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 Feb 29, 2008, 7:55 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

Tom - Somehow you are luckier about your excuse for not getting a K20 right away than I am. I'd take a new lens over a dentist visit any day.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 8:13 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
DigitalGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 696
Default

Great to see all the excitement here! it's my feeling as well.. Congratulations on your K20!! Have fun exploring and sharing results..

Love the humor in this forum!
DigitalGal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 9:25 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
robar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: D/FW area Texas
Posts: 7,590
Default

how big are the raw files?? i've heard 24m for the DNG but don't know about the PEFs

roy
robar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 10:26 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
ishino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 661
Default

A quick test shows that:

DNG = 23,619 KB

PEF = 14,539 KB
ishino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 10:36 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

robar wrote:
Quote:
how big are the raw files?? i've heard 24m for the DNG but don't know about the PEFs
Hi Roy,

About 24MB for the DNG, 14MB for the PEF. **** jpegs are 10-12 MB and *** jpegs are 6-7 MB. Downloading and processing files can get slowwww, even for just jpegs, and I can see that it's about time for a faster processor. I'm still running an Athlon 2800+ with 2 GB mem, and it's being challenged by the file sizes.

Scott
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 10:46 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

Harriet, I have a dentist thing going on this Monday, but I have a pretty good insurancce policy and it should cover it 100%, leaving me room for LBA!!

Scott, can you shoot a bird with the FA* 300 without the AF1.7 at 200 or 400 so I can see how that works out, since that is my goto lens?

I know I can go to a camera store in Minneapolis and try it for myself, but I don't think they will let me take it out and look for birds to shoot.

Thanks
Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 11:00 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
bper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington State
Posts: 454
Default

Congrads on all the new cameras. This is really interesting reading and seeing all the new pictures. Keep the info coming. I don't plan on upgrading right now and looks like me and Ira are going to be the only ones left with good ol DL's pretty soon. I just bought a new tripod and LBA isdaggling a wormfor one of those D FA100 macro's- Bruce
bper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 11:01 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

snostorm wrote:
Quote:
robar wrote:
Quote:
how big are the raw files?? i've heard 24m for the DNG but don't know about the PEFs
Hi Roy,

About 24MB for the DNG, 14MB for the PEF.
I've checked the english press release, and it states the same number of shots on various card sizes irrespective of PEF or DNG. It indicates that the file sizes are 24 MB, but this is not correct for PEF then? Does it mean that a smart move would be to use Pef in camera, and convert the files to DNG after download for use with CS2, PSE3 and other software?

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 1:05 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

ennacac wrote:
Quote:

Scott, can you shoot a bird with the FA* 300 without the AF1.7 at 200 or 400 so I can see how that works out, since that is my goto lens?
Hi Tom,

Here are a couple -- sparrows again, but they're the easiest to find this time of year. I did have to do some color correction because I stupidly forgot to reset the WB from last night when I was doing some available light tests with Tungsten WB. The lighting was medium bright overcast, both handheld from the car.

K20, FA*300, 1/125, f7.1,ISO 200. The crop, just slightly corrected for color


Full Frame, color corrected, resized only


K20, FA*300, 1/800, f7.1, ISO 400. The crop, slightly corrected for color


Full Frame color corrected, resize only


I've been using the TCs so much, I almost forgot how good this lens is by itself. Maybe if I leave it alone for a while, it'll grow into a 600/4. . . :O

Scott

Looking at the actual post, the second shot could be a bit warmer, but I think it illustrates how cropable (is that a word?) the 14.6 MP can be while still retaining a whole lot of very small detail -- of course the FA* helped a bit. . .:-)

BTW, Tom, was your LBA attack that MF Sigma 300/2.8 -- by reputation a very good lens. . . and it really looked like a great deal.
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 1:23 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default

snostorm wrote:
Quote:
Maybe if I leave it alone for a while, it'll grow into a 600/4. . . :O
And meanwhile you can spend your time at the fitness centre building some muscle...:-)

Still convincedabout the K20D, no less lust for the FA*300...

Kjell
bilybianca 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 8:40 AM.