johnw436

<p>Supriyo, indeed. The Great Lakes can be some of the most treacherous waters on Earth during storms. These are a veritable graveyard of ships. The waters of the Great Lakes are violent beyond compare during big storms because of the confused wave state, which is responsible for the truly dramatic photos in this series. The swell is moving with the wind, and the waves returning from other direction will collide with the swell and against the wind and the result is very large waves crashing head on. Sailors around the world have the utmost respect for Great Lakes sailors. I have been on ships in the North Atlantic and I have been on ships when we sailed through hurricanes. The Great Lakes can be worse. Instead of long, rising swell the confused chop on the Great Lakes beats you from every side and all at once. </p>

<p>The Tamron 28-75/f2.8 is my go-to lens. It is mounted permanently on my camera. (It was permanent on my K20 until it became permanent on my K3) It is a superb lens. There are times when I want a wider lens, and then I use my Sigma 10-20. How often is that in day to day shooting? For me- rarely. I would not trade the Tamron for another lens just to get a wider focal range, speaking for myself. I get no noticeable distortion at either end of the zoom range. I just can't say anything negative about it. When I first bought the lens I thought it felt a little bit under built. After several years, those worries were unfounded. The lens is perfectly robust and adding weight to it would serve no purpose. </p> <p>I have the DA40 and DA70 Limiteds. Images from the Tamron are nearly indistinguishable. </p> <p> </p>

<p>I hope you are right, for no other reason than to see Pentax establish itself in the FF market. Personally, I'm more than happy with Dx. Are there times when a 10mm lens isn't wide enough on Dx? Not for me. I can't remember that happening. I'm still giddy shooting my K3, and I'm still more than happy with my K20 when I'm not shooting in the dark.</p>

<p>This is the equivalent of two kids in the back seat of a car on a long, hot, summer vacation from Hell. One kid (the drone operator) is holding his finger one inch from his sibling's face saying "I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you" which is an obvious attempt to draw a forceful response from the sibling, to bait a smack from the sibling who will then have crossed the line in response even though said response is warranted.</p> <p>For what justifiable purposed, legal or not, can a drone operator fly a drone over someone else's property before it becomes a nuisance or worse? Since the property owner can't know what the intent of the drone operator is, the property owner has to on one hand tolerate the finger in the face for fear of repercussions, or on the other hand address a nuisance/ peeping tom/ instigator by disabling the drone. He can't call the police because he has no idea who to report and the drone won't be there when the police arrive. An unauthorized drone within striking distance, within the confines of a property, is a drone that is intentionally invading private property.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Christian, if you don't get a pretty good answer here quickly you'll probably have a lot better luck asking this question in the Classic Manual Cameras forum. While this forum is Pentax-specific, the Classic Manual forum is full of people who spend all day tinkering with older cameras of every stripe. </p>

<p>I haven't tried product shots with a polarizer. Interesting idea. I won't cost me anything to try, so I'll give that a shot next time and see what turns up. So far I've only been working with lighting variations.</p>

<p>As for me, I'm still working on my still life lighting. Knives, being reflective by nature, have proven to be a real challenge for me. My goal this week was to get enough light on the handle to show the depth in the wood (chatoyance) without blowing the highlights completely. The handle is finished with a very reflective oil finish and I wanted to use enough fill to accent the lines with highlights but not blow the blade completely out.</p> <p> K3 with Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 shot at 55mm @f/22. <br> AB800 through scrim as main light, ABR800 as fill light.</p> <table > <tbody> <tr> <td><a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/gRTPDRrmOmvH5be03M8rBNMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-VsrTmOflgnw/ViWuCpImBvI/AAAAAAAAGOE/_3BnW33cjRc/s800-Ic42/2015.10.19%252520Gyuto%2525208in%252520AEB-L_Pommelle%252520Koa_side.JPG" alt="" width="800" height="532" /></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td >From <a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/john.jwphoto/Knives?authuser=0&feat=embedwebsite">Knives</a></td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

<p>Matt, your compositions are so strong. The images you post always jump right off my monitor, but aside from the sharpness and color, etc. it is your composition that always pulls me into the photo. I just want you to know that I admire your work a great deal. PN seems to have slowed down an awful lot in the time I've been away and most photos don't get a lot of feedback.</p> <p>Doug, I really like your hawk photo. the sharpness and framing are wonderful. I can't quite make out what the bird has in its beak. Makes for a very interesting photo.</p> <p>Javier, it is great to see you back. From following your posts it seems you disappeared for some time. I see you haven't lost the touch for street photos.</p> <p>Harry, those colors really pop in the soccer photo. Great timing on the capture, catching the guy on the left completely off the ground.</p>

<p>I think there is great value in a book like this. Many people going into a profession are kids in love with an idea, and absolutely no life experience to guide them. They've been given such sage advice as "do something you love" by people who don't depend on doing what they love to make a living. Every vocation seems exciting when a person is fixated on the fun part of it. </p>

<p>I really appreciate you doing that. It's never my intention to clutter the site. Thank you.</p>

<p>Harry, you may be correct that I just haven't seen the issue. On that note, I ran across a YouTube video saying that the default setting for auto iso noise reduction were causing the person a lot of unpredictable results. By setting noise reduction to OFF (100-1600 iso), LOW (3200 - 12,800) and MEDIUM above that, the issue went away for the person who shot the video I watched. I did apply those settings. According to him, before he made that change the camera would at times freak out for whatever reason and apply a bunch of noise reduction, ruining the shot. I certainly can't speak to it, I only know that I've played with this camera in near pitch-black and it performed wonderfully. Only time will tell. I can only say that this camera has worked amazingly in conditions where my k20 wouldn't even try to consider firing the shutter.</p>

<p>My apologies. Andrew helped me out on how to post images, but I wasn't able to delete the two previous dead links.</p> <p> </p> <table > <tbody> <tr> <td><a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/_Ir-6URurvR_SzXFouTiYdMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-VIZeHm-oCOw/VhL6qiFYMLI/AAAAAAAAGNM/mhTmPXiyOL4/s640-Ic42/spine%252520view%252520makers%252520mark.jpg" alt="" /></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td >From</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p>K3, 1/160 @f/20, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 @ 75mm</p>

<p>Thank you, Andrew. I was pulling my hair out!</p> <p>So the most common negative I read about the K3 is the poor jpeg quality out of the camera. I'm not seeing it. Perhaps my standards are too low? I don't know, but these images are straight from the camera. The only post processing I did was a little dust spotting and resizing to 600 pixels on the long side in SilkyPix. These were shot as jpegs. The only issue I see is that I need to do more dust spotting.</p> <p> </p> <table > <tbody> <tr> <td><a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/_Ir-6URurvR_SzXFouTiYdMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-VIZeHm-oCOw/VhL6qiFYMLI/AAAAAAAAGNM/mhTmPXiyOL4/s640-Ic42/spine%252520view%252520makers%252520mark.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="426" /></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td >From <a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/john.jwphoto/Knives?authuser=0&feat=embedwebsite">Knives</a></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table > <tbody> <tr> <td><a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/6sb6qblo3cHnb0pgr7B2C9MTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-0g6_3XXovlA/VhL6YKZlgCI/AAAAAAAAGNE/b57ntTU01cY/s640-Ic42/right%252520side%252520view.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="426" /></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td >From <a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/john.jwphoto/Knives?authuser=0&feat=embedwebsite">Knives</a></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table > <tbody> <tr> <td><a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/pZYLAaufDvuU1dZCnn4e_9MTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-AG6JlcjL3nI/VhL6Lrc_JeI/AAAAAAAAGM0/dNzbqEb6qXk/s640-Ic42/left%252520side%252520with%252520sheath.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="426" /></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td >From <a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/john.jwphoto/Knives?authuser=0&feat=embedwebsite">Knives</a></td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

<p>I look forward to seeing your shots, Bethe, and getting your feedback on how you like shooting the K3. I find that my quibbles are going away as I get used to the feel of the camera. No, it's still too angular and not nearly as comfortable to hold as my K20 but as I shoot it more I'm sure I'll adjust and come to like it.</p> <p>I ran into a rather unexpected problem. I bought a 64gig SD card and did a product shoot on my knives. Then I went to transfer the photos and the computer doesn't recognize the card, telling me the card needs to be formatted. My first instinct was that the card is bad, but the camera recognizes it with no problem. Digging around on the net leads me to believe that my OS can't handle cards this size (I guess the formatting uses a different FAT format). This seems to be a known problem, just one that I hadn't heard about before. So I have a 32gig card on the way. The downside is I reformatted the SD card and lost the entire shoot.</p> <p>I did re-shoot my knives, but it's been so long since I posted to PN I can't for the life of me remember how to do it. I'm hosting my photos on Picasa and when I try to insert the link PN doesn't recognize it. I spent time searching the PN archives for help and couldn't find anything. If anyone would be so kind as to tell me how to post images I would greatly appreciate it.</p>

<p>Wayne, it's lot like compact pistols, isn't it? They market them based on size but you need a magazine with a finger extension to shoot the darn thing- negating the small size of the frame.</p> <p>I can't ever remember shooting the K20d without the battery grip, and I'm positive I'll never shoot the K3 without one if it's an option to have it on. It really doesn't make sense to shave millimeters on a camera the size of a DSLR anyway. Make a Pentax version of the Fuji X series and go tout that for size. If Pentax is going to build the Little Tank That Could with magnesium alloy frames, then the smaller the body the heavier it will feel in the hand, anyway. </p> <p>Once upon a time, many moons ago, I had a Nikon N65. It felt like a plastic toy- in fact I think it was so light I knew when it had a roll of film in it by the way it felt. (I'm kidding... a little). That's how you make a travel camera, imo. Either you want a weathertight camera that can drive nails or else you want a featherweight. Two different uses entirely. Mixing the two ideas only makes a camera that is less than perfect for either use.</p>

<p>Your take on the FLU cards seems to be in line with just about every review I've seen. I'm also not jazzed that it's useless for video mode. I understand that there's too much data transfer to have it transmit the video in real time to the remote device. (why not live view to ensure focus, and then black out when you hit the START button to record?)<br> Perhaps the one saving grace is that it's just a card. As technology improves hopefully a great one will come along and all we have to do is pop it into the SD card slot, versus having it as an integral part of the camera that can't be upgraded.</p>

<p>This weekend I'll see what the FLU card can do for me. I didn't use it today because I wanted to get a feel for the camera itself. The FLU card was what drove me from the KSii to the K3. I really, REALLY, wanted that articulating screen on the KSii. The combo deal I got on this camera included a battery grip and FLU card. Let's see if composing images on my phone works as well as I'm hoping. Boy, I really wanted that articulating screen.</p>

<p>Great minds think alike, Bethe! I also passed on the K3ii because I wanted onboard flash and I have zero need for GPS and don't shoot star trails. The onboard flash may not be perfect, but it's always better than the flash you don't have with you...</p> <p>Today was the first day I really got to work the K3 hard. I set up studio lighting to photograph a knife I just completed. (I make custom knives, of all things.) Let me tell you something that made me jump for pure joy- Live View with Focus Peaking! Where have you been all of my life? Due to the nature of shooting reflective surfaces I was shooting from a fairly high angle and getting my eye into the viewfinder to tweak focus wasn't fun. On the K20d, Live View is more of a novelty than anything else. On the K3's larger display it takes on a new life. On top of that- focus peaking! As you turn the focus ring of the lens, sparkles appear on the part of the image that is in focus. All I had to do was watch the display while I tweaked the focus ring to get the sparkles on exactly the part of the image I wanted as the focal point. Also, with the modeling light shining on the knife, I was able to move my fill reflector around and see exactly where I was getting my bounce fill on the subject. I experimented for a long time, comparing what I saw on Live View to what I could achieve using the viewfinder. No difference.</p> <p>And finally- a 100% viewfinder. No more guesstimating borders around the subject or trying to frame the image so that I could crop out things that I'd only discover on the edges later.</p> <p>Bethe, I think you will be in love with the K3, as I am.</p>

<p>And you make an excellent point about the white balance. That's something I was never thrilled about on the K20d. The auto white balance on the K3 performs better than I could do manually tweaking the WB to death on the K20. </p>

<p>I can't speak to the K3 being better in any regard to the K5ii. I doubt it's very much different at all in actual use. The K5ii was a real game changer when it came out, and the K10d/K20d was perfectly fine for large prints so any improvement over that is lost on me. Okay, perhaps now I can crop some and still get large prints, but that was not a problem before as far as I'm concerned. For my needs it really was all about the low light limitation on the K10/K20 series. If the K5ii was still available I'd have bought one without a second thought. There are plenty of reviews which seem to hint that the K3's low light sensitivity may in practice be a tiny step back from the K5ii. Again, I can't answer that, but there's no resounding praise for the K3 over the K5ii. </p> <p>For someone like me who is moving up from a K20d, the K3 is in a whole different league as far as low light is concerned, and video can't be compared because the K10/K20 didn't have it at all. But if I had a K5 series I can't see any reason I'd consider a K3, speaking personally.</p> <p>If this was "Build-A-Body Workshop" I'd take the guts of the K3 and stuff them into the K10d/K20d body. Although, I'd keep the K3's ability to run AA batteries in the grip. That was a feature I seriously took adavantage of in my *istDs days. </p> <p> </p>

<p>I finally pulled the trigger on a K3 since the price dropped. I'm not a pro, so I can't justify being an early adopter. I'd had my heart set on a K5IIs but I waited too long and they have all but disappeared.</p> <p>I was, and still am, very happy with my K20d and that's why I hadn't yet picked up a K5 variant. All I wanted was better low-light sensitivity and video. There are so many good Pentax bodies out now (thank you, Michael Kuhne for your informative posts). Just about anything made after the K20d / K7 series was going to be a vast improvement for low light sensitivity and the price point of the K50 is incredible. Then there is the KS2, but the price range was right there with the K3 now that the price has dropped dramatically. Adorama was offering the K3 with a FLU card and battery grip for 800 bucks, which to me was simply too good to turn down. I personally didn't want a K3II because I wanted pop up flash. I use that a lot for spur of the moment shots.</p> <p><br />Playing around with the K3 and K20d side by side really shocked me. Can I say it? The K20d is, in my opinion, the single best ergonomic design ever. The shape of the K3 is great, but it's too angular and frankly feels too small. I don't understand the push for small DSLRs. By the time you put a big honking lens on it what is the point? The size difference isn't enough to notice unless you are trying to measure it, but you sure can feel the difference in your hand. Even with the battery grip, the K3 isn't nearly as comfortable in the hand. It's not bad- don't get me wrong. Pentax is the Cadillac of Comfort when it comes to ergo. The K3 is the CTS coupe and the K20d is the Sedan Deville. Yes, there's a difference. Both are great. One feels solid yet sporty and the other feels, well, perfect.</p> <p>Shooting in a dark room lit only by my computer monitor seemed like a good test for the K3 low light sensitivity. Using the same lens (Tamron 28-75 f/2.8) I took shots of myself in the mirror. This is where I was shocked. I expected the K3 to be better. I did not expect it to be worlds apart. I used the same settings: (75mm @ f/2.8, 1/20, iso 3200, handheld with no flash) because this was the best shot I could get under these conditions with the K20d. At these settings, the K20d could register an image that I could barely make out. I had to manual focus because the K20d couldn't autofocus at all. The K3 with these settings turned out an image that looked *printable*. Autofocus was a snap. I was blown away. I kept dialing up the iso until the K3 was turning out images that looked like the lights were on. On my K20d, I rarely ever used iso 800 unless I had to in order to get the shot. 1600 was fun to play with but not useful in my opinion. 1600 on the K3 may as well be the native ISO. Unbelievable.</p> <p>I was expecting better low light performance, but I was not expecting a quantum leap in all-around camera performance, and that's what I got.</p>

<p>Michael, agreed on all points. I've been dreaming of a K5 since it came out, but I've been 95% satisfied with the K20d all this time. Honestly, I don't need a new camera at all. I just want better low light performance and video. I also would love a great little compact, but I want SLR quality out of the photos. There are platforms for each, but the compact versions which match my expectations don't take Pentax K mount. (not to beat a dead horse) So, if I had to pick between the two the SLR wins with me every time. And with the K5 on the way out, this is the time to get one. </p> <p>The underexposure on the K20d has never been an issue to me. It's very consistent even though it varies lens to lens. I know what my EV comp needs to be and if I'm shooting on the fly a quick peek at the histogram, a click or two on the dial, and we're off to the races. So long as any machine is consistent it isn't hard for us to compensate. That's why I find camera review sites so tedious to wade through. "the new xxxxxx comes in heavier by 3oz.... we found significant differences in noise, that although imperceptible in an actual print..." It's like reviewing a new car by reading the owner's manual instead of driving it.</p> <p>Thank you for the tip on Imaging Resource. That's a great tool.</p> <p> </p>

<p>I'm happy to hear your feedback on this as a sanity check. I like the K5IIs for all the reasons you listed. It seems to still be the high water mark for low noise at high ISO. From all I've ever read, that camera can nearly see in the dark. I missed the part of the KS2 not having a top LCD panel. That's a problem. Still, it looks like one heck of a great camera. Looks like I have some research to do yet.</p>

<p>I haven't posted on PN for a long, long time. But lately I've been on the hunt for my next camera and PN has always been my go-to source for good information regarding cameras. (especially for Pentax) I've been shooting my K20d for what seems like forever now, and truth be told the only times I feel the need for anything else is when I need video or in extreme low light when I can't use flash. </p> <p>I have been debating a K3 vs saving some money and going with the K5IIs. For my needs, all I really require is something marginally better at high ISO than the K20d, and which also offers video. As silly as it sounds, the KSII's articulating LCD might be the deciding factor which trumps either of the other two contenders. Looking at the specs, if the camera lives up to them (which I fully expect that it does), this camera pretty much satisfies my needs. </p>