Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 26, 2007, 4:22 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

jabilson007 wrote:
Quote:
Focus speed was a big issue with the DL and the K10D has solved that problem to about 85% satisfaction. If we ever get the SDM lenses, that should solve the focus speed issue and hopefully with low light also. The lack of availability of lenses I desire to purchase is a real negative.
So guessing you just want to never to actually be lowered to manually focusing a lens????

Even a slow AF is infinately faster than a person (though likely not as accurate in a complex DOF situation)..... yet those are my new acquisitions ... Prime Pentax "A" lenses.... still all the AE just MF.

Now zoom and MF can be real awkward.... but MF on a prime... is no big beal and under f/2 for $50..... AF is worth another $100 or more on a prime????

Sure all you want to shoot is sports sort of stuff AF could be a big issue.... but other than that not really.

And just from experience.... AF speed is NOT necessarily what the lens has (tech) as much as (even an inexpensive) a lens Is.

ALL AF works on contrast distinction.... and all are pretty fast in good light.... but in low, a HSM on a low/poor contrast lens lkely no better than a non HSM but good contrast lens...... you say that doesn't exist never willl....

Sure it will even that motor is cheaper than class optics....

But some will just see the HSM and be proud of the $$$ signs.



Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2007, 11:58 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
jabilson007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 182
Default

Hayward wrote:
Quote:
jabilson007 wrote:
Quote:
Focus speed was a big issue with the DL and the K10D has solved that problem to about 85% satisfaction. If we ever get the SDM lenses, that should solve the focus speed issue and hopefully with low light also. The lack of availability of lenses I desire to purchase is a real negative.
So guessing you just want to never to actually be lowered to manually focusing a lens????

Even a slow AF is infinately faster than a person (though likely not as accurate in a complex DOF situation)..... yet those are my new acquisitions ... Prime Pentax "A" lenses.... still all the AE just MF.

Now zoom and MF can be real awkward.... but MF on a prime... is no big beal and under f/2 for $50..... AF is worth another $100 or more on a prime????

Sure all you want to shoot is sports sort of stuff AF could be a big issue.... but other than that not really.

And just from experience.... AF speed is NOT necessarily what the lens has (tech) as much as (even an inexpensive) a lens Is.

ALL AF works on contrast distinction.... and all are pretty fast in good light.... but in low, a HSM on a low/poor contrast lens lkely no better than a non HSM but good contrast lens...... you say that doesn't exist never willl....

Sure it will even that motor is cheaper than class optics....

But some will just see the HSM and be proud of the $$$ signs.


I am writing of available zoom lenses. I prefer not to have to manually focus and the technology is there and I should not have to. Look at other manufacturers lens lines. Many are USM or SWM and these cameras have the fastest AF speed, especially in low light.

I gave up on my MF SLR when I had kids. Fast AF is needed for this type of photography even for portraits and since they do spend quite a bit of time indoors, I also need fast lenses. Primes, while give good results are not flexible enough for my needs. To have to manually focus and change the lens often is not really a viable solution.

I have tried the 31, 77 and tamron 28-75 2.8 and while they focus quickly and are sharp, they did not focus fast enough to justify the cost. Waiting for 16/17-50/55mm 2.8 and 70/80-200mm 2.8 SDM(or HSM) lenses. These are standard ranges. I have the money, am ready to spend it, where is the product?
jabilson007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2007, 2:35 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 42
Default

So I went ahead and picked up the K10D body. Wow, I love how it feels in my hands. The grips are perfect and the body itself is sturdy to say the least. Feels like its built to last. Ive taken a few pictures in different modes to get used to everything and I like it so far. I have a couple of concerns though and just wondering if this is normal.

1- I do 95 percent of my shooting in raw, and is there any reason why I should use DNG rather Than PEF? or, the other way around?

2- I shot some raw shots and on the2.5 LCD screenthey looked great (colors were saturated and everything looked as I remember the shot looking, however when I imported the shots into Aperture for PP, the shots were VERY bland, and the WB was completely different than that of the camera LCD monitor. I understand that Raw is the unprocessed shot, but I dont want to see a "processed" shot in the viewfinder to find out that when I import the picture, it is completely off.. Does anyone else know what im talking about and is there any way to turn off that "feature"? If i shoot raw, I would like to see what the shot looks like as I took it (when I review the shots, and not what it could look like with processing done in camera).

3- I am somewhat concerned about back/front focusing. I have shot some pictures using the FA50mm 1.4 lens which is supposed to be outstanding (I just got the lens and to be quite honest I am not happy with the lens yet as it is not yielding as sharp images as the SMC M-50mm 1.7 which I sold on ebay to get the 1.4, but thats another story) The problem was noticed yesterday when I was trying to focus on my little dogs eye (for the april contest) and the eye turned out rather blurry. I could not get it to focus correctly. Upon further inspection I realized the lens was focusing a bit lower than I actually wanted to focus, and with a shallow depth of field, it made a huge difference. These shots were all indoor under tungsten light with rather dim lighting. I brought the camera into work today, and had a couple of extra minutes to fiddle, and Tried to recreate that effect. It wasnt as pronounced as last night so I dont know if it was the lighting or just my imagination. I have heard these back/front focusing issues with the k10d however Im not sure how widespread it is, and if theres anything I can do about it.



other than that, I love the camera!



Advice and suggestions will be appreciated...

-Pete
PanagiotisDJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2007, 3:04 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 373
Default

PanagiotisDJ wrote:
Quote:
2- I shot some raw shots and on the2.5 LCD screenthey looked great (colors were saturated and everything looked as I remember the shot looking, however when I imported the shots into Aperture for PP, the shots were VERY bland, and the WB was completely different than that of the camera LCD monitor. I understand that Raw is the unprocessed shot, but I dont want to see a "processed" shot in the viewfinder to find out that when I import the picture, it is completely off.. Does anyone else know what im talking about and is there any way to turn off that "feature"? If i shoot raw, I would like to see what the shot looks like as I took it (when I review the shots, and not what it could look like with processing done in camera).
I have K100D but some things probably still apply to K10D.
When shooting RAW, the camera settings (Contrast, Sharpening etc) get saved as meta info with the RAW file. When viewing in Silkypix, the app tries to apply those default settings to the image displayed. Of course, you could change them to whatever you want and save the result as such. On the other hand, I know that with each RAW file, there is an embedded Jpeg that is being used by the camera when displaying the image on the LCD. I do not know if the embedded Jpeg has the camera settings applied to but to be consistent with computer app I would assume that it has.

The other thing to consider is that the bland effect might be a property of the specific software you use. For example, I get similar results when viewing PEF files in Picasa or Adobe Elements 5. Using the software that comes with the camera, Silkypix, they look way much better.
That is my main reason why I do not use Adobe Elements to develop RAWs: I would have to go through each image to readjust the settings which is no better than doing it in Silkypix.
DigitalAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2007, 3:08 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
ishino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 661
Default

Use .PEF, save space. DNG was more important to mebefore Adobe updated their Camera RAW plugin for the K10D PEF files. I'd say if you were ever worried about compatability problems arising for PEF files in future software products, DNG might be a safer file format.

I don't use Aperture, so I can't help there. Not sure but there might be an update for the K10D to supportthe K10D in Aperture.

My FA 50 f/1.4 has been no less than spectacular on my K10D. Auto focus has been spot on.

Congrats on the K10D Pete, it's a great camera!
ishino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2007, 3:22 PM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 42
Default

ishino wrote:
Quote:
Use .PEF, save space. DNG was more important to mebefore Adobe updated their Camera RAW plugin for the K10D PEF files. I'd say if you were ever worried about compatability problems arising for PEF files in future software products, DNG might be a safer file format.

I don't use Aperture, so I can't help there. Not sure but there might be an update for the K10D to supportthe K10D in Aperture.

My FA 50 f/1.4 has been no less than spectacular on my K10D. Auto focus has been spot on.

Congrats on the K10D Pete, it's a great camera!
Thanks.. Aperture supports .PEF i was just curious if there is any advantage using either one specifically.. As it stands I will be using PEF.


PanagiotisDJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2007, 3:30 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

PanagiotisDJ wrote:
Quote:
I shot some raw shots and on the2.5 LCD screenthey looked great (colors were saturated and everything looked as I remember the shot looking, however when I imported the shots into Aperture for PP, the shots were VERY bland, and the WB was completely different than that of the camera LCD monitor.

The problem was noticed yesterday when I was trying to focus on my little dogs eye (for the april contest) and the eye turned out rather blurry. I could not get it to focus correctly. Upon further inspection I realized the lens was focusing a bit lower than I actually wanted to focus, and with a shallow depth of field, it made a huge difference.
Pete,

I have use Aperture with my DS and the colors come out perfectly, but I am using PEF files not DNG. I have not used Aperture with my K10D since last time I looked Apple didn't support the K10D PEF files. Try the program that came with the K10D, it does a very nice job on processing RAW files, even though it isn't all that easy to deal with if you are in a hurry.

I have been having issues with front focus/back focus with my K10D also, but only when I am using extremely shallow DOF such as my 85mm f/1.4 lens, while my DS is spot on with focus, even at 1.4. There is a firmware update coming soon for the K10D and I am waiting for that before I decide what I am going to do about sending the camera back to Pentax for adjustments.

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2007, 4:52 PM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 42
Default

DigitalAddict wrote:
Quote:
PanagiotisDJ wrote:
Quote:
2- I shot some raw shots and on the2.5 LCD screenthey looked great (colors were saturated and everything looked as I remember the shot looking, however when I imported the shots into Aperture for PP, the shots were VERY bland, and the WB was completely different than that of the camera LCD monitor. I understand that Raw is the unprocessed shot, but I dont want to see a "processed" shot in the viewfinder to find out that when I import the picture, it is completely off.. Does anyone else know what im talking about and is there any way to turn off that "feature"? If i shoot raw, I would like to see what the shot looks like as I took it (when I review the shots, and not what it could look like with processing done in camera).
I have K100D but some things probably still apply to K10D.
When shooting RAW, the camera settings (Contrast, Sharpening etc) get saved as meta info with the RAW file. When viewing in Silkypix, the app tries to apply those default settings to the image displayed. Of course, you could change them to whatever you want and save the result as such. On the other hand, I know that with each RAW file, there is an embedded Jpeg that is being used by the camera when displaying the image on the LCD. I do not know if the embedded Jpeg has the camera settings applied to but to be consistent with computer app I would assume that it has.

The other thing to consider is that the bland effect might be a property of the specific software you use. For example, I get similar results when viewing PEF files in Picasa or Adobe Elements 5. Using the software that comes with the camera, Silkypix, they look way much better.
That is my main reason why I do not use Adobe Elements to develop RAWs: I would have to go through each image to readjust the settings which is no better than doing it in Silkypix.
I also have the K100D and I have not encountered any such issue with Aperture regarding the image looking different on the camera body LCD and when I import it into aperture. The difference I am talking about between the .PEF file in aperture and the one on the K10D body LCD is HUGE.. Also, although silkypix does a fine job processing raw files, I use Aperture and will only use aperture (with the combination of PhotoshopCS2 which works withing aperture as my default editing software)for many reasons,someof them being the incredible workflow ability of the program, the metadate keyword search ability, album options, vault and storage options.. I mean, Using aperture really gave me an incredible sense of "developing and storing photos" and I like it so much that I shot Jpeg for a few months because the K100d was not supported. Im just not sure if theres something im "missing" here because neither my K100d, or *istDL exibited such a difference between the Raw files and what is shown on the camera LCD after taking a shot. Its like night and day. :-?
PanagiotisDJ is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:49 AM.