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 Aug 26, 2006, 5:35 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344
Default

Fred666 wrote:
Quote:
I must say I wasn't really complaining about the measuring, just it seemed to be so negative, and I wanted to see some of Rice high's pictures.

As it was said before, each to his/her own and yes a lot of Rice High's technical points are of interest and can be useful to know.

Darren
Your last response looks totally okay to me and no offense of any kind was felt.

Since you're asking for more of my photos and also that you seem like bird photos, I share some more of mine below:-













I seldom shot birds but any comments are welcome.

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
RiceHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2006, 5:40 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344
Default

RiceHigh wrote:
Quote:
I seldom shot birds but any comments are welcome.
I wish to make a short remark that all the above (maybe again sucking ;-)) pics were made with Pentax gear, either film or digital SLRs.

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh[/quote]
RiceHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2006, 9:48 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Fred666's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 191
Default

All good shots. The 1st one catching the running bird and the splashes of water is impressive.

I assume the last sparrow(?) picture showing the high noise was shot on ISO3200.



Darren


Fred666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2006, 10:39 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,093
Default

RiceHigh, I am often confused by the fact that, inspite of finding the Canon Rebel a far superior camera, you keep coming back to Pentax. Your testing has shown that, in the purely quantitative sense, Pentax is not as accurate as Canon. (No flames here please, I believe there is far more to the photographic experience than the quantitative, I have stated that on this forum many times). I have no argument with your findings, I just don't understand why you would continue to purchase Pentax gear...???

I think your bird photos are fantastic, and your K100D test shots have merit for their purpose, and are far beter than they are given credit for. I also agree with your decision not to share most of your photography if it for and of family and friends. I admire the time and effort you have put into the testing that you have done, and I apologize if I have said anything offensive in the past. It still puzzles me however. I know that Pentax lenses are among the best, in a qualitative sense, and I can understand you wanting to continue to use those lenses but for the money you have invested in Pentax bodies you could build a modest but effective set of Canon lenses.

I am not saying "Go out and buy a Canon." I would only say that to someone who needed constant reassurance that they had bought the right camera. I just want to know if there is a particular reason you keep coming back to Pentax.

Keep up your testing but keep one thing in mind: You have seen lots of examples of excellent photography in this forum, all shot on Pentax dSLRs. The quality here is as good as you will find on a Nikon or Canon forum. Although we would all like our equipment to perform perfectly, we accept some quantitative error for the qualitative satisfaction afforded by the Pentax gear. I guess what I am trying to say here is, share your findings but when you report them keep in mind that we don't necessarily share your fasination with minute detail in test results. Sometimes your tone implies a degree of expertise which some readers may take offense to (and have on occasion). It is clear to me that your knowledge about the details of Pentax cameras far exceeds mine, but as I repeat, the quantitative is only half the story.

Respectfully

Ira






Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2006, 4:51 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Fred666's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 191
Default

Seconded!

Darren
Fred666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2006, 5:05 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

Same here!!

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2006, 9:55 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344
Default

Monza76 wrote:
Quote:
RiceHigh, I am often confused by the fact that, inspite of finding the Canon Rebel a far superior camera, you keep coming back to Pentax. Your testing has shown that, in the purely quantitative sense, Pentax is not as accurate as Canon. (No flames here please, I believe there is far more to the photographic experience than the quantitative, I have stated that on this forum many times). I have no argument with your findings, I just don't understand why you would continue to purchase Pentax gear...???

I think your bird photos are fantastic, and your K100D test shots have merit for their purpose, and are far beter than they are given credit for. I also agree with your decision not to share most of your photography if it for and of family and friends. I admire the time and effort you have put into the testing that you have done, and I apologize if I have said anything offensive in the past. It still puzzles me however. I know that Pentax lenses are among the best, in a qualitative sense, and I can understand you wanting to continue to use those lenses but for the money you have invested in Pentax bodies you could build a modest but effective set of Canon lenses.

I am not saying "Go out and buy a Canon." I would only say that to someone who needed constant reassurance that they had bought the right camera. I just want to know if there is a particular reason you keep coming back to Pentax.

Keep up your testing but keep one thing in mind: You have seen lots of examples of excellent photography in this forum, all shot on Pentax dSLRs. The quality here is as good as you will find on a Nikon or Canon forum. Although we would all like our equipment to perform perfectly, we accept some quantitative error for the qualitative satisfaction afforded by the Pentax gear. I guess what I am trying to say here is, share your findings but when you report them keep in mind that we don't necessarily share your fasination with minute detail in test results. Sometimes your tone implies a degree of expertise which some readers may take offense to (and have on occasion). It is clear to me that your knowledge about the details of Pentax cameras far exceeds mine, but as I repeat, the quantitative is only half the story.

Respectfully

Ira
Ira, I must say you're really one of the most polite persons I have met in forums so far. I feel that you are a true gentleman even though we disagree for some of the things.

For my bird photos, thank you for your kind comments. Actually, I think these are just somehow ordinary one when compared with some others like those made by ennacac etc which IMHO is more superior.

Regarding you question, actually, I have already stated quite some answers in my homepage (don't only look at the bolded words, but also the paragraphs above):-

http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh/Ca...e_Final_Advice

Also, someone who really understands me do know the answer, see (although he presented the subject in a greatly cautionous tone, so as to avoid angers from all those Pentaxians):-

http://ok1000.blogspot.com/2006/08/r...0d-review.html

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
RiceHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2006, 10:24 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344
Default

Fred666 wrote:
Quote:
All good shots. The 1st one catching the running bird and the splashes of water is impressive.

I assume the last sparrow(?) picture showing the high noise was shot on ISO3200.

Darren
I like the first one most myself. It was shot with a MZ-S with a ISO 200 film at 1/6000th at f/1.4. Without a camera as accurate as the MZ-S in focusing and as fast and responsive as the MZ-S, I guess I would have missed the shot. Lens used was FA*85/1.4.

The last one is a scanned film again as you can actually see the film scratches on it.

The middle four ones were taken with an *ist D, which were then all USM/sharpened or neatimaged if you don't see the obvious noise. Pictures taken at ISO 1600. Lens used was F*300 plus 1.4X Tamron convertor.

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
RiceHigh 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 10:21 AM.