Too bad Pentax just didn't let their cameras evolve instead of forcing the issue. :-))
Tom C. >From: "Bob Blakely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: Disappointing Results >Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 12:23:17 -0700 > >Howdy! > >Regarding number 2: What you "see" in the view finder (or without a camera >for that matter) is NOT what's there. When you look at a real world object, >you are perceiving it through what is possibly the most sophisticated >visual >processing system ever produced on this earth! Not only will the iris >change >with the lighting conditions, it will change to adapt to the subject or >even >specific areas of a subject that you are interested in - and without the >mistakes that cameras make trying to guess what you are interested in. >Further, your brain processes the image to include filling in details that >you can't see in such a manner that you can't know that it's doing it. For >example, you have a blind spot in your eye where the optic bundle converges >and turns inward to become the optic nerve - yet you are NEVER aware of >this >hole in your visual sensor (eye)! You have to trick your perception system >to demonstrate the existence of this hole in your visual loss! If that's >not >enough, your brain can, to some extent, adjust the apparent sensitivity of >your retina, and it can do it variably to the specific areas of interest to >you! This does not happen with film. What's there is what you get. For >these >shots, you need to use fill flash. Doing this well is not a trivial mount >the flash an shoot job. One needs to know how to balance the light from the >flash with the ambient light. > >Regarding 1 & 3, I shoot Pentax equipment mostly; I have no "N" stuff. >Therefore I cannot help. When I have questions regarding my other brands of >photo equipment (Graflex, Argus, Sinar, etc.) I go to sites & lists >specific >to those brands or types. Personally, I wouldn't dream of discussing any >brand of equipment on a list devoted to different brand of equipment. It >just seems... impolite and mildly offensive to me. But then that's just me. >Don't read too much into it. > >Regards, >Bob... >-------------------------------------------------------- >"Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection." > -Jean Luc Godard > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Glen Tortorella" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Hi all, > > > > Since I have a new, more "advanced" body, the N80, I tried taking > > some shots I would have avoided in the past. The results were awful-- > > not one good shot on the entire role, a miserable 0-for-24 (Kodak > > Gold 200). > > > > In the past, I would avoid two types of shots: 1) indoor shots and 2) > > outdoor "high sun" shots in the fair weather months (i.e. during the > > hours of about 10:00-4:00). In doing so, I have assured myself > > decent, but not necessarily perfect, results. Since the N80 has a > > better metering system (10-segment) and a pop-up flash that is > > supposed to be pretty good, I figured: "let me see what it can do." > > As I have said, the results were dreadful. Here are the main issues. > > > > 1) Every indoor flash shot showed at least moderate spotlight/wash- > > out effect of the subject (people). > > 2) On the outdoor "high sun" shots, the camera turned a seemingly > > minor shadows (through the viewfinder) on the subject's face into a > > black blobs that covered almost all of the subject's face. > > 3) When taking indoor shots with the flash, I would meter (10- > > segment) something like 1/30 or 1/45 or perhaps 1/60 at, say, f2. > > With the flash powered up, I do not think it ever metered > > differently. For example, 1/30 at f/2 was still 1/30 at f/2 with the > > flash enabled. Is this correct, or is there something wrong with my > > camera? > > 4) The one decent shot in the whole role--an indoor shot using only > > available light...go figure?--was spoiled by some sort of small speck > > on the subject's face. I usually keep my filter free of dust, etc. > > Could this speck have appeared as a result of the cheap processing I > > used (Wal-Mart C-41)? > > > > I know that using a fill flash may have alleviated the problem > > expressed in issue number 2, but, since I have had my subjects turn a > > bit ghastly by using the flash, I am hesitant to use it indoors or > > outdoors. I would appreciate any advice or commentary (or even pep > > talk), as I am pretty down about this. What good is a more > > "advanced" camera if I cannot even come remotely close to > > satisfactory results on the more difficult shots (i.e. indoor, "high > > sun," etc.)? > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
