I can't see your Picasa shots at work, but I just tried to open the*istDS .pefs in Pentax Photo Lab and could not.
I downloaded the version of Photo Lab released with the *istDS and it opens and converts them in a much better manner, albeit with apparent loss of deep shadows. For the *ist DS at least, there must be something wrong with the irfanview algorithms. I'll give the new Photo Lab a shot on the noisy *ist D images as well. Thanks Peter! Tom C. >From: Peter McIntosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: I Hate My *ist D - Eclipse Photos >Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 07:57:19 +1000 > >I did the same thing with my ist-DL, and got the same crappy stuff. >Talk about being p1ssed off! But I converted them to jpeg's using >Pentax's photo lab, and to my surprise got sopmething reasonably >acceptable. I had a Sigma 100-300 f/4.5-6.7 on the front, too - not >renowned for its sharpness. > >Here's a before: > >http://picasaweb.google.com/petergly/OnePhoto/photo#5103871449239871586 > >And here's the same shot after I converted with Pentax's photo lab: > >http://picasaweb.google.com/petergly/OnePhoto/photo#5103871569498955890 > >I lost some shadow detail, but I'm happy with that compared to the >original. > >Here's what I ended up with: > >http://picasaweb.google.com/petergly/2007LunarEclipse > >Given that this was my first ever attempt at this sort of photography, >the cheap lens I had on the front, and the crappy Sydney air, I'm quite >happy with these. > >Ciao, > >Peter in western Sydney > > >Tom C wrote: > > I hate my *ist D. I stayed up until 5:15 AM taking eclipse photos. The > > first several within 20 minutes of when the eclipse started look OK, >though > > that was not the fabulous part of the evening(morning). However, the >camera > > quickly became noisy (electronic noise), even at short exposures ISO 400 >and > > 1/500 sec. All with Tokina 500 f/8 mirror lens. > > > > Of course it was at its absolute worst during totality. One shot for >some > > reason was less noisy than the others, though still ruined by noise >(next to > > the last as presented). > > > > http://photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=355756 > > > > Most shots looked good on the LCD, even when magnified to check focus, >with > > orange hues and turquoise tones at the edge of earths shadow. All lost >to > > noise. > > > > Some taken during totality didn't make muster because 8 - 10 sec >exposures > > were too long and exhibited too much tracking across the frame. > > > > I'm not sure if I have a hardware problem with the camera... may be time >to > > throw it in the trash. I've taken other aurora shots with the same body > > that were virtually noise free at exposures of 15 - 20 seconds. The >newer > > *ist DS with less than 1000 shots on it was even worse, however, at ISO >800 > > and 2 secs. Images (not shown here) were absolutely obliterated. Looked > > like a Photoshop effect. > > > > Still amazing to watch. > > > > Tom C. > > > > > > > > > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
