trw

<p>1) What John said<br>

2) You are mixing 2 lighting colours, which will cause weirdness.<br>

3) Are you using Portra? Portra is fine tuned to be acurate in rendering skin-tones and is not as accurate in other colours. Maybe try Fuji Reala. But that won't fix the 2-coloured light issue. </p>

<p>4) This post belongs in one of the film forums or studio lighting forums as it has nothing to do with the brand of your lenses/light-tight-box. (I don't object to it being here, just you'll get more responses there).</p>

 

<p>Not knowing how you're scanning your film or what you're doing with the files afterwards one can not speculate if you'd get similar results with any sub-mf dSLR as mf film.<br>

Properly composed, exposed, developed, scanned, and processed 645 slides should give mind-blowingly better images but there is a lot of room for error and if you're not reproducing them large (where large depends upon the limits of the specific dSLR you're comparing) it may not be better enough to make a difference.<br>

The dSLR will have more depth of field, which will be important when shooting sculpture. It will also be a much easier and cheaper workflow.</p>

<p>I have shot fused glass and flat art with my k5 and my mamiya c220. The fused glass images are good for catalogueing and web publication; the flat art images have been used for reproduction up to 16x20 giclee prints.</p>

<p>The 6x6 slides look amazing on the lightbox but by the time I have them scanned with my workflow they are not substantially better; there is just not that much fine detail to see in human-created art.</p>

<p> For landscape images medium format slides absolutely blow away any dSLR I have tried - if it is being projected or printed large. Human created art just does not have enough detail for it to make a difference. </p>

 

<p>I concur with Rick. I have both versions of this lens and both of them have given some great results. They are not fast or super sharp, but they are versatile, lightweight, compact, and inexpensive.</p>

<p>This is almost certainly an AWB issue. Polarizers increase saturation but rarely change colour. If it was changing colour you'd see it in the viewfinder. AWB depends on the camera being able to guess what the colour should be - usually based on assuming the colours balance out to grey over the whole field (this is almost always incorrect but sometimes close enough). When you have large expanses of saturated colours it will get thrown for a loop on any camera.</p>

<p> </p>

Pentaxs usually are ok up to 25V

(but don't quote me on that if your

camera dies)

Maybe you've set the jpeg rendering

in camera to bright? Makes the

jpegs really nice but raw is still

raw... Im pretty sure I encountered

this too but dont remember which

menu setting it is.

<p>The noise you are hearing is most likely coming from the body, not the lens. As they're both screw drive lenses with a long throw designed for very precise focusing, they're both likely to be louder than a SDM lens like the DA*s.<br>

I use the Tamron 272E and am happy with it but haven't used the D-FA 100 so I can't compare them.</p>

 

<p>If it's the 272E it works on any pentax K body using all the features that body supports (except SDM). You slide the focus collar in and out to switch between AF and MF. in AF mode the focus collar is disengaged and turns freely. This makes it a good way to support the lens.<br>

It may not work (other than wide open) on the Asahiflex and a few really really early cameras that don't automatically stop down the lens.<br>

Here's a bunch shot with the 272E on a K10:</p>

<p>http://trentwhaley.smugmug.com/Nature/Dewey-Morning/9619566_FCc7kS#!i=648250504&k=JS4LDfP<br>

<img src="http://trentwhaley.smugmug.com/Nature/Dewey-Morning/i-JS4LDfP/0/L/Dewey%20Morning%204-L.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="536" /></p>

<p> </p>

<p>(double posted accidentally due to 503 gateway error) </p>

 

<p>I have the 272E which does have an aperture ring. The F004 in the catalogue is not listed as being available for Pentax.</p>

<p>In PS Elements you need to "Save for Web" (in the file menu) to export as jpeg.</p>

<p>Your lens is on inside out!?</p>

<p>OK, I'm just making this up and there is absolutely no evidence to make me think that any of this will happen, but here's Nine announcements that are more likely than a 24mm x 36mm sensor'd k-mount dSLR, and make more sense given Pentax's placement:</p>

<ol>

<li>Mirrorless 645d with flip-up or top mount screen and flip-out viewing hood (so similar to using a waist-level finder), priced similar to Canon/Nikon FF Models, ergonomics for use on a tripod</li>

<li>Portrait length Prime DA645 lens, 135/f2 ish</li>

<li>Wide Prime DA645 Lens, 35/f4 ish</li>

<li>Midrange zoom DA645</li>

<li>K-5 replacement with more megapixels, flash sync at any speed, built in radio flash controls, multiple audio jacks, cleaner low light, and/or multiple framerates in 1080p</li>

<li>Hotshoe and pocket flashes that work with 5, Studio plug-in or battery-pack flashes that work with 5</li>

<li>Some random uninteresting consumer/entry-level DSLR, MILC, bridges, and compact models</li>

<li>645d-cinema model, 4k or 8k resolution @60Hz, some video raw format, SATA3 or thunderbolt connection</li>

<li>Updated 645d or a price drop on the existing model (not that it's not already a pretty good deal)</li>

<li>oops... 10... A film 645, priced/marketed to get hobbyists into shooting MF and buying 645 lenses</li>

</ol>

<p>Some of these are likely at some point soon (the lenses), others are pie-in-the-sky, all of them are more likely than Ricoh coming out with a me-too model that requires them to bring out a whole new line of pro lenses (or redesign existing ones with different coatings) when they already have a better pro model than the competition.</p>

<p>I am perplexed... Other than 30fps 1080p video, 12bit/channel raw, and narrower iso range it looks like a slightly modified K-5?</p>

<p>I use Adorama Flashpoint BF-160s, which should have been mentioned in the article as they're another great bang-for-your-buck option.</p>

<p>I too have a K10d and K5 for comparison.</p>

<p>I'm not sure what all the push to get a PC sync socket was about; it's not like a hotshoe to PC sync adapter is expensive or hard to get. I made the mistake once of taking the cap off. Once I got it back on I decided to never take it off again. Wireless flash transmitters work just fine on the hotshoe.</p>

<p>One of the unsung improvements to me was the focus assist LED. Yes, the K10D has focus assist via the flash, but the pop-up flash must be up to use it. This rules out both manual off-camera flash and ambient-only exposure if you want to use autofocus in low-ambient condition with the K10d.</p>

<p>Yes, the k5 has no SR switch, but when you're changing between tripod and handheld, you can cycle to the info screen with it by pressing "info" twice.</p>

<p>All the usually-reported upgrades of course are also there; higher ISO range, lower noise at a given iso, higher pixel count (which further increases the useable light range if printing smaller), lower acoustic noise, 14 bit RAW, etc.</p>

<p>My k-5 works with all my K-mount lenses the same as it does with my k10d. Setting ISO is different though.<br>

To set it to auto iso, hold the iso button and press the green button. To set it back to manual, hold iso button and roll the rear e-dial to the desired iso. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.ricoh.com/release/2011/1001_1.html">Ricoh has purchased Pentax Imaging.</a></p>

<p>I have seen Canon F1 set up this way, for shooting sports.</p>

 

<blockquote>If you have a large collection of M lenses and you don't want the 2X crop of M4/3 you're left with the 1.5X crop of either the Sony NEX or the Ricoh GXR M module. The Ricoh has the option of an EVF while the Sony does not (at least until the leaked NEX-7) and the Ricoh controls are more photographer centric rather than Playstation based.</blockquote>

<p>Or an M9 or MP.</p>

 

<p>Did you order a NEW adaptall 90mm macro? The Tamron 90mm macro is available in direct K-mount without an adapter and autofocus and auto-aperture work.</p>

<p>Yes, you could build a mirror box with a sophisticated cam system to control the mirror speed profile, but it would probably be cheaper to assemble, smaller, and more reliable with a stepper motor.</p>

<p>My suspicion is that they use a micro-stepping controlled stepper to smoothly accelerate & decelerate the mirror, rather than the usual full-speed slap. This is merely conjecture based on the way it feels though and I have no inside knowledge.</p>

<p>I think making a K-mount APSC-Sensored digital cinema camera (crazy-high resolution @ flexible rates) and digital video camera (1080p@25 or 30) body would be a good move. It would broaden the market for K lenses.</p>

<p>The first video camera model could probably be the guts of a K5 with a heatsink on the back of the sensor in a different body (and no pentaprism, mirror, or mechanical shutter). With less weight and space constraints and no need for sensor-shift (due to expecting to use a tripod, dolly, or crane), they could stick a big heat pipe, heat resevoir, and radiator on the back of the sensor, and solve the overheat issues. Not sure how to solve the "rolling shutter" issue though.</p>

<p>Also, if they wanted to really go out on a limb they could build a digital IMAX-like system with a giant sensor to take 645 lenses.</p>

<p>This image is uninteresting (unless you look at the EXIF)</p>

<div></div>