how big are the raw or dng files coming out of the K20D typically? jco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Stenquist Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 10:51 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: A bit embrassing?
I shot a mere 4 gigs today, but I agree with you in regard to the K20D's ability to capture more detail. Consistent exposures have also been noticed and applauded here. I look forward to seeing your pics of Lindsaye. Paul On Mar 16, 2008, at 9:46 PM, William Robb wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: A bit embrassing? > > >> Some interesting threads came up today: In-camera (image >> stabilisation) vs. lens dedicaed >> (image stabilisation); improved continuous autofocus with the new >> Pentax cameras and lenses. >> No much discussion followed either of these. So what topic does >> the list fixate on: Whether >> Macs or PCs do a better job of burning DVDs. Such silliness. > > Well, while you guys were fixating on burning CDs and trying to > decide which method of shake > reduction works best, I shot 6 gigs of Lyndsaye at the studio. > It was another good day. > However, to answer your questions: > In camera IS definitely is better, since it supports all my Pentax > lenses. What more is there to > say? > The AF improvements with DA* lenses will be an improvement to me if > I ever get around to > purchasing any of them. I'm still not convinced that zooms are > where I want to go, though the > 60-250 is on my next lens list, and I will pick one up the moment > it becomes available to me. > > Now, about my day. > This time, I managed to remember to set my ISO to 100....... I decided > to eschew the umbrellas and soft boxes in favour of spun > steel pans, which I like > better. I don't know why, but I just like the quality of light off > them better. I think they > give a more lifelike image. > The studio boys use umbrellas and the like because they are easy, I > say easy sometimes doesn't > give as nice a result. > I started off with the DA70mm LTD and did some basic head shots so > she could see how her hair > style photographs (trial run for her wedding in June). > I then backed off a bit and did some half length stuff some kinda > arsty stuff. > After I got bored with that, I switched to the Voigtlander 58mm and > she switched to a little red > dress, which was quite delightful. We did a bunch of full lengths, > and then I had her sit down > and we did some stuff, and then I had her stand up again and did > some more full lengths. > After that, she changed into a little black dress, which didn't > work quite as well, but I got a > few nice shots, and then she changed into slacks and a sleeveless > top, which worked quite well. > > The camera worked marvelously. Every exposure is excellent (except > for a few where the flash > trigger didn't manage to fire the Normans) and I only have a couple > of pictures that misfocused, > and that was my fault for pushing the button when I should have > been twisting the focus ring. > Something that I've noticed is that the IR trigger reflects a red > catchlight in the subjects > eyes. I never saw this with the K10. It's not really a big deal, > but for wedding work I will > probably go back to a PC cord (thanks Pentax for including a plug) > to avoid having to retouch > all the eyes. > Buffer size and write speeds was not an issue, the camera easily > keeps up with the recycling > time on the power pack, even with the slower UltraII 4 gig cards > that I am using. I noticed that > there is now an ExtremeIII 4 gb card available, I may pick up a few > of them, for shooting doggie > stuff, the faster write speeds can be handy. > One thing I am noticing when comparing K20 images to K10 images is > that the K20 seems to give a > smoother looking picture. Skin tones are nicer, tonal transitions > are smoother, and the camera > seems less prone to blowing out highlights and loosing shadow detail. > Talking about detail, there is a very noticable improvement in fine > detail with this camera. > Some of it (perhaps nost of it) can be attributed to the higher > resolution sensor, but I think > that fine tuning the AF on a lens by lens basis makes an > improvement as well. The images are > more sharply detailed than anything I've seen coming off a 35mm > film camera. > The screen on the K20 gives a very close approximation of what the > image looks like with the > default Camera Raw settings. The K10 was always just a tad brighter > than what would show up on > the monitor. I'm glad they included the adjustments, I'm even > happier that I don't feel the need > to avail myself of them. > > Anyway, I'll post a few shots later. > > William Robb > > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > 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 PDML@pdml.net 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 PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
