|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
|
![]()
Hi Roy,
I don't think that I took your comments the wrong way -- Sorry if I sounded defensive in my answer -- The hawk shots were some of the first with the K20 in a "real-life" birding situation, and I was just going through the list of excuses I made to myself for them not turning out as well as I would have liked -- lessons leaned --but I thought them easily good enough to post. . . especially since I've had such bad luck getting any raptor shots in the past. It took quite a while for me to get comfortable with the K10 after the DS. Working with the K20 is a similar experience for me, despite the K20's functional similarities to the K10. It's going to take me a while before I sort out all the in-camera settings and the PP workflow. Remember that I am mainly a jpeg shooter, so the right settings are a bit more important to me, and with the new sensor, PP is a process of discovering what might work best. I try not to rely on the same old workflow, and am discovering some new ways to get more out of the image files that I'm getting now with the K20. I just took four garbage shots of the same subject in jpeg ***, jpeg ****, PEF, and DNG, and the file sizes came out like this. Jpeg *** = 6,260,600 Jpeg **** = 11,152,748 PEF = 13,542,137 DNG = 24,044,349 I've been shooting mostly in Jpeg ***. The file sizes from yesterday (about 165 shots) ranged from @ 5.9MB to 7.7MB (the number of shots that were not in the 6.xxMP range were very few), with a guesstimate average of @ 6.6MB, so I'd say that the average RAW sizes for the type of things I shoot would be a bit larger than the sample shots. I've done some test shots comparing Jpeg *** and ****, and I don't see any practical difference between them, so the higher compression *** quality will probably end up being my default (I'll decide after some more actual situation testing). I can see some compression artifacts in the ** and especially the * Jpegs, so I'll not use them -- I'd rather use 10MP or even 6MP modes at lower compression if I was running out of memory, and needed to squeeze a lot more shots out of a card. Scott |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
|
![]()
mtngal wrote:
Quote:
Thanks! I hope you realize that drooling is not usually considered a good look! :-) I'm still in the process of shaking off the rust that's accumulated over the winter, so I'm confident that the images will get better as time goes on. There's a lot more to work with in the K20, so it'll take a bit of time before I get things sorted out. I'm really having fun with the learning process though, and have some really good expectations for when the migratory species start showing up later this month. Scott |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
|
![]()
Lyrics51 wrote:
Quote:
Thanks for your comments! I've had such little success getting raptor shots that I have to consider any opportunities something of a fluke. I've gone out countless times with the intent of shooting the hawks and falcons that I've seen while driving around, and have almost universally come up empty-handed. Hopefully, this is an indication that my luck is changing -- ![]() Scott |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Antwerp - Belgium
Posts: 3,454
|
![]()
Magnificent shots Scott,
I'm still trying to get a good shot of raptors in the wild. But somehow I never get close enough, or I only see them when I'm without camera. Great work, Ronny |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|