r.t. dowling

<p><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y144/mec407/IMGP1532.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<strong>K100D + Tamron 70-300 Di @ 180/8</strong></p>

<p><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y144/mec407/IMGP1546.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<strong>K100D + Tamron 70-300 Di @ 300/5.6</strong></p>

<p> </p>

<p>If it were me, I'd just wait and save my pennies until I could afford the Panasonic 20/1.7. The Sigma 19 and Olympus 17 don't impress me at all.</p>

<p>I don't know what Mr. Twedten's budget is, but the Panasonic LX5 is currently the least expensive of the "high quality compacts." A few weeks ago, Amazon was selling them for $330. Right now it's back up to $360, but that's still less than the S95 and S100, and significantly less than the XZ-1.</p>

<p>Olympus XZ-1. Not only is the lens sharper, it's more consistently sharp across the frame. To my eyes it's also superior to the Leica lens on the Panasonic LX-5.</p>

<p>Wow, lots of beautiful stuff for me to wake up to today!</p>

<p>I've been shooting with my E-PL1 and Zuiko 14-42 all week, so I don't have anything Pentaxian to post... but next week I'll probably start playing with the K-mount adapter again, and perhaps try my compact Ricoh 50/1.7. We're part of the Ricoh family now, so that counts, right? :-)</p>

<p>Does turning IS off solve the problem?</p>

<p>Thanks, Hin!</p>

<p>My Tamron is all over the place with exposures. At some focal lengths I have to use as much as -1 exposure compensation; at other focal lengths I have to use +0.3 or +0.7. I should probably just use auto bracketing with this lens, but for some reason I never think of it until after the fact.</p>

<p>6.3 to 8 definitely seems to be the sweet spot for sharpness with this lens when shooting in the 180mm-300mm range.</p>

<p>Hin, can you tell us what aperture those were shot at? I couldn't find it in the EXIF. Just curious. :-) My Tamron is fairly soft wide open, but if I stop down just a little bit -- to 6.3 or 7.1 -- the sharpness does improve. The biggest issue is the iffy autofocus, and my difficulty in trying to adjust the focus manually (K100D viewfinder isn't the greatest, and relying on the focus confirmation light always results in backfocus).</p>

<p>It's hard to say whether it would be substantially better or not. Looking at the test results on Photozone, it does not appear that the Pentax is sharper than the Tamron. It does, however, seem to maintain its contrast a bit better through the zoom range. I would go out on a limb and suggest that the Pentax might autofocus a bit faster, and perhaps offer more consistent exposures (my Tamron's AF stinks at the long end, and it tends to underexpose slightly or overexpose slightly at certain focal lengths -- this is irritating because I can't just set the exposure compensation and forget it, due to the variation throughout the zoom range). The Pentax also has quick-shift manual focus, which is always nice.</p>

<p>If you buy the Pentax lens and find that it's not much better than your Tamron, you could probably sell it and make a profit, the way Pentax lens prices are going!</p>

<p>I still have concerns about that sensor. If you look at the test results on Photozone of the 16/2.8 tested on the NEX 5 and then re-tested on the NEX 7, the center resolution was higher on the NEX 7 (due to the higher resolution of the 7's sensor), but the border and corner resolution was actually lower on the 7 than on the 5.</p>

<p>If it's the same 24 megapixel sensor used in the NEX 7, it's going to potentially expose a lot of optical flaws that previously weren't visible with the 16 megapixel (and lower) sensors. That 24 megapixel sensor is very unforgiving. (That's one reason why I probably won't buy a NEX 7; I like the body design, but would much rather have the 16 megapixel sensor in the NEX 5n.)</p>

<p>How about Corel AfterShot Pro? (formerly known as Bibble -- I've used Bibble in the past and really liked it) It's not free, but it's not terribly expensive either, and might be your best bet at this point.</p>

<p>Their site says that 10.7 (Lion) is supported in the Mac version.</p>

<p>http://www.corel.com/corel/product/index.jsp?pid=prod4670071#tab4</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Also: the K-x has such amazingly good image quality at high ISOs that you can shoot in situations that would've been completely impossible in the film days, or even in the early DSLR days.</p>

<p>If sports photography was possible back in the days of manual-advance film cameras and manual focus lenses, there's no reason why it's not possible today. :) Great photos!</p>

<p><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y144/mec407/mP4130083.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="613" /><br>

<strong>Olympus E-PL1 + RainbowImaging K-mount adapter + Pentax 50/1.7 A (processed in CameraBag 2)</strong></p>

<p>Great stuff, everyone!</p>

<p>Here's my contribution. This was just a test shot while trying to figure out my new E-PL1, but after playing around with it in post, I kind of like it.</p>

<p><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y144/mec407/mP4130083.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<strong>E-PL1 + RainbowImaging K-mount adapter + Pentax 50/1.7 (processed with CameraBag 2)</strong></p>

<p>Have you tried RawTherapee? It's free, comes in Mac/Windows/Linux versions, and is compatible with X100 raw files.</p>

<p>I've got the original 14-42 and so far I'm impressed with it, but I haven't used the other 14-42 lenses so I have no frame of reference.</p>

<p>Photozone (a great resource) did thorough reviews of the original Olympus 14-42 and the Panasonic 14-42, as well as the Panasonic 14-45 which looks like it might be better than the 14-42. Worth checking out:</p>

<p>http://www.photozone.de/m43</p>

<p>Try this:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/olympus-camera-forum/00a6r4</p>

<p> </p>

<p>The price on this lens is back up to $280, so I guess I won't have to make a decision just yet. ;-) That's probably for the best, since I keep going back and forth between wanting an E-M5 and wanting a D7000... and the NEX cameras are looking more and more compelling. Argh!</p>

<p>100% crop from above</p>

<p><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y144/mec407/cP4150104.jpg" alt="" /></p>

 

<p><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y144/mec407/P4150104.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<strong>E-PL1 + 14-42 @ 24 5.6</strong></p>

<p>I've been using the E-PL1 + 14-42 combo for the past three days and I'm pretty impressed thus far. The 14-42 seems to be at least as sharp as my Pentax 18-55, which I consider one of the best kit lenses ever made.</p>

<p><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y144/mec407/sbc/04-15-2012/P4150108.jpg" alt="" width="799" height="599" /><br>

<strong>E-PL1 + 14-42 @ 14 5.6</strong></p>

<p>Great shots, everyone!</p>

<p>Howard: I would have started it at 12:00 AM but the site was being very slow and it was 12:02 by the time the page finally loaded. ;-)</p>