

Now; I also try to get the best result I can out of camera without adjustments and what adjustments I make are as subtle as I can make them. your constant beating of your long dead horse about histogram's is nothing more in my opinion than your resistance to general guidelines espoused by the majority of digital photographers.

Again, as I have said before, if you want to shoot only JPEG's please, please do so. If you want to have the most data that your camera can produce and not leave it up to the manufacturer's engineers to pre-decide what "good enough is" then shoot RAW. By shooting RAW will you have better pictures, no probably not. But will you have the capability to take that image to greater heights, yes.. yes you can, if you are willing to put in the work. I have also said, and will repeat it here, that modern cameras (say from about 2005 - bias here, that is when I bought my *ist Ds) will capture "good" images at around 90%. I choose to try and shoot in the greater than 90% area. This attitude comes from working for hours and hours on prints in the darkroom, that process carries over to today.
Forum: General Photography 04-02-2018, 11:14 PM  
Just Jpg Shooters?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 108
Views: 2,912
Precisely why to use the histogram. Turn on the "blinkies" and if there are a lot of them, compensate to get away from the highlight spike. Get the histogram to just touch the right side if possible. Most times there are data (detail) in the highlights that RAW can pull back and use. If you have jacked up your JPEG settings you have messed up even more.

I shoot mostly classical musicians and I expose to get the highlights (piano keys and music) to be just blinking on the LCD. In post processing I can recover those highlights and recover the notes on the page and the cracks between the white keys. It is all a process, very similar to shooting film, but I would have had issues shooting slide film in the current environment since flash is not allowed at the venues or I am shooting from far enough away that a flash would not work. Most of the time the lighting is pretty harsh too.
Forum: General Photography 04-02-2018, 05:13 PM  
Just Jpg Shooters?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 108
Views: 2,912
The key phrase in all of my statements above is "I shoot RAW" so the inference is that when you state:

is meaningless to me. Once I learned that my cameras shot RAW, I never went back.

Your statement:

does not reflect on reality. If the histogram is a utter waste of time, then ETTR, classwork (workshops, instruction, youtube for heavens sake) are all wrong. I said, and repeat here, I use the histogram as a guide. It is not a end all be all and along with the "blinkies" it is a tool available for photographers to use to their advantage. If you are a JPEG only shooter, then it should be your primary go to tool to evaluate your images on the fly. I do agree with you that the image on the LCD is really not up to par for critical judgement.

With reference to your "absolutely not better than just watching the preview of the taken shot" - Wait-What? The histogram is the graphical representation of the distribution of colors in the JPEG you are looking at i.e. your preview. From Wikipedia: "For digital images, a color histogram represents the number of pixels that have colors in each of a fixed list of color ranges, that span the image's color space, the set of all possible colors." Please note also that I have stated above that I have turned preview OFF. I only chimp when I question what I think is going on with the exposure.
Forum: General Photography 04-01-2018, 07:19 PM  
Just Jpg Shooters?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 108
Views: 2,912
When I shoot RAW I do look at the LCD to see the histogram. I usually look once during a shoot to evaluate that the camera is set up correctly and what the histogram displays, I never look at the white balance as I change that during post processing. I have the JPEG settings set to Zero so no JPEG tweaking is going on - at all. I also have the digital preview set to OFF. In consistent lighting (inside at an event) I will take out my incident light meter and measure what light is happening, take a shot and look at the histogram (with blinkies) and go from there, usually setting the exposure to manual. When shooting for most of the time I am in AV mode and look at the exposure values in the viewfinder, I rarely look at the LCD when shooting while out and about.

If you are using a color managed computer environment, the color you see on your computer screen will be different than the color seen on your uncontrolled LCD. The color as seen by your camera will vary by body and to have the same color displayed by different bodies you need all the data you can get to move the color balance. This is true with film emulsions and digital. In the film days we bought hordes of film with the same emulsion number to make the "sensor" act uniformly across the development cycle. With color film printing you had to change your development processes each time you changed one of the following: film stock, paper, chemicals, light bulb in the enlarger. It is much simpler with digital, but you have to calibrate your monitor and if you print, calibrate your printer profiles for paper and inks. Same old thing. In digital it helps (note I am not saying that it requires) to have the largest amount of data you can get.

If you do not want to shoot RAW, fine, you are limiting yourself to the processing carried out by the camera body. Fine and dandy, I do have a camera (other than my phone) that shoots only JPEG and it does a pretty good job most of the time. But remember, on those rare occasions when everything just screws up, RAW can come to your rescue and it has for me. If you feel lazy about post processing, so be it. But if you change anything in a JPEG, dude, you are post processing. When I first got into shooting with a camera that supported RAW (*ist Ds) I discovered that most decent digital cameras were able to capture a usable image 90% of the time. My mindset is that I am shooting in that 10% where "good enough" just does not cut it.

As for your comment about pushing the shadows and along with landscape usage, please watch this webinar and go to 12:00 minutes.
















You Tube




Behold the power of RAW and no, his images do not look flat. Just try and use a linear response curve on a JPEG, it is not going to work out all that well. I wish I had this ability back in the days when I was shooting film.

I do not shoot HDR, but I do strive to get as much DR as the image can use. I did the same thing when shooting film (slide film - under expose by 2/3 of an f stop and meter off the highlights, burn and dodge with Black & White). My favorite slide film was Kodachrome 25 and as that slowly went away I shot a lot of Extachrome and Fujichrome. I shot a little bit of Extachrome IR too, which was a hoot.

Also, I did not say that shooting only JPEG is "bad", I said that you are limiting the potential of what you can do with the image. If all you do is shoot "normal" shots... great, keep up the good work. But if you want to play around with cross processing, bizarre color casts, differing Black & White processes, precise color response (think museum documentation) and correcting color casts, then you better be shooting RAW because you are going to need all the data you can get. Even if you shoot only JPEG, make sure that your editing software is non-destructive, otherwise your are SOL.
Forum: General Photography 04-01-2018, 04:51 PM  
Just Jpg Shooters?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 108
Views: 2,912
As I see it, when you shoot only JPEG's you get what the engineers think is "good enough". The algorithms and hardware used to generate in camera JPEG's do not really change all that much over the lifetime of the body. So if you are shooting with a older generation body (like my K20D, K10D or K-3II) I would be "stuck" using the same old method that was cooked into the camera. If you shoot JPEG on a 10 year old body, you are using 10 year old processes to create the image.

When you shoot RAW, simply put, you get more data to work with. JPEG creation throws away a good percentage of the information gathered by the sensor. If you know what you are doing and are willing to customize your settings to maximize your information on each shot, then use JPEG, I however, would rather shoot - not chimp to tweak. Also, as RAW conversion software changes (upgraded or manufacturer changes) you get the ability to use the "improved" algorithms on your old RAW images, which can lead to new interpretations. The use of "special" functions in the RAW converter (styles in Capture One), Black and White (not simple desaturation) and advanced sharpening (halo suppression) require RAW data to function. The data necessary to work with this functionality is just not available in JPEG.

And to provide a little background, I have been shooting "pictures" for 50+ years. I have shot nearly everything from 110 sized film to 4x5. I have shot with fully manual cameras to cameras that do everything for you. My father and I built darkroom in our home where I developed, Black and White, color print and transparencies. We printed Black and White and color prints from both color film and transparencies (I still have the enlarger and a good amount of darkroom parts and pieces). I purchased 35mm film (Panatomic-X) in 100 foot rolls and filled the canisters. I taught a class in "Scientific Photography" for Undergraduate Archaeology students. I earned a degree in Computer Science and worked for 30+ years for fortune 500 corporations supporting hardware and software engineers.

Digital imaging is about all about data, the more data the better. And as for "getting it right in camera", that has been my moto since the early days, especially since I started shooting 35mm slides where your leeway for getting a "proper" exposure was/is very narrow. I have taken my fair share of pure rubbish images on both film and digital. The ones that I have been able to "recover/rescue" with the greatest success have been RAW digital images.

JPEG vs RAW shooters is a fools argument. Shoot what you want to shoot, what you are comfortable with. Oh - and as for the argument that you "need a computer to see RAW", well, you need a computer to see JPEG also
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-01-2018, 04:12 PM  
Highlight Correction metadata, and Digikam support
Posted By PDL
Replies: 4
Views: 303
Put this in a loop or use a wildcard.
This will only work if you want to have "A series Lens" or "K or M Lens" for old manual lenses.

exiftool -overwrite_original "-exif:LensModel < ${Composite:LensID}"

Check the syntax for ExifTool if you do not want to have the generic text show up for non-Pentax lenses.
My Bower, Rokinon, Vivitar and Tokina lenses do not work with the simple script. I am on Windows so I use ExifToolGUI and plug in the correct lens name as necessary.
Forum: Photographic Technique 03-21-2018, 10:20 PM  
Portraiture Concert Shooting.
Posted By PDL
Replies: 7
Views: 601
I spot meter off of something/someone and take those settings to set the camera to manual.

I chimp once at the beginning to check the histogram and look for highlight blinkies, make adjustments as necessary. Then never chimp again during the shoot. Chimping requires you to take "your eye off the ball". Since you are limited to three songs, why waste time chimping each shot? These days three songs are running around 9 minutes (3 minutes a song) so use your time shooting not looking. Turn off instant preview, there are few things more irritating than having what looks like a flashlight/strobe going off every few seconds for 9 minutes in front of you. (from the perspective of the paying audience standing/sitting behind you)

Use Back Button Focus so you can shoot off a set of images without having the camera hunt every time you release the shutter button.

The concerts I shoot are for non-profits (mostly Classical music) where I am not limited by the dreaded "three song rule". Push up your ISO so you can get to a Depth of Field you can live with. Use the fastest glass you have and be ready to switch to wider apertures and faster shutter speeds as necessary. Or slow down the shutter and close down the aperture to get some level of blur.

And of course shoot RAW while hoping/praying for minimal post processing requirements.
Forum: Travel, Events, and Groups 03-13-2018, 04:11 PM  
Traveling to Seattle
Posted By PDL
Replies: 13
Views: 340
I have flown to the far sides of the planet carrying various and assorted cameras both film and digital. Just be sure to carry the camera onto the plane as carry on luggage. (I take my camera bag and put it under the seat).

I put all of my "wires and chargers" in my checked luggage (a big sealable plastic bag) along with other accumulated support stuff. In the camera bag are my camera body, lenses, batteries (packaged individually in plastic boxes), extra memory cards etc. I no longer carry tripods, although on my last trip I took my table top tripod, I just did not use it. I do not carry a flash and most places really don't like having flashes go off.

I did carry a laptop with me on my last trip, mainly to transfer images off of my memory cards to a portable SSD drive. I did use the computer to process and post pictures along the way and keep up with email. I gave my family and some friends a link to a OnDrive folder. The computer was in another carry on bag (a hard covered day bag) that also stored travel documents, medications etc.

Remember also, enjoy being where you are and put the camera down to experience the place. I live just outside of Seattle, there are many many places to go and enjoy. The city, in places, is a target rich environment.
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals 03-12-2018, 07:11 PM  
Should Pentax make a digital TLR ?
Posted By PDL
Replies: 22
Views: 1,231
Good heavens no.

We complain a great deal about the cost and limited number of Pentax lenses now. With a TLR you need to exchange two lenses as (referring to the Yashica Flex) instead of one. Any third party would just laugh and sell off all of their Pentax stock.
Search took 0.02 seconds | Showing results 1 to 25 of 300

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:21 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top