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 May 7, 2012, 6:15 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Keltech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Andover, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,178
Default

Another week of great shots. I particularly like the 10-17mm shots the best.

Lou
Keltech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7, 2012, 7:44 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Morganton, NC
Posts: 223
Default

Great set . . enjoyed them everyone. Especially #2 and the last one.
__________________
Pentax K3 ii and Pentax K-1
Various Lens

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pastorbbc/
_____________
Pastorbbc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 8, 2012, 1:22 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,076
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtngal View Post

Les - I agree that the 10-17 is a sharp, very contrasty lens. Part of my problem is that I got it to use as a fisheye, rather than as an ultrawide. I use mine sometimes as a Fisheye...but the thing I love about the 10-17, is that unlike a prime fisheye which IMO is very limiting ...I feel the Pentax offers much more versatility...given that one can go from full fisheye...to a ultrawide of sorts....and everything in between.

I generally use it at 17mm when taking pix of vintage cars
and I find that if I play with the angle (it's a bit of work) I can generally find an almost distortion free...wide angle pix...with something extra. Hard to describe the 'something extra'...but it seems to put extra 'body' into my old car pictures. They still look like they do to the eye, but with the FE @ 17mm...it's almost as if they have more dimension. I know that I'm not doing a good job of describing the 'extra' with the FE. I don't really have a good feel of how to use it effectively, to know when its properties would add to a picture. The only place where I found it effortless to use was in Antelope Canyon -I recall those pictures...they were quite striking. I've usually struggled with it in other locales. I either seem to have too much effect or not enough. I know what you mean. Of all my lenses I find the 10-17 can be either the most frustrating or most rewarding. It certainly is the biggest challenge to use and I also get a physical workout from moving the camera/lens up and down to find the pix I want. It doesn't help that I find my camera often will overexpose with it more than any other lens I have, so I'm constantly trying to keep that in mind. I just need to spend more time with it.
I find I use the spot meter a lot when I use the fisheye....but then with cars...I usually am close, with little background showing and I also usually want a reading off the paint job.
lesmore49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 8, 2012, 8:44 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: East Central Vermont
Posts: 1,890
Default

I also enjoyed this series very much. I couldn't pick a favorite if I tried, but the building with curving walls and the catwalks running in every which direction are particularly appealing to me. I don't own the 10-17, but I rented it when I visited Zion National Park a year and a half ago, and I also found it to be tremendously challenging, but at the same time it was a lot of fun.

Please keep them coming. I'm really enjoying this project.
mtnman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2012, 12:02 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

Thanks, all!

Tom - I wasn't paying too much attention to my metering/exposure, just wanted to get a clear picture. I should have either spot focused or else dialed in a greater -Ev to keep the rocks from blowing out. The K5 is very forgiving as far as detail in the shadows, so underexposing isn't a big deal (expose so the hightlights don't blow out and then lighten the shadows, no problem). I should have been paying more attention to how much black there was and how it would influence the picture. Come to think of it, I'd have to dial in the -Ev, the rabbit was a good grey card, and my exposure even at spot metering, wouldn't have been much different.

Am still thinking about last week, I'll probably start writing it up tomorrow.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2012, 6:37 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
mole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 8,522
Default

Another fascinating and diverse series - your talents keep growing!

Would tend to agree about cropping off a bit of the grass in #2 - it does add some depth, but the first bit is kind of flat in texture compared to the rest.

Interesting that both of your "twins" are holding a remote!

Wonderful "cloud blanket" in #7.
mole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2012, 11:41 AM   #17
Member
 
john339's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: California USA
Posts: 62
Default

Very interesting shots of many different things.
I like the person facing herself and the rabbit.
The complicated building with all the walkways is also a nice shot.
You are very versatile shooting close and far and many different things well.
Thanks for sharing.
__________________
Fuji HS-20
Pentax Kr
Sony SLT57
john339 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2012, 3:57 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

Thanks, mole and John, for your feedback. I almost didn't bother to put together the twin picture because the remotes really bothered me. But I didn't have anything else for that day and now I'm glad I did it.

John - one of my aims with doing this shot a day thing is to push myself to shoot more variety. I'm sure that I could get 365 excellent shots of flowers, but that wouldn't teach me anything and would get downright boring. So I'm on the look-out for anything that is new and catches my interest. I still have a list of things I haven't done yet, that I'm hoping I will try sometime over this year.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2012, 9:21 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Morganton, NC
Posts: 223
Default

another great series. Especially like the 2nd and the last image. Enjoying your series week by week.
__________________
Pentax K3 ii and Pentax K-1
Various Lens

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pastorbbc/
_____________
Pastorbbc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 2012, 10:34 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ennacac View Post
Harriet, sorry for being so simplistic, but the Rabbit photo works for me with all the fine detail in the fur, although I would have done some work on the stones behind the Rabbit to bring back some of the detail. That is one of the issues I personally have with digital with its limited DR, film would have kept the highlight detail with no extra work processing the image.

Tom
I thought I had read somewhere that digital has surpassed the DR of film so just took a few moments to research this.

These are the most interesting quotes / sites and even Wikipedia article can not find an outright winner since so many factors are involved.

----------

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/dynamicrange2/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital...lm_photography

-----------

Digital cameras, like the Canon 1D Mark II, show a huge dynamic range compared to either print or slide film, at least for the films compared. Jpeg digital camera images suffer from posterization and the problem is significant for highlights and darkest portions of an image. Digital camera transfer functions, like that in the Canon 1D Mark II camera, are similar to print film.

While digital cameras like that tested here show superior intensity detail and signal to noise, slow speed films have higher spatial resolution.

-----------

There seems to be an urban legend that says digital cameras have less dynamic range than film. The legend is wrong. The above plot shows the comparison of a DSLR with print and slide film. The slide film records only about 5 photographic stops of information (a stop is a factor of 2, so 5 stops is 32). The print film shows about 7 stops of information. The digital camera shows at least 10 stops of information (this test was limited to 10 stops). Other tests show the Canon 1D Mark II camera has about 11.6 stops of information (a range of 3100 in intensity). Other DSLR cameras, like the Canon 10D have around 11 stops. Point and shoot digital cameras, somewhat less."
__________________
http://frogfish.smugmug.com
Pentax : 15 Ltd, 77 Ltd, 43/1.9 Ltd, Cosina 55/1.2, DA*300/4, Contax Zeiss Distagon 28/2.8, Raynox 150/250, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.

Nikon : D800, D600, Sigma 500/4.5, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 35/2.0, Nikkor 85/1.8G, Sigma 50/1.4. Nikon x1.4 TC, Sigma x2.0 TC
Frogfish 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 12:47 PM.