And if you wanna use Bill's idea and really push it (the idea, not
Bill), you'd use a 1° spot meter because, really, our Pentax cameras
spot meter isn't that spot. It is around 5° or more AFAIR.
If you're really too rich, get a Sekonic L758 which you can profile
with your DSLR sensor specs (DR
Larry Colen wrote:
On Apr 11, 2011, at 1:32 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
The simple answer about extended bracketing with the K-5: Read
instruction manual (page 160). It's all there.
For me, extended bracketing is nearly useless:
When extended bracketing is set, the file format is set to
On Apr 12, 2011, at 2:09 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
Larry Colen wrote:
On Apr 11, 2011, at 1:32 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
The simple answer about extended bracketing with the K-5: Read instruction
manual (page 160). It's all there.
For me, extended bracketing is nearly useless:
When
On 12/04/2011 12:09 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
All this thread subset about bracketing other than exposure is pointless
then. Shoot RAW, take good care of exposure (bracket in extreme
conditions) and you're done.
Measure the brightest part of the scene that you want to keep detail in.
On Apr 10, 2011, at 9:46 PM, Christine Aguila wrote:
- Original Message - From: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com
As a matter of side note, I made recently a shot at ISO 6400 in rather
dim light. It came out so good that practically I don't think I need
bother with ISO any more.
Boris,
combining replies
It is something that I do hope to experiment with. However, while just trying
something to see what happens does have value, I feel that I could do a much
better experiment, and get a lot more out of it, if I understood the theory
behind what I'm trying. If not,
From: Larry Colen
In my typical geeky fashion, I'm trying to wrap my head around all of
the ramifications of adjusting sensitivity (ISO) on my camera. Please
correct the errors in my understanding.
In the simplest form, it is a measure of how many LSBs per photon (or
tens, thousands or
On Apr 11, 2011, at 5:05 AM, John Sessoms wrote:
From: Larry Colen
It seems to me that if we are shooting a low contrast situation, such
as clouds on a grey sky, or with a mediocre, low contrast lens, we
could compensate by using a higher ISO to spread the fewer stops of
dynamic range in
On Apr 11, 2011, at 3:59 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
On Apr 11, 2011, at 5:05 AM, John Sessoms wrote:
From: Larry Colen
It seems to me that if we are shooting a low contrast situation, such
as clouds on a grey sky, or with a mediocre, low contrast lens, we
could compensate by using a
On Apr 11, 2011, at 1:07 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
On Apr 11, 2011, at 3:59 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
On Apr 11, 2011, at 5:05 AM, John Sessoms wrote:
From: Larry Colen
It seems to me that if we are shooting a low contrast situation, such
as clouds on a grey sky, or with a mediocre,
On Apr 11, 2011, at 4:16 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
On Apr 11, 2011, at 1:07 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
On Apr 11, 2011, at 3:59 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
On Apr 11, 2011, at 5:05 AM, John Sessoms wrote:
From: Larry Colen
It seems to me that if we are shooting a low contrast
The simple answer about extended bracketing with the K-5:
Read instruction manual (page 160). It's all there.
Dario
--
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
On Apr 11, 2011, at 1:32 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
The simple answer about extended bracketing with the K-5: Read instruction
manual (page 160). It's all there.
For me, extended bracketing is nearly useless:
When extended bracketing is set, the file format is set to [JPEG] and cannot be
From: Larry Colen
On Apr 11, 2011, at 5:05 AM, John Sessoms wrote:
From: Larry Colen
It seems to me that if we are shooting a low contrast
situation, such as clouds on a grey sky, or with a mediocre,
low contrast lens, we could compensate by using a higher ISO
to spread the fewer stops of
In my typical geeky fashion, I'm trying to wrap my head around all of the
ramifications of adjusting sensitivity (ISO) on my camera. Please correct the
errors in my understanding.
In the simplest form, it is a measure of how many LSBs per photon (or tens,
thousands or millions of photons).
If
Larry,
Read through this, it may help your understanding (or it may confuse
the hell out of you):
http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/noise-p3.html#ETTR
And the entire document:
http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/index.html
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 8:27 PM,
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 05:27:53PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote:
In my typical geeky fashion, I'm trying to wrap my head around all of the
ramifications of adjusting sensitivity (ISO) on my camera. Please correct the
errors in my understanding.
In the simplest form, it is a measure of how many
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 3:27 AM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
... I'm trying to wrap my head around all of the ramifications of ...
I most certainly realize that this is a standard figure of speech.
Yet, I cannot help but notice that wrapping one's head around things
such as these may
- Original Message -
From: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com
As a matter of side note, I made recently a shot at ISO 6400 in rather
dim light. It came out so good that practically I don't think I need
bother with ISO any more. Apparently auto ISO setting of 80-6400 was
exactly right
19 matches
Mail list logo
