DA 40, I thought was full frame. That is close but shooting right to the edge
of the lens.
-Original Message-
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Stanley Halpin
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2016 9:28 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net>
Subject: Re: K-1 Vign
> On May 10, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Stanley Halpin
> wrote:
>
> I just did a quick look at the manual. E.g., the appendix on pp107ff which
> talks about restrictions on combinations of special functions. When doing a
> pixel shift you can’t bracket, use HDR, use any
I just did a quick look at the manual. E.g., the appendix on pp107ff which
talks about restrictions on combinations of special functions. When doing a
pixel shift you can’t bracket, use HDR, use any form of interval shooting, mix
scotch whisky with soda water, wash your dark and light clothes
Stanley Halpin wrote:
>The open question is how good the K-1 is as a pseudo APS-C camera compared
>with the K-5 or K-3. Is it as good or better even in this mode? [For values of
>good/better which lie somewhere in a multidimensional space with dimensions
>such as Resolution, Tonality,
Stanley Halpin wrote:
So, a 24-70 on FF and one on APS and switching between the two might work. :-)
An alternate strategy to think about:
As Bill mentioned, you have an option on the K-1 to shoot full frame,
APS-C crop, or Auto. The new little mode dial makes it easy to switch.
> On May 10, 2016, at 1:20 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
>
>
> Stanley Halpin wrote:
>>> On May 9, 2016, at 10:37 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Stanley Halpin wrote:
> On May 9, 2016, at 8:55 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
Stanley Halpin wrote:
On May 9, 2016, at 10:37 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
Stanley Halpin wrote:
On May 9, 2016, at 8:55 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
Stanley Halpin wrote:
In sum, the 35/2.8, 40/2.8, and 55/1.4 all seem to have value when used with
the K-1,
> On May 9, 2016, at 10:37 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
>
>
> Stanley Halpin wrote:
>>> On May 9, 2016, at 8:55 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Stanley Halpin wrote:
In sum, the 35/2.8, 40/2.8, and 55/1.4 all seem to have value when used
Stanley Halpin wrote:
On May 9, 2016, at 8:55 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
Stanley Halpin wrote:
In sum, the 35/2.8, 40/2.8, and 55/1.4 all seem to have value when used with
the K-1, without too much compromise.
And the evidence…
A small gallery here. I didn’t keep these
> On May 9, 2016, at 8:55 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
>
>
> Stanley Halpin wrote:
>>
>> In sum, the 35/2.8, 40/2.8, and 55/1.4 all seem to have value when used with
>> the K-1, without too much compromise.
>
And the evidence…
A small gallery here. I didn’t keep these full
> On May 9, 2016, at 8:55 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
>
>
> Stanley Halpin wrote:
>>
>> In sum, the 35/2.8, 40/2.8, and 55/1.4 all seem to have value when used with
>> the K-1, without too much compromise.
>
> Excellent. I have, and like, those three lenses.
>>
>> I also
On 5/9/2016 7:50 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Stanley Halpin wrote:
DA 40/2.8: Slight darkening of the corners. If I “Enable Profile Correction”
inLightroom (leaving the Distortion and Vignetting parameters at default zero)
then the shadows are gone.
Here's a test I'd like to see: Comparing the
Stanley Halpin wrote:
>DA 40/2.8: Slight darkening of the corners. If I Enable Profile Correction
>inLightroom (leaving the Distortion and Vignetting parameters at default zero)
>then the shadows are gone.
Here's a test I'd like to see: Comparing the DA 40/2.8 with the old
M40/2.8 on the
Stanley Halpin wrote:
In sum, the 35/2.8, 40/2.8, and 55/1.4 all seem to have value when used with
the K-1, without too much compromise.
Excellent. I have, and like, those three lenses.
I also did a few shots on the same set up with a 24/1.4, 77/1.8, and 100 D FA
Macro /2.8 WR. No
14 matches
Mail list logo