Re: Spontaneous wide angle comparison

[ann sanfedele]

its snowing heavily here now.. but not sticking  at least not in my 
neighborhood..  weather channel guy is a bit further uptown

, so I'm looking at  snow on Tv but not out my window :-(

ann who wants a bit of snow.. just a bit.. at least




On 2/27/2023 8:46 PM, l...@red4est.com wrote:

That was two weeks ago, between the flood and the blizzard.

On February 27, 2023 5:30:50 PM PST, ann sanfedele  wrote:

I just enjoyed the scenery... I see the monsoon had not yet set in

ann

On 2/26/2023 11:28 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

Two weeks ago, on my way home from Riverside, I stopped on the Lerdo Highway to 
photograph a bit of the scenery, I ended up shooting the same scene with 
several of my wide angle lenses:
tamron 28-75/2.8, Irix 11/4, DA 15-30/2.8, Sigma 20/1.8

And also did some quick and dirty hdr panoramas with them processed in 
lightroom. My conclusion after comparing the photos is that the most important 
thing is where you are pointing your camera when you press the shutter.

But for those of you who enjoy such comparisons.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720306319553


--
Larry Colen
l...@red4est.com.   sent from Mirkwood


--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

--
ann sanfedele photography
https://annsan.smugmug.com
https://www.cafepress.com/+ann-sanfedele+gifts
https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/annsan
https://www.createphotocalendars.com/Shop/annsanfedelecalendarsandbooks
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.



--
ann sanfedele photography
https://annsan.smugmug.com
https://www.cafepress.com/+ann-sanfedele+gifts
https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/annsan
https://www.createphotocalendars.com/Shop/annsanfedelecalendarsandbooks
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Spontaneous wide angle comparison

[lrc]

That was two weeks ago, between the flood and the blizzard.

On February 27, 2023 5:30:50 PM PST, ann sanfedele  wrote:
>I just enjoyed the scenery... I see the monsoon had not yet set in
>
>ann
>
>On 2/26/2023 11:28 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>> Two weeks ago, on my way home from Riverside, I stopped on the Lerdo Highway 
>> to photograph a bit of the scenery, I ended up shooting the same scene with 
>> several of my wide angle lenses:
>> tamron 28-75/2.8, Irix 11/4, DA 15-30/2.8, Sigma 20/1.8
>> 
>> And also did some quick and dirty hdr panoramas with them processed in 
>> lightroom. My conclusion after comparing the photos is that the most 
>> important thing is where you are pointing your camera when you press the 
>> shutter.
>> 
>> But for those of you who enjoy such comparisons.
>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720306319553
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Larry Colen
>> l...@red4est.com.   sent from Mirkwood
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>> follow the directions.
>
>-- 
>ann sanfedele photography
>https://annsan.smugmug.com
>https://www.cafepress.com/+ann-sanfedele+gifts
>https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/annsan
>https://www.createphotocalendars.com/Shop/annsanfedelecalendarsandbooks
>--
>%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
>to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
>the directions.
>

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Spontaneous wide angle comparison

[ann sanfedele]

I just enjoyed the scenery... I see the monsoon had not yet set in

ann

On 2/26/2023 11:28 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

Two weeks ago, on my way home from Riverside, I stopped on the Lerdo Highway to 
photograph a bit of the scenery, I ended up shooting the same scene with 
several of my wide angle lenses:
tamron 28-75/2.8, Irix 11/4, DA 15-30/2.8, Sigma 20/1.8

And also did some quick and dirty hdr panoramas with them processed in 
lightroom. My conclusion after comparing the photos is that the most important 
thing is where you are pointing your camera when you press the shutter.

But for those of you who enjoy such comparisons.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720306319553


--
Larry Colen
l...@red4est.com.   sent from Mirkwood


--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.


--
ann sanfedele photography
https://annsan.smugmug.com
https://www.cafepress.com/+ann-sanfedele+gifts
https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/annsan
https://www.createphotocalendars.com/Shop/annsanfedelecalendarsandbooks
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Spontaneous wide angle comparison

[Bill]

On 2/26/2023 10:28 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

Two weeks ago, on my way home from Riverside, I stopped on the Lerdo Highway to 
photograph a bit of the scenery, I ended up shooting the same scene with 
several of my wide angle lenses:
tamron 28-75/2.8, Irix 11/4, DA 15-30/2.8, Sigma 20/1.8

And also did some quick and dirty hdr panoramas with them processed in 
lightroom. My conclusion after comparing the photos is that the most important 
thing is where you are pointing your camera when you press the shutter.

But for those of you who enjoy such comparisons.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720306319553
From a technical perspective, I noted that with one exception, all your 
pictures were shot at f5.6. This is getting very close to the point 
where all lenses are created equal.
And yes, it is well known that a sharp picture of a fuzzy concept is not 
going to be a good one.


bill
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Spontaneous wide angle comparison

[Larry Colen]

Two weeks ago, on my way home from Riverside, I stopped on the Lerdo Highway to 
photograph a bit of the scenery, I ended up shooting the same scene with 
several of my wide angle lenses:
tamron 28-75/2.8, Irix 11/4, DA 15-30/2.8, Sigma 20/1.8

And also did some quick and dirty hdr panoramas with them processed in 
lightroom. My conclusion after comparing the photos is that the most important 
thing is where you are pointing your camera when you press the shutter.

But for those of you who enjoy such comparisons.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720306319553


--
Larry Colen
l...@red4est.com.   sent from Mirkwood


--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

DPReview of K3 III (+comparison to Nikon D500)

[Henk Terhell]

Now on YouTube:
https://youtu.be/UpDDp3QEF34

Henk
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Same with the Leica SL ... There is even a configuration option to disable the 
top-left control button (that you might tap with your nose at eye level with 
the EVF enabled) to prevent accidentally enabling the menu system. :-)

G

> On Jan 25, 2017, at 10:43 AM, Charles Robinson 
>  wrote:
> 
> Olympus OM-D can be set to automatically toggle between the rear screen and
> the EVF when the eyepiece is close to your face.  It's pretty slick.
> 
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:27 AM, P. J. Alling 
> wrote:
> 
>> Unless the camera is smart enough to turn the touch screen off when the
>> camera is to your eye, it becomes a nose pointer, for the cameras AF point
>> selection, and your nose doesn't know, what you want to focus on...
>> 
>> 
>>> On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:
>>> 
>>> It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
>>> Though it is a touch screen.
>>> 
>>> http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 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.
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -Charles
> 
> --
> ** Please note my email address has changed **
> Charles Robinson - charles.robinson...@gmail.com
> Minneapolis, MN
> http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson
> -- 
> 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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[P. J. Alling]

I can't remember which new camera actually turns off half the rear 
screen so that you can use the other half to control focus points.  I 
don't know if which half is configurable, but even if it's always the 
left half that's turned off, then for the right eyed that's really slick.


I think it's nice that Olympus makes cameras that look like old school, 
cameras that actually sort of work as new school cameras. They did 
however start with a blank slate, well except for the 4:3 standard, 
which allowed them to build anything they actually wanted.   It's easy 
if you don't need to avoid offending a user base that expects a certain 
level of backward compatibility.


On 1/25/2017 1:43 PM, Charles Robinson wrote:

Olympus OM-D can be set to automatically toggle between the rear screen and
the EVF when the eyepiece is close to your face.  It's pretty slick.

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:27 AM, P. J. Alling 
wrote:


Unless the camera is smart enough to turn the touch screen off when the
camera is to your eye, it becomes a nose pointer, for the cameras AF point
selection, and your nose doesn't know, what you want to focus on...


On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:


It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
Though it is a touch screen.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV



--
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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[Charles Robinson]

Olympus OM-D can be set to automatically toggle between the rear screen and
the EVF when the eyepiece is close to your face.  It's pretty slick.

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:27 AM, P. J. Alling 
wrote:

> Unless the camera is smart enough to turn the touch screen off when the
> camera is to your eye, it becomes a nose pointer, for the cameras AF point
> selection, and your nose doesn't know, what you want to focus on...
>
>
> On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:
>
>> It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
>> Though it is a touch screen.
>>
>> http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV
>>
>>
>
> --
> 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.
>



-- 
 -Charles

--
** Please note my email address has changed **
Charles Robinson - charles.robinson...@gmail.com
Minneapolis, MN
http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson
-- 
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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[Igor PDML-StR]

This is an interesting comparison, but it is a bit narrow-focused: it 
looks only at the specs, but does not involve the performance.

It also makes some mistakes in the analysis of the specs.


The first question that pops in my mind after reading this comparison: 
has anybody who suggests that K-1 might be better for sports compared the 
the AF performance? Those might be on par with each other, but given the 
history of Pentax's AF lagging behind that of other "big" brand(s), I 
would not assume that fact, unless there is a good proof of that.


Second, they didn't do a good job about the comparison.
As a matter of fact, it looks someone has an agenda in that comparison. 
And that dictates the conclusions _despite_ the facts, not based on them.


The most glaring example (besides the aforementioned AF): how is Pentax 
"excellent" for Daily Photography, while Canon is only good, while the 
features shown in the comparison table show Pentax being worse: 1. 
heavier, 2. thicker (with the rest being equal).

They've got it backwards!

(Actually, the weakness of Canon in that department it's length, not 
thickness! But they omitted that part.)


And there are many other factors (even those that they've mentioned) that 
they excluded from the consideration. E.g. they compare the availability 
of lenses. (Never mind the comparison of their quality!)
Just by looking at the numbers, - CAnon has many more wide-angle zooms and 
primes. Shouldn't that affect that suitability for landscape photography?
The same disparity in the telephoto department: shouldn't that affect the 
suitability for sports photography?
I am not suggesting which camera is better from the lens' point of view, - 
I am just saying that the comparison could be deeper. And I understand 
that it would require a much bigger effort then just massaging the 
published specs.



So, it is a rather shallow and in some aspects flawed comparison (or as it 
is fashionable to say today: "rigged" ;-) ).


Nonetheless, thanks for posting the link, it is interesting to look at 
this comparison.


Cheers,

Igor



On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:


It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
Though it is a touch screen.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV



--
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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[John]

For me it's a legacy of my days running a mini-lab & trying to keep the
order kiosk screens clean.

I never felt I needed to use protective gloves when handling prints in
the darkroom, but I damn sure did whenever I went to clean the kiosk
screens. And NOT from the glass cleaner I had to use either!

Does no one ever wash their hands any more?

On 1/25/2017 10:23 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:

Yeah. Ever pulled out a smartphone in the dead of winter when it's
-15C with a -25C windchill and tried to use the touch screen? After
you pull off your gloves and your fingers start to freeze you discover
that dry skin fails to register.

Give me buttons and dials.


On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:04 AM, John  wrote:

The touch screen is not a really big selling point for me since I hate
touch screens.

On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:


It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
Though it is a touch screen.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV








--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[Steve Cottrell]

On 25/1/17, Bruce Walker, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Yeah. Ever pulled out a smartphone in the dead of winter when it's
>-15C with a -25C windchill and tried to use the touch screen? After
>you pull off your gloves and your fingers start to freeze you discover
>that dry skin fails to register.
>
>Give me buttons and dials.

Not so fast buster





-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
||  (O)  |Web Video Production
--
_



-- 
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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[P. J. Alling]

Unless the camera is smart enough to turn the touch screen off when the 
camera is to your eye, it becomes a nose pointer, for the cameras AF 
point selection, and your nose doesn't know, what you want to focus on...



On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:

It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
Though it is a touch screen.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV




--
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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[Gonz]

I don't care for a touch screen either.  Not on a camera.  I think
they are trying to bring the same usage model of a phone onto a
camera, but they are not the same beast.

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Bruce Walker  wrote:
> I must check into those. Thanks, Zos. :)
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Zos Xavius  wrote:
>> They make gloves that work with smart phones. I have a pair. It is
>> cumbersome but better than freezing.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Bruce Walker  
>> wrote:
>>> Yeah. Ever pulled out a smartphone in the dead of winter when it's
>>> -15C with a -25C windchill and tried to use the touch screen? After
>>> you pull off your gloves and your fingers start to freeze you discover
>>> that dry skin fails to register.
>>>
>>> Give me buttons and dials.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:04 AM, John  wrote:
 The touch screen is not a really big selling point for me since I hate
 touch screens.

 On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:
>
> It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
> Though it is a touch screen.
>
> http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV
>

 --
 Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
 Religion - Answers we must never question.


 --
 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -bmw
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>
>
>
> --
> -bmw
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
-- Reduce your Government Footprint

-- 
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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

My Leica SL has a touch screen. I find it occasionally useful, mostly when 
doing tabletop work and using autofocus. 

Actually, the Leica SL app on my iPad implements touch screen focus targeting 
and release ... That's a lot more useful as it can be significantly more 
precise than touching that little LCD display. :-)

G

>> On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:
>> It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
>> Though it is a touch screen.
>> 
>> http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV

-- 
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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[Bruce Walker]

I must check into those. Thanks, Zos. :)


On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Zos Xavius  wrote:
> They make gloves that work with smart phones. I have a pair. It is
> cumbersome but better than freezing.
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Bruce Walker  wrote:
>> Yeah. Ever pulled out a smartphone in the dead of winter when it's
>> -15C with a -25C windchill and tried to use the touch screen? After
>> you pull off your gloves and your fingers start to freeze you discover
>> that dry skin fails to register.
>>
>> Give me buttons and dials.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:04 AM, John  wrote:
>>> The touch screen is not a really big selling point for me since I hate
>>> touch screens.
>>>
>>> On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:

 It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
 Though it is a touch screen.

 http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV

>>>
>>> --
>>> Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
>>> Religion - Answers we must never question.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -bmw
>>
>> --
>> 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.



-- 
-bmw

-- 
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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[Zos Xavius]

They make gloves that work with smart phones. I have a pair. It is
cumbersome but better than freezing.

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Bruce Walker  wrote:
> Yeah. Ever pulled out a smartphone in the dead of winter when it's
> -15C with a -25C windchill and tried to use the touch screen? After
> you pull off your gloves and your fingers start to freeze you discover
> that dry skin fails to register.
>
> Give me buttons and dials.
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:04 AM, John  wrote:
>> The touch screen is not a really big selling point for me since I hate
>> touch screens.
>>
>> On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:
>>>
>>> It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
>>> Though it is a touch screen.
>>>
>>> http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
>> Religion - Answers we must never question.
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>
>
>
> --
> -bmw
>
> --
> 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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[Bruce Walker]

Yeah. Ever pulled out a smartphone in the dead of winter when it's
-15C with a -25C windchill and tried to use the touch screen? After
you pull off your gloves and your fingers start to freeze you discover
that dry skin fails to register.

Give me buttons and dials.


On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:04 AM, John  wrote:
> The touch screen is not a really big selling point for me since I hate
> touch screens.
>
> On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:
>>
>> It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
>> Though it is a touch screen.
>>
>> http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV
>>
>
> --
> Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
> Religion - Answers we must never question.
>
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
-bmw

-- 
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.

Re: interesting comparison someone sent me

[John]

The touch screen is not a really big selling point for me since I hate
touch screens.

On 1/24/2017 2:28 PM, Gonz wrote:

It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
Though it is a touch screen.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV



--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
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.

interesting comparison someone sent me

[Gonz]

It surprises me that the Canon does not have an articulating screen.
Though it is a touch screen.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pentax-K-1-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV

-- 
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.

GESEO Nidan exams also K-1/K-3 real world comparison

[Larry Colen]

Last Saturday we had Nidan (2nd degree black belt) exams at the dojo. 
For the sake of comparison I shot with both the K-1 and the K-3ii. I 
used the Tamron 28-75/2.8 mostly on the K-3 and the Pentax 28-105 mostly 
on the K-1, but for the sake of comparison I did swap them for a bit.  I 
varied apertures and shutter speeds on both, mostly shooting Tav a stop 
or two under.


For the sake of comparing the cameras, I posted the photos to flickr in 
"full resolution", i.e. whatever was left over when I was done cropping. 
 The K-3 was a lot less sluggish than the K-1, but in crop mode on the 
K-1 a lot of the gap closed up.


As you can tell, the lighting in the room totally sucks. The room lights 
are very orange, there is skylight coming in from windows on both sides, 
plus the mats reflect green and the ceiling is tan.  Fortunately, the 
lighting was about as good as it gets, with bright light, but no direct 
sunlight coming in.


fluidr should show the exif info on each shot, I tried to tag the lens 
being used. Also the LRC0 photos are with the K-1, the LRC2 
photos are with the K-3. I forgot to apply additional noise reduction in 
lightroom where needed, so some of the noise gap could probably be 
cleaned up.


http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157670797123990

A bit of background on the two people testing. A few years ago, Nicola 
(in the first test) was hiking/mountain climbing on Mt Shasta (IIRC) and 
in strong winds was blown off the edge, sliding/falling down about 1300 
feet of snow/mountainside.  She suffered compound fractures in one of 
her legs, so the fact that she is not only alive but still has both 
feet, or is even walking, much less training in aikido are testaments to 
modern medicine and her spirit of will.


Nathan, the redhead in the second test, is the son of Linda Holiday, the 
head instructor at our dojo.  She is the blonde woman on the examining 
panel that you can see in the background of a lot of the photos.

--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
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.

Re: K-1 Macro comparison, pixel shift etc

[Steve Cottrell]

On 12/5/16, mike wilson, discombobulated, unleashed:

>We know that's you, Slarti.  Stop spoofing or we'll take our next contract
>elsewhere.
>
>Rudolph the red-nosed white mouse.

Bloody freemasons at it again

-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
||  (O)  |Web Video Production
--
_



-- 
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.

Re: K-1 Macro comparison, pixel shift etc

[mike wilson]

> On 12 May 2016 at 09:28 Jostein Øksne  wrote:
> 
> 
> Performance out on the raggedy end of the Fiddlybits matters. Send me a camera
> and I'll test that properly for you. :-) 
> Jostein

We know that's you, Slarti.  Stop spoofing or we'll take our next contract
elsewhere.

Rudolph the red-nosed white mouse.

> 
> Den 12. mai 2016 01.56.24 CEST, skrev Larry Colen :
> 
> >Yes, I know that what matters is not the quality of the image on the 
> >pixel level, but sometimes, it's the performance out on the raggedy 
> >edges of the fiddly bits that matters, if only for bragging rights.
> 
> -- 
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> 
> -- 
> 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.

Re: K-1 Macro comparison, pixel shift etc

[Jostein Øksne]

Performance out on the raggedy end of the Fiddlybits matters. Send me a camera 
and I'll test that properly for you. :-) 
Jostein

Den 12. mai 2016 01.56.24 CEST, skrev Larry Colen :

>Yes, I know that what matters is not the quality of the image on the 
>pixel level, but sometimes, it's the performance out on the raggedy 
>edges of the fiddly bits that matters, if only for bragging rights.

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-- 
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.

Re: K-1 Macro comparison, pixel shift etc

[Larry Colen]

Stanley Halpin wrote:

On May 10, 2016, at 8:20 PM, Larry Colen<l...@red4est.com>  wrote:



Stanley Halpin wrote:

Larry wondered about using such-and-such a lens. Bob Sullivan wondered about 
comparison to the 645Z. Mark wondered about using pixel-shift in APS-C mode. So 
I posted a couple of shots that really didn’t address the issues. Forget those, 
they have been deleted.

Awesome!  Thanks! As expected, at this resolution they look great, I haven't 
had the chance to download them yet.

For those of us who are both pixel peepers and lazy (I can't be the only one) 
any chance of also posting a small 1500 pixel wide crop out of the middle of 
each?


Larry, I’ll do this if you can tell me how to select a 1000x1500 pixel section 
of an image from within LR. I know how to change the aspect ratio of a crop, I 
know how to put in a custom ration, but I don’t see a way to specify a specific 
size.


The way I would do it, which would be close enough for me:

Press "i" until the text on the screen shows the size of the image in 
pixels.

Select the photos
Make virtual copies (propeller-' on the mac)
hit R
select the aspect ratio
Move the corners until the size of the image is close to 1000x1500
I'm not going to sweat it being off a bit.

There is a chance that you'll end up with different resolutions on the 
photos of different cameras.  You may want to go and trim the bigger 
ones down, or just pick a crop where the highest resolution is still a 
comfortable size to view at 100%


Yes, I know that what matters is not the quality of the image on the 
pixel level, but sometimes, it's the performance out on the raggedy 
edges of the fiddly bits that matters, if only for bragging rights.


--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
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.

Re: K-1 Macro comparison, pixel shift etc

[Stanley Halpin]

> On May 10, 2016, at 8:20 PM, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Stanley Halpin wrote:
>> Larry wondered about using such-and-such a lens. Bob Sullivan wondered about 
>> comparison to the 645Z. Mark wondered about using pixel-shift in APS-C mode. 
>> So I posted a couple of shots that really didn’t address the issues. Forget 
>> those, they have been deleted.
> 
> Awesome!  Thanks! As expected, at this resolution they look great, I haven't 
> had the chance to download them yet.
> 
> For those of us who are both pixel peepers and lazy (I can't be the only one) 
> any chance of also posting a small 1500 pixel wide crop out of the middle of 
> each?

Larry, I’ll do this if you can tell me how to select a 1000x1500 pixel section 
of an image from within LR. I know how to change the aspect ratio of a crop, I 
know how to put in a custom ration, but I don’t see a way to specify a specific 
size.

By the way, when you go to my Zenfolio gallery with these images, you can move 
between the images with left-right arrow on the key board. If you alternate 
back and forth between the single-shot vs. pixel-shift versions (either in FF 
or in crop mode) you can see a subtle color shift…

stan

> 
> 
>> 
>> Set-up:
>> 
>> K-3 with D FA 100/2.8 macro @ f/8
>> 
>> vs.
>> 
>>  K-1 with same lens in “natural” mode
>> 
>> vs.
>> 
>> K-1, same lens, the camera now in pixel-shift mode
>> 
>> vs.
>> 
>>K-1, same lens, the camera now in APS-C mode
>> 
>> vs.
>> 
>>   K-1, same lens, the camera still in APS-C mode, but now again with 
>> pixel-shift
>> 
>> vs.
>> 
>>  645Z with FA 120/4 macro @ f/8
>> 
>> The images are @ 
>> http://photos.stanhalpin.com/p1033969621/h79536f21#h79536f21 and onward.
>> 
>> File downloads are enabled; password PDML
>> 
>> Files imported to LR with no presets, exported as jpg’s with no size or 
>> quality restrictions.
>> 
>> stan
> 
> -- 
> Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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.

Re: K-1 Macro comparison, pixel shit etc

[Larry Colen]

Stanley Halpin wrote:

Larry wondered about using such-and-such a lens. Bob Sullivan wondered about 
comparison to the 645Z. Mark wondered about using pixel-shift in APS-C mode. So 
I posted a couple of shots that really didn’t address the issues. Forget those, 
they have been deleted.


Awesome!  Thanks! As expected, at this resolution they look great, I 
haven't had the chance to download them yet.


For those of us who are both pixel peepers and lazy (I can't be the only 
one) any chance of also posting a small 1500 pixel wide crop out of the 
middle of each?





Set-up:

K-3 with D FA 100/2.8 macro @ f/8

vs.

   K-1 with same lens in “natural” mode

vs.

  K-1, same lens, the camera now in pixel-shift mode

vs.

 K-1, same lens, the camera now in APS-C mode

vs.

K-1, same lens, the camera still in APS-C mode, but now again with 
pixel-shift

vs.

   645Z with FA 120/4 macro @ f/8

The images are @ http://photos.stanhalpin.com/p1033969621/h79536f21#h79536f21 
and onward.

File downloads are enabled; password PDML

Files imported to LR with no presets, exported as jpg’s with no size or quality 
restrictions.

stan


--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
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.

K-1 Macro comparison, pixel shit etc

[Stanley Halpin]

Larry wondered about using such-and-such a lens. Bob Sullivan wondered about 
comparison to the 645Z. Mark wondered about using pixel-shift in APS-C mode. So 
I posted a couple of shots that really didn’t address the issues. Forget those, 
they have been deleted.

Set-up:

K-3 with D FA 100/2.8 macro @ f/8

vs.

  K-1 with same lens in “natural” mode

vs.

 K-1, same lens, the camera now in pixel-shift mode

vs.

K-1, same lens, the camera now in APS-C mode

vs.

   K-1, same lens, the camera still in APS-C mode, but now again with 
pixel-shift

vs.

  645Z with FA 120/4 macro @ f/8

The images are @ http://photos.stanhalpin.com/p1033969621/h79536f21#h79536f21 
and onward.

File downloads are enabled; password PDML

Files imported to LR with no presets, exported as jpg’s with no size or quality 
restrictions. 

stan
-- 
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.

Re: wide angle comparison

[Christine Nielsen]

I just applied the lens profile in Lightroom to "correct" the fisheye view to 
rectilinear... Nothing fancy. 

For me, the takeaway was: not much gained on the wide end of ff once you get 
down to extremely wide focal lengths, but you don't want fisheye & so you have 
to correct distortion/crop into image.  I've been shooting lots of interiors 
lately, seems like doing that with 8mm could be a bit much, probably exteriors 
& astral photos are more suited.  

-c


On May 2, 2016, at 5:38 PM, Darren Addy <pixelsmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Very interesting demonstration, Christine. Thanks for sharing it.

What method of "correction" for the fisheye did you use?
This makes me look a bit differently at the Samyang 8mm fisheye (on a
full frame). I'm not usually terribly interested in fisheye lines, but
if it gets one wider (corrected)
This thread has some examples: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50064023



> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Christine Nielsen <ch...@inielsen.net> wrote:
> So, for all of the other visual learners out there, who don't bother
> with FOV conversions & charts (The rest of you move along, lest
> you be tempted to reply: DUH...)
> 
> Recently, I had the need to explore the ranges of wide angle lenses. I
> have the 12-24mm for my k-5ii,  but was curious how much wider I could
> reasonably expect to get ...
> 
> I rented the 10-17mm pentax lens , and the D610 with a sigma 12-24 to
> compare... not apples to apples, but close enough.
> 
> Here's the result...
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2FyWgglq6t8Sm9yVUFtWC1QZXM/view?usp=sharing
> 
> "Corrected" fisheye image at 10mm = ff image at 12mm.  Huh!   I know
> it's not a completely fair comparison, but I really thought ff would
> be... wider.
> 
> Still, I will not let this discovery deter me.  Now that the holidays
> are over, expect my order to be incoming, Messrs B!
> 
> ;)
> -c
> 
> --
> 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.



-- 
“The Earth is Art, The Photographer is only a Witness ”
― Yann Arthus-Bertrand, Earth from Above

-- 
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.

Re: wide angle comparison

[Darren Addy]

Very interesting demonstration, Christine. Thanks for sharing it.

What method of "correction" for the fisheye did you use?
This makes me look a bit differently at the Samyang 8mm fisheye (on a
full frame). I'm not usually terribly interested in fisheye lines, but
if it gets one wider (corrected)
This thread has some examples: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50064023



On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Christine Nielsen <ch...@inielsen.net> wrote:
> So, for all of the other visual learners out there, who don't bother
> with FOV conversions & charts (The rest of you move along, lest
> you be tempted to reply: DUH...)
>
> Recently, I had the need to explore the ranges of wide angle lenses. I
> have the 12-24mm for my k-5ii,  but was curious how much wider I could
> reasonably expect to get ...
>
> I rented the 10-17mm pentax lens , and the D610 with a sigma 12-24 to
> compare... not apples to apples, but close enough.
>
> Here's the result...
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2FyWgglq6t8Sm9yVUFtWC1QZXM/view?usp=sharing
>
> "Corrected" fisheye image at 10mm = ff image at 12mm.  Huh!   I know
> it's not a completely fair comparison, but I really thought ff would
> be... wider.
>
> Still, I will not let this discovery deter me.  Now that the holidays
> are over, expect my order to be incoming, Messrs B!
>
> ;)
> -c
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
“The Earth is Art, The Photographer is only a Witness ”
― Yann Arthus-Bertrand, Earth from Above

-- 
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.

wide angle comparison

[Christine Nielsen]

So, for all of the other visual learners out there, who don't bother
with FOV conversions & charts (The rest of you move along, lest
you be tempted to reply: DUH...)

Recently, I had the need to explore the ranges of wide angle lenses. I
have the 12-24mm for my k-5ii,  but was curious how much wider I could
reasonably expect to get ...

I rented the 10-17mm pentax lens , and the D610 with a sigma 12-24 to
compare... not apples to apples, but close enough.

Here's the result...

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2FyWgglq6t8Sm9yVUFtWC1QZXM/view?usp=sharing

"Corrected" fisheye image at 10mm = ff image at 12mm.  Huh!   I know
it's not a completely fair comparison, but I really thought ff would
be... wider.

Still, I will not let this discovery deter me.  Now that the holidays
are over, expect my order to be incoming, Messrs B!

;)
-c

-- 
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.

Re: Balloon Scan Comparison

[John]

If you don't like the pink tint on the white, I'm pretty sure Lightroom
has a way you can use an "adjustment brush" to mask the effect from that
area.

On 2/27/2016 11:25 AM, Christine Aguila wrote:

Hi All:

I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original
shot posted and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make
sure the whites in the balloon on the left stayed white.  If you
think the whites are to pinky, feel free to let me know.

http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html

 Cheers, Christine



--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
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.

Re: Balloon Scan Comparison

[ann sanfedele]

Yup - new one better - I had agreed with Darren that it was a bit too 
cyan (and to my eye a bit too light)


It really isn't fair to get to picky when we all have different monitors...
and then you hvae to make your printer happy too and they can be cranky!

xo,
ann

On 2/27/2016 12:55 PM, Christine Aguila wrote:

Thanks, Dan!  Cheers, Christine



On Feb 27, 2016, at 11:28 AM, Daniel J. Matyola <danmaty...@gmail.com> wrote:

I think the new one is more pleasing to the eye, and overall a very
effective shot.

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola


On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Christine Aguila
<christ...@caguila.com> wrote:

Hi All:

I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original shot posted 
and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make sure the whites in the 
balloon on the left stayed white.  If you think the whites are to pinky, feel 
free to let me know.

http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html

Cheers, Christine
--
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.

Re: Balloon Scan Comparison

[Christine Aguila]

Understood, Igor.  Obviously, I’ll be tweaking and doing true comparisons when 
printing these scans.  Everybody’s monitor is different, so probably best to 
compare prints.My purpose here was just to show a quick web comparison.

Cheers, Christine


> On Feb 27, 2016, at 12:07 PM, Igor PDML-StR <pdml...@komkon.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Christine,
> 
> On my monitor (it was calibrated 2-3 months ago, but I think it is still in a 
> good shape), - the colors of both images (in the comparison linked below) 
> look a bit off.
> I am not 100% sure what should be tweaked, I think they are slightly 
> blueish-greenish...
> 
> Maybe you've tried that already, - but I would just zoom in and try to
> do "Auto-white-balance" by pointing the "picker" cursos at the white portion 
> of the baloon. It doesn't guarantee that it would make all colors right, but 
> often it works well.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Igor
> 
> 
> 
> Darren Addy Sat, 27 Feb 2016 09:32:48 -0800 wrote:
> 
> Ah, thanks to Daniel's comments, I want to clarify that my comment
> referred to the original.
> 
> 
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Daniel J. Matyola
> <danmaty...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think the new one is more pleasing to the eye, and overall a very
>> effective shot.
>> 
>> Dan Matyola
>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Christine Aguila
>> <christ...@caguila.com> wrote:
>>> Hi All:
>>> 
>>> I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original shot
>>> posted and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make sure the whites
>>> in the balloon on the left stayed white.  If you think the whites are to
>>> pinky, feel free to let me know.
>>> 
>>> http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html
>>> 
>>> Cheers, Christine
> 
> -- 
> 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.

Re: Balloon Scan Comparison

[Igor PDML-StR]

Christine,

On my monitor (it was calibrated 2-3 months ago, but I think it is still 
in a good shape), - the colors of both images (in the comparison linked 
below) look a bit off.
I am not 100% sure what should be tweaked, I think they are slightly 
blueish-greenish...


Maybe you've tried that already, - but I would just zoom in and try to
do "Auto-white-balance" by pointing the "picker" cursos at the white 
portion of the baloon. It doesn't guarantee that it would make all colors 
right, but often it works well.


Cheers,

Igor



Darren Addy Sat, 27 Feb 2016 09:32:48 -0800 wrote:

Ah, thanks to Daniel's comments, I want to clarify that my comment
referred to the original.


On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Daniel J. Matyola
<danmaty...@gmail.com> wrote:

I think the new one is more pleasing to the eye, and overall a very
effective shot.

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola


On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Christine Aguila
<christ...@caguila.com> wrote:

Hi All:

I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original shot
posted and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make sure the whites
in the balloon on the left stayed white.  If you think the whites are to
pinky, feel free to let me know.

http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html

Cheers, Christine


--
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.

Re: Balloon Scan Comparison

[Christine Aguila]

Thanks, Dan!  Cheers, Christine


> On Feb 27, 2016, at 11:28 AM, Daniel J. Matyola <danmaty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think the new one is more pleasing to the eye, and overall a very
> effective shot.
> 
> Dan Matyola
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola
> 
> 
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Christine Aguila
> <christ...@caguila.com> wrote:
>> Hi All:
>> 
>> I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original shot 
>> posted and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make sure the whites 
>> in the balloon on the left stayed white.  If you think the whites are to 
>> pinky, feel free to let me know.
>> 
>> http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html
>> 
>> Cheers, Christine
>> --
>> 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.

Re: Balloon Scan Comparison

[Darren Addy]

Ah, thanks to Daniel's comments, I want to clarify that my comment
referred to the original.

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Daniel J. Matyola
<danmaty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the new one is more pleasing to the eye, and overall a very
> effective shot.
>
> Dan Matyola
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Christine Aguila
> <christ...@caguila.com> wrote:
>> Hi All:
>>
>> I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original shot 
>> posted and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make sure the whites 
>> in the balloon on the left stayed white.  If you think the whites are to 
>> pinky, feel free to let me know.
>>
>> http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html
>>
>> Cheers, Christine
>> --
>> 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.



-- 
“The Earth is Art, The Photographer is only a Witness ”
― Yann Arthus-Bertrand, Earth from Above

-- 
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.

Re: Balloon Scan Comparison

[Christine Aguila]

Thanks, Darren!  I guess upping the pink tint didn’t get ride enough of the 
blue on your monitor.  Cheers, Christine


> On Feb 27, 2016, at 11:24 AM, Darren Addy <pixelsmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Neat image! The guy holding the rope makes it more interesting than
> your average hot air balloon photo.
> 
> It looksa little too cyan on my monitor. Correct that and I'll bet
> those reds brighten up, too.
> 
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Christine Aguila
> <christ...@caguila.com> wrote:
>> Thanks, Jack!  Cheers, Christine
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 27, 2016, at 11:04 AM, Jack Davis <jdavi...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Prefer the +20 saturation and see
>>> no "pink."
>>> J
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On Feb 27, 2016, at 8:25 AM, Christine Aguila <christ...@caguila.com> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi All:
>>>> 
>>>> I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original shot 
>>>> posted and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make sure the 
>>>> whites in the balloon on the left stayed white.  If you think the whites 
>>>> are to pinky, feel free to let me know.
>>>> 
>>>> http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers, Christine
>>>> --
>>>> 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.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> “The Earth is Art, The Photographer is only a Witness ”
> ― Yann Arthus-Bertrand, Earth from Above
> 
> -- 
> 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.

Re: Balloon Scan Comparison

[Daniel J. Matyola]

I think the new one is more pleasing to the eye, and overall a very
effective shot.

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola


On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Christine Aguila
<christ...@caguila.com> wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original shot 
> posted and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make sure the whites 
> in the balloon on the left stayed white.  If you think the whites are to 
> pinky, feel free to let me know.
>
> http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html
>
> Cheers, Christine
> --
> 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.

Re: Balloon Scan Comparison

[Darren Addy]

Neat image! The guy holding the rope makes it more interesting than
your average hot air balloon photo.

It looksa little too cyan on my monitor. Correct that and I'll bet
those reds brighten up, too.

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Christine Aguila
<christ...@caguila.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Jack!  Cheers, Christine
>
>
>> On Feb 27, 2016, at 11:04 AM, Jack Davis <jdavi...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Prefer the +20 saturation and see
>> no "pink."
>> J
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Feb 27, 2016, at 8:25 AM, Christine Aguila <christ...@caguila.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi All:
>>>
>>> I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original shot 
>>> posted and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make sure the 
>>> whites in the balloon on the left stayed white.  If you think the whites 
>>> are to pinky, feel free to let me know.
>>>
>>> http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html
>>>
>>> Cheers, Christine
>>> --
>>> 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.



-- 
“The Earth is Art, The Photographer is only a Witness ”
― Yann Arthus-Bertrand, Earth from Above

-- 
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.

Re: Balloon Scan Comparison

[Christine Aguila]

Thanks, Jack!  Cheers, Christine


> On Feb 27, 2016, at 11:04 AM, Jack Davis <jdavi...@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> Prefer the +20 saturation and see
> no "pink."
> J
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Feb 27, 2016, at 8:25 AM, Christine Aguila <christ...@caguila.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi All:
>> 
>> I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original shot 
>> posted and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make sure the whites 
>> in the balloon on the left stayed white.  If you think the whites are to 
>> pinky, feel free to let me know.
>> 
>> http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html
>> 
>> Cheers, Christine
>> -- 
>> 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.

Re: Balloon Scan Comparison

[Jack Davis]

Prefer the +20 saturation and see
no "pink."
J

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 27, 2016, at 8:25 AM, Christine Aguila <christ...@caguila.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi All:
> 
> I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original shot 
> posted and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make sure the whites 
> in the balloon on the left stayed white.  If you think the whites are to 
> pinky, feel free to let me know.
> 
> http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html
> 
> Cheers, Christine
> -- 
> 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.

Balloon Scan Comparison

[Christine Aguila]

Hi All:

I added 20+ pink in Lightroom.  Here’s a comparison of the original shot posted 
and the frame with pink adjustment.  I wanted to make sure the whites in the 
balloon on the left stayed white.  If you think the whites are to pinky, feel 
free to let me know.

http://caguilaphotography.com/ballooncomparison/content/ballooncomparisonwithtextpdml_large.html

Cheers, Christine
-- 
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.

Sony versus Pentax informal comparison

[Larry Colen]

I photographed a friend's music video shoot yesterday. Afterwards, one 
of the videographers and I got to geeking out on comparing camera's and 
such, walked into the driveway and aimed our cameras at the house across 
the street.  All of the photos are hand held, at f/2.8, ISO varies 
between 16,000 and 20,000 shutter speed between .25 and .33 Seconds. 
Photos that were obviously bad were discarded from the test.


The first six frames (with DSC in the names) were shot with a Sony 
mirrorless full frame alpha7S-II.  Google tells me the body sells for 
around $2800.


The next six frames (LRC26...) were shot with my Pentax K-3, APS DSLR, 
you can pick up the body new for about $650


The last five frames (LRC56...) were shot with my Pentax K-5ii APS DSLR, 
which you can still find new for about $550


The full resolution photos are posted at:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157664757248072

In theory, you will eventually be able to see them with exif data at:
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157664757248072

In the meantime, this may be an easier way to see them all:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157664757248072/

Unfortunately, I didn't notice that the K-5 was focusing on the truck, 
rather than the house.  Joe, however was blown away that my Pentaxes 
would autofocus in that light.


Note that after posting them, I noticed that they weren't processed 
quite the same, so I'm re-uploading the Pentax photos, processed a 
little brighter.  I also did not apply lightroom noise reduction to them.


--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
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.

Re: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[Mark Roberts]

Malcolm Smith wrote:

>P.J. Alling wrote:
>
>> It's quite a bit smaller than the Nikon D810.
>> 
>> http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,557
>
>I know I'm in the minority, but I like the size of the D810. If you have
>large hands, this continual race to make a smaller camera results in tiny
>buttons to press. Nothing wrong with a Pentax 67 sized camera.

I agree completely.
 
-- 
Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
www.robertstech.com





-- 
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.

Re: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[Paul Stenquist]

I'm pleased that it's of substantial mass. It will be a better match for the 
150-450 in terms of balance.
But regardless of that is the package bigger than it has to be to accommodate 
the 24x36 sensor and features? I don't know. How does it compare to comparable 
Nikon and Canon products.

Paul via phone

> On Feb 19, 2016, at 7:19 AM, Bill <anotherdrunken...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/18/2016 9:45 PM, Mark C wrote:
>> Yeah - but 6x7 / 67 lenses are pretty big and heavy. With lens attached
>> the 6x7 would be quite a bit larger and heavier.
> 
> I've handled some of these new lenses Pentax is making.
> Granted they are zooms, but they are also ginormous.
> Note that the K1 body dimensions don't include the battery grip.
> 
> Ricoh seems to have fallen into the bigger is better trap.
> 
>> 
>>> On 2/18/2016 8:28 PM, Bill wrote:
>>> 
>>> The K1 is 136.5 x 110 x 85.5 and weighs 1010 grams.
>>> 
>>> For comparison, the Pentax 67 was
>>> 177 x101 x91. and weighed 1290 grams.
>>> 
>>> bill
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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.

Re: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[Bill]

On 2/18/2016 9:45 PM, Mark C wrote:

Yeah - but 6x7 / 67 lenses are pretty big and heavy. With lens attached
the 6x7 would be quite a bit larger and heavier.


I've handled some of these new lenses Pentax is making.
Granted they are zooms, but they are also ginormous.
Note that the K1 body dimensions don't include the battery grip.

Ricoh seems to have fallen into the bigger is better trap.



On 2/18/2016 8:28 PM, Bill wrote:


The K1 is 136.5 x 110 x 85.5 and weighs 1010 grams.

For comparison, the Pentax 67 was
177 x101 x91. and weighed 1290 grams.

bill




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus





--
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.

Re: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[P.J. Alling]

On 2/18/2016 10:45 PM, Mark C wrote:
Yeah - but 6x7 / 67 lenses are pretty big and heavy. With lens 
attached the 6x7 would be quite a bit larger and heavier.


On 2/18/2016 8:28 PM, Bill wrote:


The K1 is 136.5 x 110 x 85.5 and weighs 1010 grams.

For comparison, the Pentax 67 was
177 x101 x91. and weighed 1290 grams.

bill





Just for giggles I compared the K-1 to the Canon D7 Mark II.  The K-1 is 
slightly narrower, slightly shorter and weighs 10% less, though it is a 
bit thicker, mostly due to it's grip. Sure the Canon has astounding 
performance in everything except imaging, where it lags pretty much 
everybody else by a bit, but we are comparing body size of a FF camera 
to an APS-C camera and the FF camera is smaller and lighter.


Now I want to say the Pentax isn't really a small camera, just small by 
comparison to some of it's competition.






---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus






--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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.

RE: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[Malcolm Smith]

P.J. Alling wrote:

> It's quite a bit smaller than the Nikon D810.
> 
> http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,557

I know I'm in the minority, but I like the size of the D810. If you have
large hands, this continual race to make a smaller camera results in tiny
buttons to press. Nothing wrong with a Pentax 67 sized camera.

I take it the latest battery grips come with a warning that it may make your
camera look fat.

Malcolm


-- 
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.

Re: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[Mark C]

Yeah - but 6x7 / 67 lenses are pretty big and heavy. With lens attached 
the 6x7 would be quite a bit larger and heavier.


On 2/18/2016 8:28 PM, Bill wrote:


The K1 is 136.5 x 110 x 85.5 and weighs 1010 grams.

For comparison, the Pentax 67 was
177 x101 x91. and weighed 1290 grams.

bill




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
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.

Re: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[Mark Roberts]

Bill wrote:

>
>  On 2016-02-18 12:32 , P.J. Alling wrote:
>> The image I stole to post last night was a bit misleading.  The K-1 is
>> quite
>> a bit bigger than the K-3II.
>>
>> http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,619
>
>The K1 is 136.5 x 110 x 85.5 and weighs 1010 grams.
>
>For comparison, the Pentax 67 was
>177 x101 x91. and weighed 1290 grams.

When I get a K-1 I'll post a photo of it next to my 67. Should be
interesting.
 
-- 
Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
www.robertstech.com





-- 
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.

Re: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[Bill]

 On 2016-02-18 12:32 , P.J. Alling wrote:

The image I stole to post last night was a bit misleading.  The K-1 is
quite
a bit bigger than the K-3II.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,619


The K1 is 136.5 x 110 x 85.5 and weighs 1010 grams.

For comparison, the Pentax 67 was
177 x101 x91. and weighed 1290 grams.

bill

--
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.

Re: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[P.J. Alling]

Well the boyz from digitalrev seem to think that m43 has hit or is about 
to hit a dead end.  That Olympus has no where to go improving it's 
sensor, that it's about topped out in dynamic range, resolution etc.  
I'm not sure I see it that way, but hey it's a data point.


I happen to think the new Pen F looks like a wonderful street shooter.


On 2/18/2016 4:52 PM, steve harley wrote:

On 2016-02-18 12:32 , P.J. Alling wrote:
The image I stole to post last night was a bit misleading.  The K-1 
is quite

a bit bigger than the K-3II.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,619


alas, this is the direction camera life has been leading me:



(note the thickness and weight in the bullet points)

the K-1 is pretty attractive though, and i have a nice set of lenses 
for it; waiting to find out it's low-light performance, as that is the 
main thing that keeps me split between K-5 and E-M5







--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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.

Re: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[steve harley]

On 2016-02-18 12:32 , P.J. Alling wrote:

The image I stole to post last night was a bit misleading.  The K-1 is quite
a bit bigger than the K-3II.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,619


alas, this is the direction camera life has been leading me:



(note the thickness and weight in the bullet points)

the K-1 is pretty attractive though, and i have a nice set of lenses for it; 
waiting to find out it's low-light performance, as that is the main thing 
that keeps me split between K-5 and E-M5




--
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.

Re: Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[Christine Nielsen]

Well, I appreciate you doing this crap. ;)  I've been *this* close a
couple of times to pulling the trigger on a D750, but I prefer a
smallish-er camera...

:)
-c

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:32 PM, P.J. Alling <webstertwenty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The image I stole to post last night was a bit misleading.  The K-1 is quite
> a bit bigger than the K-3II.
>
> http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,619
>
> It is a bit smaller than the Nikon D610 and D750, in height and width.
>
> http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,486
>
> http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,567
>
> It's quite a bit smaller than the Nikon D810.
>
> http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,557
>
> Size comparison to the Canon 5D bodies and 6D what you'd expect, for a FF
> DSLR the Canon 6D qualifies as tiny, and it's still bigger than the Pentax
> in at least one dimension but not by much.
>
> It's not worth comparing to the Nikon D5 or Canon 1D lines since it's
> obviously in a different class altogether.
>
> Still it's smallish for a FF DSLR. (Yes, I have nothing better to do today
> other than this crap).
>
> --
> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve
> immortality through not dying.
> -- Woody Allen
>
>
> --
> 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.

Camera size has the K-1 available for comparison.

[P.J. Alling]

The image I stole to post last night was a bit misleading.  The K-1 is 
quite a bit bigger than the K-3II.


http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,619

It is a bit smaller than the Nikon D610 and D750, in height and width.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,486

http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,567

It's quite a bit smaller than the Nikon D810.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#659,557

Size comparison to the Canon 5D bodies and 6D what you'd expect, for a 
FF DSLR the Canon 6D qualifies as tiny, and it's still bigger than the 
Pentax in at least one dimension but not by much.


It's not worth comparing to the Nikon D5 or Canon 1D lines since it's 
obviously in a different class altogether.


Still it's smallish for a FF DSLR. (Yes, I have nothing better to do 
today other than this crap).


--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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.

Re: Camera Size comparison between K-3 and Nikon D500

[Ken Waller]

It's not the size of the wand. it's the magician that wields it !

Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller

- Original Message - 
From: "P.J. Alling" <webstertwenty...@gmail.com>

Subject: Camera Size comparison between K-3 and Nikon D500


Firstly everyone who want's to feel a little smug about something Pentax 
can follow the link...


http://camerasize.com/compare/#648,485

Secondly it's just annoying that Camera Size gets Canon and Nikon gear 
entered immediately while some other manufactures take forever and some 
relatively recent cameras are ignored entirely.


--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.

-- Woody Allen



--
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.

Re: Camera Size comparison between K-3 and Nikon D500

[Darren Addy]

It seems odd (with that size difference) that the Nikon is only 60
grams heavier. That would seem to indicate it is made of lighter
stuff. Does it have a magnesium frame inside like the Pentax?

On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:29 AM, P.J. Alling  wrote:
> Firstly everyone who want's to feel a little smug about something Pentax can
> follow the link...
>
> http://camerasize.com/compare/#648,485
>
> Secondly it's just annoying that Camera Size gets Canon and Nikon gear
> entered immediately while some other manufactures take forever and some
> relatively recent cameras are ignored entirely.
>
> --
> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve
> immortality through not dying.
> -- Woody Allen
>
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.

-- 
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.

Camera Size comparison between K-3 and Nikon D500

[P.J. Alling]

Firstly everyone who want's to feel a little smug about something Pentax 
can follow the link...


http://camerasize.com/compare/#648,485

Secondly it's just annoying that Camera Size gets Canon and Nikon gear 
entered immediately while some other manufactures take forever and some 
relatively recent cameras are ignored entirely.


--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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.

Re: quick and dirty panorama exposure comparison

[P.J. Alling]

Looked at their website and I'm not sure that I really trust software 
developers who can't build a site that will properly wrap text in html.


On 12/15/2015 7:10 PM, Paul wrote:

Check out EasyHDR...

http://www.easyhdr.com/

It's on sale for just a shade over 30 bucks; you can batch process 
with it and it comes with a plug-in so you can call it up from within 
Lightroom.


-p

On 12/15/2015 3:19 PM, Larry Colen wrote:


8) I wish I could just point Lightroom to a folder/directory and just
tell it to make HDR versions of the lightest and darkest exposures of
all of the bracketed frames, rather than having to manually do each one.







--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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.

quick and dirty panorama exposure comparison

[Larry Colen]

Yesterday afternoon I made run to the hardware store and thought the 
sunset clouds behind the old sawdust burning oven looked interesting.

I tried shooting a few panoramas, bracketing by +/- 2 stops.

Here are three different panos, one from the fastest shutter speed 
(1/100), one from the middle (1/25) and one from an HDR from the fastest 
and slowest (1/100+ 1/16), all processed in lightroom 6.


https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157662305853371

My conclusions are:
1) the K-3 has enough dynamic range that for a lot of shots, if you're 
willing to take the time HDR isn't completely necessary to get a decent 
shot, particularly at ISO 100.


2) The lightroom auto-toning of HDR works a *LOT* better than their 
normal auto-toning and get the exposure a lot closer to what I want.


3) While the final outcome in lightroom between HDR and not may not be 
dramatic, it's a lot quicker to get the good results using their HDR.


4) I really ought to use a tripod at 1/6 second.

5) With the incredible dynamic range of the K-3 sensor, I really want 
more than a maximum of two stops of bracketing per frame. Seriously, 
when you compare the raw files two stops out of 12 or 14 are barely 
noticeable.  I want +/-4 stops.
Mind you, +/- 2 stops might make a difference if you're the sort of 
tosser that shoots in jpeg.


6) With the dynamic range of the K-3, I really wish that Lightroom had a 
larger range of adjustment on all of their sliders, particularly in HDR 
mode.


7) I really wish that Lightroom let me select regions from various 
frames that I explicitly want to include in or exclude from either HDR 
or panorama frames.


8) I wish I could just point Lightroom to a folder/directory and just 
tell it to make HDR versions of the lightest and darkest exposures of 
all of the bracketed frames, rather than having to manually do each one.



--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est)

--
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.

Re: quick and dirty panorama exposure comparison

[Paul]

Check out EasyHDR...

http://www.easyhdr.com/

It's on sale for just a shade over 30 bucks; you can batch process with 
it and it comes with a plug-in so you can call it up from within Lightroom.


-p

On 12/15/2015 3:19 PM, Larry Colen wrote:


8) I wish I could just point Lightroom to a folder/directory and just
tell it to make HDR versions of the lightest and darkest exposures of
all of the bracketed frames, rather than having to manually do each one.




--
Being old doesn't seem so old now that I'm old.

--
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.

Re: quick and dirty panorama exposure comparison

[Paul]

The demo is somewhat limited.  The newest "paid for" version - v3.7 - 
will save as JPGs, TIFs, and PNGs.  That's the one that will do batch 
conversions, too.


-p

On 12/15/2015 7:27 PM, Larry Colen wrote:



Paul wrote:

Check out EasyHDR...

http://www.easyhdr.com/


Thanks.



It's on sale for just a shade over 30 bucks; you can batch process with
it and it comes with a plug-in so you can call it up from within
Lightroom.


Interesting, I downloaded the demo and tried a couple of quick
experiments.  It seems to do much more of the tone mapping by default,
rather than the Adobe simply expanding the dynamic range.  A quick RTFM
seems to imply that it can generate the expanded range raw files, but
the free demo says that it only produces jpegs.

I'll have to take a closer look at it, but right now I don't have quite
enough free time to save that much time.




-p

On 12/15/2015 3:19 PM, Larry Colen wrote:


8) I wish I could just point Lightroom to a folder/directory and just
tell it to make HDR versions of the lightest and darkest exposures of
all of the bracketed frames, rather than having to manually do each one.








--
Being old doesn't seem so old now that I'm old.

--
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.

Re: quick and dirty panorama exposure comparison

[Larry Colen]

Paul wrote:

Check out EasyHDR...

http://www.easyhdr.com/


Thanks.



It's on sale for just a shade over 30 bucks; you can batch process with
it and it comes with a plug-in so you can call it up from within Lightroom.


Interesting, I downloaded the demo and tried a couple of quick 
experiments.  It seems to do much more of the tone mapping by default, 
rather than the Adobe simply expanding the dynamic range.  A quick RTFM 
seems to imply that it can generate the expanded range raw files, but 
the free demo says that it only produces jpegs.


I'll have to take a closer look at it, but right now I don't have quite 
enough free time to save that much time.





-p

On 12/15/2015 3:19 PM, Larry Colen wrote:


8) I wish I could just point Lightroom to a folder/directory and just
tell it to make HDR versions of the lightest and darkest exposures of
all of the bracketed frames, rather than having to manually do each one.






--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est)

--
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.

Re: OT Peso's, SBSC (side by side comparison.)

[knarf]

Lovely shot.

Colour wins.

Cheers,

frank 

On November 1, 2015 10:05:19 AM EST, David J Brooks  wrote:
>Taken last weekend on our camera club walkabout.
>
>B is in camera conversion using red filter bias, and the colour
>shot, same scene is from the RAW file of the X30
>
>https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22649815196/
>
>https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22487873630/
>
>Comments.??
>
>Dave

-- 

"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -- Henri Cartier-Bresson

Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-- 
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.

Re: OT Peso's, SBSC (side by side comparison.)

[Bob W-PDML]

I prefer the colour. The other is a bit bland, but would would respond well to 
more contrast, I think

B

> On 1 Nov 2015, at 15:07, David J Brooks  wrote:
> 
> Taken last weekend on our camera club walkabout.
> 
> B is in camera conversion using red filter bias, and the colour
> shot, same scene is from the RAW file of the X30
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22649815196/
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22487873630/
> 
> Comments.??
> 
> Dave
> 
> -- 
> Documenting Life in Rural Ontario.
> www.caughtinmotion.com
> http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
> York Region, Ontario, Canada
> 
> -- 
> 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.

Re: OT Peso's, SBSC (side by side comparison.)

[Paul]

I'd have to vote for the b/w over the color, though I'd like to see a 
litle subtle vignetting to lead my eye more down the path.  You might 
change my mind by adding a little more contrast to the color.  It looks 
a little bland, to me.  In either case, I'd like to be making my way 
down that path.  ;>}


-p

On 11/1/2015 9:05 AM, David J Brooks wrote:

Taken last weekend on our camera club walkabout.

B is in camera conversion using red filter bias, and the colour
shot, same scene is from the RAW file of the X30

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22649815196/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22487873630/

Comments.??

Dave



--
Being old doesn't seem so old now that I'm old.

--
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.

Re: OT Peso's, SBSC (side by side comparison.)

[ann sanfedele]

You're just being contrary... all the smart money is on the color 
version ;-)


The softness of the light , lack of contrast in the color is a plus to 
me.. appropriate for his overcast day.


ann

On 11/1/2015 2:07 PM, Paul wrote:
I'd have to vote for the b/w over the color, though I'd like to see a 
litle subtle vignetting to lead my eye more down the path.  You might 
change my mind by adding a little more contrast to the color.  It 
looks a little bland, to me.  In either case, I'd like to be making my 
way down that path.  ;>}


-p

On 11/1/2015 9:05 AM, David J Brooks wrote:

Taken last weekend on our camera club walkabout.

B is in camera conversion using red filter bias, and the colour
shot, same scene is from the RAW file of the X30

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22649815196/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22487873630/

Comments.??

Dave






--
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.

Re: OT Peso's, SBSC (side by side comparison.)

[ann sanfedele]

The color, by a mile for me

ann

On 11/1/2015 10:05 AM, David J Brooks wrote:

Taken last weekend on our camera club walkabout.

B is in camera conversion using red filter bias, and the colour
shot, same scene is from the RAW file of the X30

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22649815196/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22487873630/

Comments.??

Dave




--
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.

Re: OT Peso's, SBSC (side by side comparison.)

[John]

On 11/1/2015 10:05 AM, David J Brooks wrote:

Taken last weekend on our camera club walkabout.

B is in camera conversion using red filter bias, and the colour
shot, same scene is from the RAW file of the X30

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22649815196/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22487873630/

Comments.??

Dave



The color image is more pleasing to my taste.

--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
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.

Re: OT Peso's, SBSC (side by side comparison.)

[David J Brooks]

On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Bob W-PDML  wrote:
> I prefer the colour. The other is a bit bland, but would would respond well 
> to more contrast, I think
>
> B

I'll have to check my in camera settings, i think i have it at + 1 for
contrast, may need to try +2 and see

Dave
>
>> On 1 Nov 2015, at 15:07, David J Brooks  wrote:
>>
>> Taken last weekend on our camera club walkabout.
>>
>> B is in camera conversion using red filter bias, and the colour
>> shot, same scene is from the RAW file of the X30
>>
>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22649815196/
>>
>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22487873630/
>>
>> Comments.??
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> --
>> Documenting Life in Rural Ontario.
>> www.caughtinmotion.com
>> http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
>> York Region, Ontario, Canada
>>
>> --
>> 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.



-- 
Documenting Life in Rural Ontario.
www.caughtinmotion.com
http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
York Region, Ontario, Canada

-- 
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.

Re: OT Peso's, SBSC (side by side comparison.)

[P.J. Alling]

I find that B renderings need a touch more contrast, compared to the 
color version.  That's something I didn't really notice all that much in 
the good ol' days of film.


On 11/1/2015 11:17 AM, David J Brooks wrote:

On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Bob W-PDML  wrote:

I prefer the colour. The other is a bit bland, but would would respond well to 
more contrast, I think

B

I'll have to check my in camera settings, i think i have it at + 1 for
contrast, may need to try +2 and see

Dave

On 1 Nov 2015, at 15:07, David J Brooks  wrote:

Taken last weekend on our camera club walkabout.

B is in camera conversion using red filter bias, and the colour
shot, same scene is from the RAW file of the X30

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22649815196/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22487873630/

Comments.??

Dave

--
Documenting Life in Rural Ontario.
www.caughtinmotion.com
http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
York Region, Ontario, Canada

--
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.






--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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.

OT Peso's, SBSC (side by side comparison.)

[David J Brooks]

Taken last weekend on our camera club walkabout.

B is in camera conversion using red filter bias, and the colour
shot, same scene is from the RAW file of the X30

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22649815196/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22487873630/

Comments.??

Dave

-- 
Documenting Life in Rural Ontario.
www.caughtinmotion.com
http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
York Region, Ontario, Canada

-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited atf/11

[Rob Studdert]

There are apps specifically designed to produce similar results using
image bursts and it's actually not overly tedious to stack images in
LR, you can choose to have them auto-aligned too. Personally my
preference would be to have access to the images stack as discrete
images so that I could easily remedy any aberrations that were
introduced by subject movement.

I understand the theory but I think that there is way too much
emphasis put on the limited advantage leveraged by the PSR tech,
scaling down an image from a larger sensor will yield similar results.
The sample you provided a link to comes nowhere near filling my screen
so I'm not sure where a 5k screen would differ in the appraisal of
your samples?

Lastly if the scene lends its self to tripod shooting I tend to shoot
a pano sequence if I wish to generate a file with greater resolution,
again this takes very little effort to post process these days and
arguably yields a higher resolution file for the same data space.

Interesting inclusion none the less.

On 2 November 2015 at 11:17, Darren Addy <pixelsmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Appreciate the comments Rob. I'd be curious to know what Paul
> Stenquist sees on his new 5K Mac display. (See original post in this
> thread, if you are wanting a diversion, Paul). Just a guess, but I
> think he may see more than "subtle" differences.
>
> Regarding your 2nd paragraph, it would be difficult to duplicate PSR
> with just 4 shots. I'm no statistician, but PSR overcomes the Bayer
> array with its 4 precise shots. Simply put, taking a theoretical
> pixelsite-sized section of your overall image, any handheld shot you
> take has a 50% chance of being a green one, a 25% chance of being a
> red one, and a 25% chance of being a blue one. That does not equal
> 100% chance of getting that exact distribution with 4 random handheld
> shots.
>
> Also, you are going to have to deal with any subject movement from the
> time you take your first exposure to the time you end your last one
> (same problem for PSR).
> In any event, the point is that the camera takes care of your exercise
> FOR you. You don't HAVE to do the tedious combination of separate
> images that you describe. The camera does it for you. Although you can
> work with the huge RAW file yourself, if you wish. I have yet to
> experiment with that.
>
> That being said, I'd be interested in seeing what a burst of 8 shots
> at 8 fps would look like compared to PSR. Might have to put that on my
> list of things to do, unless someone beats me to it.
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Rob Studdert <distudio.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It's subtle but it's there, whether it's going to make a discernible
>> difference in a print for instance depends on crop size vs print size
>> I guess but it's a tool with very limited scope from my perspective
>> given the artifacts created when there is any movement in the frame.
>>
>> I have yet to test but I would assume that similar results would be
>> gained by shooting a series of four images using the high speed mode
>> then combining them in LR or some similarly capable package, there
>> would be sufficient camera shift between each shot to create a similar
>> effect I expect.
>>
>> On 25 October 2015 at 03:51, John <sesso...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> The lettering on the wire appears (to me) a tiny bit crisper in the
>>> pixel shift version.
>>>
>>> On 10/23/2015 12:01 AM, Alan C wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.
>>>>
>>>> Alan C
>>>>
>>>> -Original Message- From: Darren Addy
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:04 PM
>>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>>> Subject: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm
>>>> Limited atf/11
>>>>
>>>> My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
>>>> Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
>>>> electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
>>>> limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).
>>>>
>>>> What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
>>>> pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
>>>> pixel image.
>>>>
>>>> Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
>>>> shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
>>>> changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
>>>> (without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of came

Re: OT Peso's, SBSC (side by side comparison.)

[John]

I think the subject itself is a bit bland to benefit from B
conversion. Is there anything there that can only be seen or can be seen
better because of the B conversion?

If there is, I don't see it.

On 11/1/2015 11:11 AM, Bob W-PDML wrote:

I prefer the colour. The other is a bit bland, but would would respond well to 
more contrast, I think

B


On 1 Nov 2015, at 15:07, David J Brooks  wrote:

Taken last weekend on our camera club walkabout.

B is in camera conversion using red filter bias, and the colour
shot, same scene is from the RAW file of the X30

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22649815196/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22487873630/

Comments.??

Dave




--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
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.

Re: OT Peso's, SBSC (side by side comparison.)

[David J Brooks]

John, probably not but i have the camera set to be a primary B
camera butt with raw+jpg have the opportunity to see the colour shot
as well, just an experiment, thanks for the input

Dave

On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 2:42 PM, John  wrote:
> I think the subject itself is a bit bland to benefit from B
> conversion. Is there anything there that can only be seen or can be seen
> better because of the B conversion?
>
> If there is, I don't see it.
>
> On 11/1/2015 11:11 AM, Bob W-PDML wrote:
>>
>> I prefer the colour. The other is a bit bland, but would would respond
>> well to more contrast, I think
>>
>> B
>>
>>> On 1 Nov 2015, at 15:07, David J Brooks  wrote:
>>>
>>> Taken last weekend on our camera club walkabout.
>>>
>>> B is in camera conversion using red filter bias, and the colour
>>> shot, same scene is from the RAW file of the X30
>>>
>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22649815196/
>>>
>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/djbrooks/22487873630/
>>>
>>> Comments.??
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>
>
> --
> Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
> Religion - Answers we must never question.
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
Documenting Life in Rural Ontario.
www.caughtinmotion.com
http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
York Region, Ontario, Canada

-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited atf/11

[Darren Addy]

Appreciate the comments Rob. I'd be curious to know what Paul
Stenquist sees on his new 5K Mac display. (See original post in this
thread, if you are wanting a diversion, Paul). Just a guess, but I
think he may see more than "subtle" differences.

Regarding your 2nd paragraph, it would be difficult to duplicate PSR
with just 4 shots. I'm no statistician, but PSR overcomes the Bayer
array with its 4 precise shots. Simply put, taking a theoretical
pixelsite-sized section of your overall image, any handheld shot you
take has a 50% chance of being a green one, a 25% chance of being a
red one, and a 25% chance of being a blue one. That does not equal
100% chance of getting that exact distribution with 4 random handheld
shots.

Also, you are going to have to deal with any subject movement from the
time you take your first exposure to the time you end your last one
(same problem for PSR).
In any event, the point is that the camera takes care of your exercise
FOR you. You don't HAVE to do the tedious combination of separate
images that you describe. The camera does it for you. Although you can
work with the huge RAW file yourself, if you wish. I have yet to
experiment with that.

That being said, I'd be interested in seeing what a burst of 8 shots
at 8 fps would look like compared to PSR. Might have to put that on my
list of things to do, unless someone beats me to it.


On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Rob Studdert <distudio.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's subtle but it's there, whether it's going to make a discernible
> difference in a print for instance depends on crop size vs print size
> I guess but it's a tool with very limited scope from my perspective
> given the artifacts created when there is any movement in the frame.
>
> I have yet to test but I would assume that similar results would be
> gained by shooting a series of four images using the high speed mode
> then combining them in LR or some similarly capable package, there
> would be sufficient camera shift between each shot to create a similar
> effect I expect.
>
> On 25 October 2015 at 03:51, John <sesso...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> The lettering on the wire appears (to me) a tiny bit crisper in the
>> pixel shift version.
>>
>> On 10/23/2015 12:01 AM, Alan C wrote:
>>>
>>> Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.
>>>
>>> Alan C
>>>
>>> -Original Message- From: Darren Addy
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:04 PM
>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> Subject: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm
>>> Limited atf/11
>>>
>>> My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
>>> Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
>>> electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
>>> limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).
>>>
>>> What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
>>> pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
>>> pixel image.
>>>
>>> Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
>>> shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
>>> changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
>>> (without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
>>> JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.
>>>
>>> Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
>>> http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg
>>>
>>> At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
>>> just magically got significantly better.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
>> Religion - Answers we must never question.
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>
>
>
> --
> Rob Studdert (Digital  Image Studio)
> Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours
> Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.

-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited atf/11

[Rob Studdert]

It's subtle but it's there, whether it's going to make a discernible
difference in a print for instance depends on crop size vs print size
I guess but it's a tool with very limited scope from my perspective
given the artifacts created when there is any movement in the frame.

I have yet to test but I would assume that similar results would be
gained by shooting a series of four images using the high speed mode
then combining them in LR or some similarly capable package, there
would be sufficient camera shift between each shot to create a similar
effect I expect.

On 25 October 2015 at 03:51, John <sesso...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> The lettering on the wire appears (to me) a tiny bit crisper in the
> pixel shift version.
>
> On 10/23/2015 12:01 AM, Alan C wrote:
>>
>> Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.
>>
>> Alan C
>>
>> -Original Message- From: Darren Addy
>> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:04 PM
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm
>> Limited atf/11
>>
>> My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
>> Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
>> electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
>> limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).
>>
>> What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
>> pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
>> pixel image.
>>
>> Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
>> shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
>> changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
>> (without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
>> JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.
>>
>> Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
>> http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg
>>
>> At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
>> just magically got significantly better.
>>
>
> --
> Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
> Religion - Answers we must never question.
>
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
Rob Studdert (Digital  Image Studio)
Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours
Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio

-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited atf/11

[John]

The lettering on the wire appears (to me) a tiny bit crisper in the
pixel shift version.

On 10/23/2015 12:01 AM, Alan C wrote:

Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.

Alan C

-Original Message- From: Darren Addy
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:04 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm
Limited atf/11

My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).

What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
pixel image.

Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
(without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.

Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg

At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
just magically got significantly better.



--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited atf/11

[P.J. Alling]

That should be "your display", damned f!&@$#n' spell checker, you'd 
think by now that I'd have learned to watch how it corrects suspect words...


On 10/23/2015 1:54 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:
Probably you're display can't actually show the differences.  I don't 
see any differences either.  I know that the display I'm using isn't 
nearly as good as the Hitachi SuperScan CRT that it replaced.


On 10/23/2015 12:01 AM, Alan C wrote:

Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.

Alan C

-Original Message- From: Darren Addy
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:04 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm 
Limited atf/11


My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).

What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
pixel image.

Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
(without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.

Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg

At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
just magically got significantly better.







--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mmLimited at f/11

[Darren Addy]

Alan,
In my case the expenditure was only difference between market value on
my K-3 and the price of a K-3 II. When I move up, I always sell my
previous camera.

But I have to say that I'm a little offended by your suggestion that
I'm imagining a difference, simply because you can't see it. I asked a
coworker to look at the side by side image on my screen (hiding the
labels off-screen) and she almost instantly correctly picked the one
that was better. If you are correct, then the people that commented on
my identical DPR thread must also be imagining seeing the difference.
None of them had any ties to thinking about my expenditure.

Anyway, this was my first shots with the camera. I'm sure I will have
other images, going forward, that might more clearly demonstrate the
difference. I'm excited about it and "ain't nobody gonna rain on my
parade".
:)

-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited atf/11

[P.J. Alling]

Hey, I got a grammar error and a spelling error in one.  A bargain!

On 10/23/2015 2:11 PM, Darren Addy wrote:

And I need a grammar checker.
:\

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:06 PM, P.J. Alling <webstertwenty...@gmail.com> wrote:

That should be "your display", damned f!&@$#n' spell checker, you'd think by
now that I'd have learned to watch how it corrects suspect words...


On 10/23/2015 1:54 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:

Probably you're display can't actually show the differences.  I don't see
any differences either.  I know that the display I'm using isn't nearly as
good as the Hitachi SuperScan CRT that it replaced.

On 10/23/2015 12:01 AM, Alan C wrote:

Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.

Alan C

-Original Message- From: Darren Addy
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:04 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm
Limited atf/11

My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).

What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
pixel image.

Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
(without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.

Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg

At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
just magically got significantly better.





--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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.






--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited atf/11

[Collin B]

> Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.
> Alan C

> Ditto
>Kenneth Waller

I had to study it for a while.  Looking at the pitting on the column the
edges are a bit sharper. Note also that white dot on the right edge of the
column, to the right of the axle.  It's not like you're going to see an
improvement akin to making it into a 40Mp camera.

From what I can see it reminds me of doing some edge enhancements
in PS. 

Remember also: These are 100% crops, a small part of the original.  The
"timbre" improvement over the whole of the image would toward improved
realism.  I wonder -- will this feature be in the FF camera?  Had better be.
It appears to be a valuable addition.  The value of that value is ... ymmv.

The lens didn't get better.  The medium got better and could resolve the
light from the lens.  Like going from TriX to APX25.  Sort of. :-)



-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited at f/11

[Darren Addy]

My intent in showing the side by side comparison is not to make anyone
unhappy with their current equipment. Heaven knows that I believe that
very cool images can be created with ANY camera of ANY kind of
technology all the way down to a plastic Holga or home made pinhole
camera. You can have a lifetime of fun with anything, especially if
you have an imagination. And I'm not arguing that Pixel Shift
Resolutution, is, by itself, a good enough reason to justify the
purchase of a K-3II. It depends what you shoot and most people think
about the kind of photography subjects that they shoot and don't see a
use for it. Personally, I happen to have some subjects that I think it
is going to work very well on.

As to why people cannot see the difference, I can't say. I don't know
if it is their eyes, the size of the monitor they are looking at it
on, the quality of the montior they are looking at it on (or its
settings)... too many variables. The difference is clear to me, both
on my 24" work monitor and my 15" laptop (though it becomes unclear if
I turn the brightness on my laptop down).. Or they aren't clicking on
the image to actually see it at 100% pixels.

As to Boris question of print size, to see the difference, I can't
say, particularly given that some people apparently can't see the
difference on their monitors, which are 96dpi devices. To see the full
aps-c frame at 96dpi you would have a 42 x 63" print. The crop I took
for the side by side would be approximately a vertical 8x10 crop from
that 42x63" image.

PSR is simply another tool in the toolbox. Once you have the tool in
your toolbox you start thinking about different ways that it could be
used.

 It is like a sharpening tool in post-processing, only much better
because that method produces artifacts when the subject is moving and
oversharpening also produces artifacts. Speaking of PSR artifacts, I
don't see why it would'n't be practical to take two images of a scene
(PSR and "normal") and put the PSR layer over the normal layer in
Photoshop and simply DROP OUT any PSR artifacts that resulted from
moving. I think that would make an image that would make those pixels
imperceptible.

Pixel Shift Resolution should make any Pentax user (or fanboy)
seriously proud of the Pentax engineers that came up with this system
and pulled it off. Pentax engineers have been figuring out how to
leverage the SR system for all kinds of amazingly innovative things
like the AstroTracer and the user-selectable AA simulator. I'd put the
Pentax designers, from ergonomics, to menu design, to the camera
itself, up against anybody's. If having the SR in the body made a lot
of sense to you and is one of the reason you picked Pentax, then pat
yourself on the back. You picked the winning horse.

And based upon my experience and what I see in the specs and (so far
in practice) the K-3 II has the potential to be objectively called the
Ultimate APS-C DSLR on the planet for versatility and image quality.

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 12:22 AM, Boris Liberman <bori...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Darren, can you please enlighten me and indicate - what size of print would
> be necessary for the common viewer to look at it and say - "hmmm, I think
> that this picture is more pleasant to look at than that one"?
>
> Naturally, I don't mean to say that the new technology does not better the
> old one or that Pentax makes bad gear. However, I am still perfectly happy
> with my good old K-5.
>
> Not long ago, I has a picture of mine printed 40x60 cm (<-- notice, cm, not
> inch) from 12 MP Ricoh GXR shot at rather high ISO handheld at night with
> Nokton 40/1.4 at f/1.8, if my memory does not fail me. It looks so good,
> that I have absolutely no desire for any kind of upgrade of my gear. I think
> it will be a waste of my money, energy and time, as personally me - I will
> not be able to extract any reasonable technical improvement over my current
> gear. Doubtless, it will make me feel good, though.
>
> Ok, back to my lurking.
>
> Boris
>
> On 10/23/2015 5:59, Darren Addy wrote:
>>>
>>> I must resist the temptation of purchase.
>>
>> Why? YOLO!
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.

-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited atf/11

[P.J. Alling]

Probably you're display can't actually show the differences.  I don't 
see any differences either.  I know that the display I'm using isn't 
nearly as good as the Hitachi SuperScan CRT that it replaced.


On 10/23/2015 12:01 AM, Alan C wrote:

Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.

Alan C

-Original Message- From: Darren Addy
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:04 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm 
Limited atf/11


My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).

What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
pixel image.

Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
(without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.

Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg

At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
just magically got significantly better.




--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mmLimited at f/11

[Alan C]

Isn't it like a placebo? You need to justify the expenditure so you convince 
yourself that it works.


Alan C

-Original Message- 
From: Darren Addy

Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 1:43 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 
77mmLimited at f/11


My intent in showing the side by side comparison is not to make anyone
unhappy with their current equipment. Heaven knows that I believe that
very cool images can be created with ANY camera of ANY kind of
technology all the way down to a plastic Holga or home made pinhole
camera. You can have a lifetime of fun with anything, especially if
you have an imagination. And I'm not arguing that Pixel Shift
Resolutution, is, by itself, a good enough reason to justify the
purchase of a K-3II. It depends what you shoot and most people think
about the kind of photography subjects that they shoot and don't see a
use for it. Personally, I happen to have some subjects that I think it
is going to work very well on.

As to why people cannot see the difference, I can't say. I don't know
if it is their eyes, the size of the monitor they are looking at it
on, the quality of the montior they are looking at it on (or its
settings)... too many variables. The difference is clear to me, both
on my 24" work monitor and my 15" laptop (though it becomes unclear if
I turn the brightness on my laptop down).. Or they aren't clicking on
the image to actually see it at 100% pixels.

As to Boris question of print size, to see the difference, I can't
say, particularly given that some people apparently can't see the
difference on their monitors, which are 96dpi devices. To see the full
aps-c frame at 96dpi you would have a 42 x 63" print. The crop I took
for the side by side would be approximately a vertical 8x10 crop from
that 42x63" image.

PSR is simply another tool in the toolbox. Once you have the tool in
your toolbox you start thinking about different ways that it could be
used.

It is like a sharpening tool in post-processing, only much better
because that method produces artifacts when the subject is moving and
oversharpening also produces artifacts. Speaking of PSR artifacts, I
don't see why it would'n't be practical to take two images of a scene
(PSR and "normal") and put the PSR layer over the normal layer in
Photoshop and simply DROP OUT any PSR artifacts that resulted from
moving. I think that would make an image that would make those pixels
imperceptible.

Pixel Shift Resolution should make any Pentax user (or fanboy)
seriously proud of the Pentax engineers that came up with this system
and pulled it off. Pentax engineers have been figuring out how to
leverage the SR system for all kinds of amazingly innovative things
like the AstroTracer and the user-selectable AA simulator. I'd put the
Pentax designers, from ergonomics, to menu design, to the camera
itself, up against anybody's. If having the SR in the body made a lot
of sense to you and is one of the reason you picked Pentax, then pat
yourself on the back. You picked the winning horse.

And based upon my experience and what I see in the specs and (so far
in practice) the K-3 II has the potential to be objectively called the
Ultimate APS-C DSLR on the planet for versatility and image quality.

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 12:22 AM, Boris Liberman <bori...@gmail.com> wrote:
Darren, can you please enlighten me and indicate - what size of print 
would

be necessary for the common viewer to look at it and say - "hmmm, I think
that this picture is more pleasant to look at than that one"?

Naturally, I don't mean to say that the new technology does not better the
old one or that Pentax makes bad gear. However, I am still perfectly happy
with my good old K-5.

Not long ago, I has a picture of mine printed 40x60 cm (<-- notice, cm, 
not

inch) from 12 MP Ricoh GXR shot at rather high ISO handheld at night with
Nokton 40/1.4 at f/1.8, if my memory does not fail me. It looks so good,
that I have absolutely no desire for any kind of upgrade of my gear. I 
think

it will be a waste of my money, energy and time, as personally me - I will
not be able to extract any reasonable technical improvement over my 
current

gear. Doubtless, it will make me feel good, though.

Ok, back to my lurking.

Boris

On 10/23/2015 5:59, Darren Addy wrote:


I must resist the temptation of purchase.


Why? YOLO!





--
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.




--
Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.

--
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. 



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mmLimitedat f/11

[Alan C]

Sorry, Darren. No offence intended. I was just pulling your leg. I'm sure 
you're right - my laptop probably has a crappy monitor but it is the only 
one I have.


Alan C

-Original Message- 
From: Darren Addy

Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 8:10 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 
77mmLimitedat f/11


Alan,
In my case the expenditure was only difference between market value on
my K-3 and the price of a K-3 II. When I move up, I always sell my
previous camera.

But I have to say that I'm a little offended by your suggestion that
I'm imagining a difference, simply because you can't see it. I asked a
coworker to look at the side by side image on my screen (hiding the
labels off-screen) and she almost instantly correctly picked the one
that was better. If you are correct, then the people that commented on
my identical DPR thread must also be imagining seeing the difference.
None of them had any ties to thinking about my expenditure.

Anyway, this was my first shots with the camera. I'm sure I will have
other images, going forward, that might more clearly demonstrate the
difference. I'm excited about it and "ain't nobody gonna rain on my
parade".
:)

--
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. 



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited at f/11

[Larry Colen]

Darren Addy wrote:

My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).

What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
pixel image.


On my 27" Apple monitor the differences are pretty subtle. Likewise on 
my second Dell monitor that I use in vertical format.
I suspect that a lot of that has to do with the subject matter not 
making it clear exactly what the plane of focus is.


Perhaps, if you took a book and set it up so that the page was at an 
angle to the plane of the image and shot it at mtr optimal f-stop then 
it would be easier to tell where the sharpest bit was to compare the two.


I also wonder how PSR also affects other characteristics such as noise 
and dynamic range.  In theory, it makes each pixel effectively three (or 
four?) times the area.  As such it would also be interesting to compare 
a test photo shot at both ISO 100 and ISO 10,000.


Since most of us don't tend to show, or look at, much of our work zoomed 
in at the pixel peeping level, I do wonder if there is any difference to 
the subjective experience, and if it would be different for different 
lenses.


For example, would the magic pixie dust of the FA77 (or the FA31) be 
more noticeable with PSR than without?




Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that


12 second selftimer, not the 2 second?


changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
(without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.


I also wonder if the difference would be more, or less, noticeable after 
carefully processing the two raw files.




Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg

At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
just magically got significantly better.


I don't know about that, but I do know that your upgrading made a 
significant improvement to the resolving power of all of my lenses.






--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est)

--
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited atf/11

[John Francis]

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 07:43:08AM -0400, Collin B wrote:
> > Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.
> > Alan C
> 
> > Ditto
> >Kenneth Waller
> 
> I had to study it for a while.  Looking at the pitting on the column the
> edges are a bit sharper. Note also that white dot on the right edge of the
> column, to the right of the axle.  It's not like you're going to see an
> improvement akin to making it into a 40Mp camera.
> 
> From what I can see it reminds me of doing some edge enhancements
> in PS. 

I can definitely see a difference, but looking at two almost identical images
like this on a middle-of-the-road monitor (a HP ZR24w) also shows me that the
differences are easily masked by differences caused by other factors (such as
the angle at which you are viewing the image).  If I shift my head from side
to side (by about one quarter of the viewing distance) there is a significant
change in contrast (which, of course, affects perceived sharpness) which makes
it much harder to spot any actual changes.

As others have said, the pitting on the upright (and details visible through
the small hole in the spool near the top of the image) do show differences.

I don't think much of the photography I do would benefit from this kind of
thing (not to mention that I'm already concerned that if I do get a K-3 the
increase in file size is going to put a strain on my computer system).
How many MB are needed to store a full pixel-shift resolution image?

-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mmLimited at f/11

[Matthew Hunt]

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Alan C  wrote:

> Isn't it like a placebo? You need to justify the expenditure so you convince
> yourself that it works.

I have no expenditure to justify, but I had no trouble seeing the
difference. (Make sure your browser isn't shrinking the image to fit
in your window!) For example, look at the 9 in "19 STRAND". The white
gap between the upper part and the lower part of the 9 is better
defined to me in the pixel-shift shot.

I think the difference might be more significant at larger apertures;
diffraction is in play at f/11, with an Airy disk diameter of ~14.7
µm, and a pixel size of 3.88 µm.

-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited atf/11

[Darren Addy]

And I need a grammar checker.
:\

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:06 PM, P.J. Alling <webstertwenty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That should be "your display", damned f!&@$#n' spell checker, you'd think by
> now that I'd have learned to watch how it corrects suspect words...
>
>
> On 10/23/2015 1:54 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:
>>
>> Probably you're display can't actually show the differences.  I don't see
>> any differences either.  I know that the display I'm using isn't nearly as
>> good as the Hitachi SuperScan CRT that it replaced.
>>
>> On 10/23/2015 12:01 AM, Alan C wrote:
>>>
>>> Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.
>>>
>>> Alan C
>>>
>>> -Original Message- From: Darren Addy
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:04 PM
>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> Subject: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm
>>> Limited atf/11
>>>
>>> My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
>>> Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
>>> electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
>>> limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).
>>>
>>> What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
>>> pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
>>> pixel image.
>>>
>>> Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
>>> shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
>>> changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
>>> (without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
>>> JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.
>>>
>>> Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
>>> http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg
>>>
>>> At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
>>> just magically got significantly better.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve
> immortality through not dying.
> -- Woody Allen
>
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.

-- 
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.

A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited at f/11

[Darren Addy]

My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).

What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
pixel image.

Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
(without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.

Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg

At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
just magically got significantly better.

-- 
Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.

-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited atf/11

[Alan C]

Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.

Alan C

-Original Message- 
From: Darren Addy

Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:04 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited 
atf/11


My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).

What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
pixel image.

Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
(without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.

Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg

At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
just magically got significantly better.

--
Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.

--
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. 



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mmLimited atf/11

[Ken Waller]

Ditto

Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller

- Original Message - 
From: "Alan C" <c...@lantic.net>
Subject: Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 
77mmLimited atf/11




Am I missing something? Can't see a difference.

Alan C

-Original Message- 
From: Darren Addy

Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:04 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm 
Limited atf/11


My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).

What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
pixel image.

Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
(without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.

Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg

At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
just magically got significantly better.



--
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mmLimited atf/11

[Darren Addy]

> Am I missing something?

The answer is "yes".

-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited at f/11

[Bob Sullivan]

You're killing me here!
I must resist the temptation of purchase.
Regards,  Bob S.

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Darren Addy  wrote:
> My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
> Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
> electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
> limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).
>
> What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
> pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
> pixel image.
>
> Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
> shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
> changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
> (without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
> JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.
>
> Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
> http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg
>
> At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
> just magically got significantly better.
>
> --
> Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.
>
> --
> 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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited at f/11

[Darren Addy]

> I must resist the temptation of purchase.

Why? YOLO!

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Bob Sullivan  wrote:
> You're killing me here!
> I must resist the temptation of purchase.
> Regards,  Bob S.
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Darren Addy  wrote:
>> My K-3II arrived today and so I had to try out the Pixel Shift
>> Resolution during afternoon break. Found an obliging dusty rack of
>> electrical wire that agreed to serve as my subject. The 77mm f/1.8
>> limited is a very sharp lens (as anyone who has one will tell you).
>>
>> What you see in the link below is an image blown up to 100% (actual
>> pixels). Each is an 863 pixel x 994 pixel crop of the full 6016 x 4000
>> pixel image.
>>
>> Conditions: Same exposure (2 sec. f/11, ISO 100) focused manually,
>> shutter fired with the 12 second self-timer. The only thing that
>> changed between shots was that I turned on Pixel Shift Resolution
>> (without moving anything). On the left is a standard out of camera
>> JPEG and on the right the JPEG produced with Pixel Shift Resolution.
>>
>> Click on it with your browser cursor to see it at 100%:
>> http://www.antiqueauto.org/assets/PSRComparison.jpg
>>
>> At least for cooperative subjects, it looks (to me) like all my lenses
>> just magically got significantly better.
>>
>> --
>> Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.
>>
>> --
>> 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.



-- 
Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.

-- 
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.

Re: A side-by-side Pixel Shift Resolution comparison with 77mm Limited at f/11

[Boris Liberman]

Darren, can you please enlighten me and indicate - what size of print 
would be necessary for the common viewer to look at it and say - "hmmm, 
I think that this picture is more pleasant to look at than that one"?


Naturally, I don't mean to say that the new technology does not better 
the old one or that Pentax makes bad gear. However, I am still perfectly 
happy with my good old K-5.


Not long ago, I has a picture of mine printed 40x60 cm (<-- notice, cm, 
not inch) from 12 MP Ricoh GXR shot at rather high ISO handheld at night 
with Nokton 40/1.4 at f/1.8, if my memory does not fail me. It looks so 
good, that I have absolutely no desire for any kind of upgrade of my 
gear. I think it will be a waste of my money, energy and time, as 
personally me - I will not be able to extract any reasonable technical 
improvement over my current gear. Doubtless, it will make me feel good, 
though.


Ok, back to my lurking.

Boris

On 10/23/2015 5:59, Darren Addy wrote:

I must resist the temptation of purchase.

Why? YOLO!





--
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.

Re: Another casual lens comparison K55/1.8 v F50/1.7

[steve harley]

on 2014-04-06 6:40 Collin Brendemuehl wrote

I took two framings this morning.


interesting study

 [regarding bokeh]

The one extra stop with the K lens accounts for this.  Still even if one
adds one stop with the F50/1.7 to create an equivalent result, the K
performed quite nicely.


f/8 to f/9 is more like a third of a stop, but the difference in bokeh seems 
subjectively like at least a couple of stops, so i suspect (as it seems you do) 
that one of the lenses' apertures is not functioning to spec




When it comes to rendering the soft edges with the K are much smoother.
The F50/1.7's edges are much softer, almost having that double-image
appearance.
I think the K wins in this regard.


that was hard for me to see on your shots, and i wonder if it is down to the 
uncertain aperture




--
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.

Another casual lens comparison K55/1.8 v F50/1.7

[Collin Brendemuehl]

I took two framings this morning.
In my typical on-the-fly approach these were shot without a tripod.
So I shot several of each and chose the sharpest.
Roughly 1/125 @ f9.
These are my blackberry bushes in the back yard.

The scene image represents the shot used for the center.
I then shifted so that the center ended up in the lower left corner.

This made for some interesting comparisons of the same elements.
The bokeh shots came from the shifted framing and are just off-center.

One technical caveat: Though I used manual mode with the green button it
appears that the K55/1.8 stopped down differently.
The originals were underexposed so the DOF was greater.  That affected the
bokeh shots.

Center
The K55/1.8 compares favorably with the F50/1.7.
The center shots with the F50/1.7  are only slightly sharper.  Not much.
The K did quite well.
To be a bit more precise, the leaf veins are a bit clearer in using the
F50/1.7 but the small white buds appear more distinct with the K55/1.8.
Of course the slight magnification advantage might help the K55 in that
regard.  Still, not a great deal of difference.

Corner
The corner shots exhibit roughly the same distinctions.

Bokeh/rendering
The bokeh shots are significant.
The red things in the window show little separation with the F50/1.7 while
the K55/1.8 shows the much more distinctly.
Likewise the bushes between the windows and the house siding are very
different.
The one extra stop with the K lens accounts for this.  Still even if one
adds one stop with the F50/1.7 to create an equivalent result, the K
performed quite nicely.

When it comes to rendering the soft edges with the K are much smoother.
The F50/1.7's edges are much softer, almost having that double-image
appearance.
I think the K wins in this regard.

Conclusion:
If you are shooting film and want a really sharp non-A lens it is hard to
beat the K55/1.8.



-- 
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.