jacques c pelletier

May 15, 2010

Hi Eric.

I meant to say that there seems to be what I call "lissage" when the NR is set high. I believe this happens with nearly all brands though, or am I mistaken to think that way? I know for sure this happens when my cameras are set to "High" noise reduction, JPEG format. I shoot RAW nearly 100% of the time ... paradoxal? What I mean is that when shooting RAW, NR doesn' t come "on" unless I go to very ISO settings, such as over ISO1600.

Of course, I often end up shooting in less-than-ideal weather, so ISO is cranked up, and the noise becomes rather nagging. I hate having to do much PP to reduce it.

I understand that the D700 (full frame, rifght?) and the 5dmkI handle this sort of situation much better but that is presently not an option for me. Therefore, I suppose I will have to just continue "as is" until I make a firm and informed decision.

Thanks for the reply, much appreciated.

JP

May 15, 2010

Thanks Shun.

So, I will then proceed with the testing of my friend's D300 and make sure that we also take some shots during dimmed lighting conditions. I appreciate your comments regarding that.

For the reviews, I will make sure that they are from "reputable" sources, such as those you are mentioning: Thom Hogan, Bjorn Rorslett and DPReview ... and your own! I didn't know about the latter, my apologies.

Cheers.

JP

May 15, 2010

Peter,

So I guess that you didn't want to get into Pentax DSLR's then.

I too started out with Pentax, a long time back, and I kept some of my best lenses which I still use today. However, I donned on me a few times to make a switch but because of all the gear I already had, and the then restrcted budget, I decided to stay put.

Of course, you guys are right: going into two different systems could be troublesome. I agree that if ever decide to go Nikon, or Canon, I should make a complete switch.

What I have decided to do is wait a bit ... cameras change all the time with new features, and see what's coming up over the next few months.

In the meantime, I am not desperate, I will continue using the gear I have and make the best out of it.

As I mentioned earlier though, I am still having some issues with the type of AF I wished I had on my camera bodies, as well as some concerns for working at high ISO settings.

So, thanks for the reply.

Cheers.

JP

May 14, 2010

Eric, Shun:

Thanks guys for the replies.

I did some homework and found a few reviews comparing both the Nikon D300 and D300s, and the Canon D7.

For me, what is really important is handling of high ISO situations and giving "unwashed" results, i.e.: that the noise is being taken care of without lissage, or loss of details.

Then, the AF: must be fast, able to track moving targets and can lock on without hunting all over.

The reviews seem to indicate that the Nikon D300, and the D300s as well, handle noise at high ISO in a more or less "washed out" fashion. That is what I seem to comprehend anyway.

For what it's worth, sure I would consider making a total brand switch only if all of the above critria are met.

Thanks again for all of the info.

Cheers.

JP

Edit: I had five reviews for which I had links, but the forum sends a message saying not to post "rumours" ??? Those were not rumours.

May 14, 2010

Hi Shun,

I plan to do that indeed.

This far, I can tell you that:

1. The D300 "seems" to have faster AF

2. It literally locks on the moving target, here it was a BIF.

3. Great results at high ISO settings.

Thanks for the reply.

JP

May 14, 2010

Buying into Nikon and sticking with Pentax too?

The title may be misleading but I didn't quite had the room for the entire question(s). I did post this thread/question in another well known forum but I did not received any feedback whatsoever. So, here it is: Some of you may know me as a Pentaxian "only", doing mostly nature and wildlife photography. I presently have a great Pentax system/gear with two camera bodies, namely a K20D and a K7. Most of my stuff is done with a DA*300/4 with or without TC and /or a Tamron 80-200/2.8., plus quite a few other lenses. Anyway, today I was shocked, or should I say amazed, to see what this Nikon300 could do when tracking BIF under cloud covered conditions. My buddy, a Nikon fan, let me use his D300 coupled with a rather fast 70-200/2.8 VR lens (Nikon). Also, we use ISO 800 and up to 1250 and the results were unquestionably very good, to say the least. I am now in the "consider Nikon" phase as a second system, specifically for wildlife, fast moving subjects and, more often than not, having to shoot at high ISO settings under dimmed lighting conditions, probably very high on my list of priorities/criteria. I am not trying to bash Pentax, which I really like and will likely stick with it for a very long time yet, but if Nikon can give me more latitude for this particular type of photography, that would be the most important reason(s) to buy into it. As well, I NEED fast <acronym title="Auto Focus">AF</acronym> tracking which locks on the moving subject(s) without having to deal with <acronym title="Auto Focus">AF</acronym> hunting. For that, I would sell some of my Pentax equipment, but still keep an entire system which, as I said earlier, suits me fine for most of my photography. Hence, I would like to know whether this would be suitable for my purposes, for a few years at least: Nikon D300 (lightly used or "NEW" in the box ... there are some still available out there I am told), and a Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VR, plus a 1.4X TC matching this lens. I thought this would be a good place to start asking questions about the Nikon system. Cheers. JP

May 14, 2010

Amazing photos, Bryan, and thanks for the reply.

Yes indeed, had I not own a Tamron maco, I seriously think I would have bought this 100mm/WR, no doubt.

But since all replies here confirm that this is a keeper, I might as well get out there and start to really use it.

Cheers.

JP

May 14, 2010

Staffan,

You just confirmed my decision to keep the Tamron.

Also, very good arguments:

Is the IQ better with the Pentax?

Is this a matter of "wanting" the Pentax lens?

Spend much less and get "protection" for the gear.

Thanks for the timely reply.

Cheers.

JP

May 14, 2010

Orlando:

Thanks for reply.

Indeed, weather protection is great to have but I will nevertheless stick with the Tamron. If there isn't much difference in IQ between the two lenses, that is one more positive point of keeping the Tammy.

JP

May 14, 2010

Michael (Elenko): If bad weather hasn't stopped you, it shouldn't stop me either! Good point. As you said, it is a matter of USING the lens more and have fun with it. As for the tecnique of doing macro, of course I have much, much to learn. Well, thanks for the reply. Cheers. JP

May 14, 2010

Hi Douglas.

Yes, true enough: I have no idea how much better the Pentax WR would be compared to the Tamron. In that case, I will likely follow the suggestions to keep it and use it more often. Maybe I will surprise myself!

Cheers.

JP

May 14, 2010

Hi Michael. This new 100mm WR Macro sure seems to be quite a gem, according to reviews from all over. It is also looks like a Limited. But, as I am reading further down this thread, maybe I am thinking that I "need" it while the truth is that I "want" it ... LBA? Maybe I should get more practice with the Tamron and see what I can do with it. Perhaps later when I see a used one for sale (which I doubt) I will reconsider? I thank you for the reply! Cheers. JP

May 14, 2010

Andrew: As I am reading your reply and the others' posts, I realize that it would probably a foolish thing to do in switching for the Pentax, albeit with great reviews. I guess I should just shoot more with the Tamron and appreciate its full potential. Thanks for your reply.

JP

May 13, 2010

Hi everyone,

Summer is coming soon (still fairly cold here though) and I thought that it is time to start doing some macro photos.

Not that I am an expert at it, far from that, but I would sure like to "get going" for a change. My DA*300/4 has been a constant "attachment" to my K20D in the past and now is a fixture on the K7.

I presently own a Tamron SP Di 90/2.8 Macro lens with which I took a few shots already and, to be frank, are quite acceptable (to me anyway).

Problem is that when I go in wet/humid areas, I am afraid that because this lens is not weather "resistant", I might damage it. However, as I mentioned earlier, this lens makes indeed some great shots.

So, I am wondering if it would be foolish to sell the Tammy and go for this new Pentax 100mm WR which shows a lot of good reviews. I am also wondering, if I do that, if there would be a demand for the Tamron lens.

Suggestions would be appreciated.

Cheers.

JP

April 21, 2010

Hi everyone,

I haven't posted here for some time ... been busy taking pics!

Anyway, I am just about ready to go to my friendly comp store (run by professional geeks :)) and after much thinking and searching, also here on Photo.net, I need to have some feedback on a few items, if anyone can help me with that:

(Yes I trust those fellows at the store but I don't want to be caught in an endless race for the "best and most powerful" box either; and any feedback from here would be very nice).

1. First major upgrade is to go to Win7 ... I am still running Win XP. The question here is should I go with the 64 bits installation in spite of the many rumours that drivers may not be available for some applications. I am thinking of:

- Photoshop CS4

- Noiseware Pro

- Pentax Photo Lab/Browser.

2. I presently have 4Gb of RAM and since CS4 can handle as much RAM as you can give it, I might as well go for a fair amount of RAM, in the range of 8 to 12 Gb. Is this reasonable? Will that really speed up processing of large RAW and TIFF files?

3. I have two separate graphic cards on the machine, running two monitors: a 22" for the "major work" and an old 17" for data files and such. Those graphic cards are set up this way:

- card no.1: "stand alone" card, not part of the motherboard. This is "dedicated" to the larger monitor.

- card no.2: "built-on-the-motherboard" type of card. This one runs the smaller 17" monitor.

Is there anything else I should know about graphic cards for running CS4 in such a described environment above?

OK, so that is pretty much what I had to ask and if anyone could contribute, I would be much, much appreciated.

Cheers!

JP

April 5, 2010

Might be a good idea to get one of those little USB SDHC card reader?

I've used this ever since I got my first digital camera and never had to use the cables.

Just a thought.

JP

March 25, 2010

Ian,

You said:

" ... the high-iso Noise reduction off. The test photo was shot in raw @ 1600iso edited in silky pixs , the noise NR set as low as possible as not to hide the noise,"

"What I have done to the setting on the K7 is to set the High/low key Adj as far left as possible and also setting the Contrast shadow adjustment also to the far left."

and you tested it in RAW? I always thought that when shooting RAW, with the K7, no matter what NR setting you used, it wouldn't kick in beofre you reached ISO 3200.

I got this information from another site, all Pentax related.

Now, this is really becoming confusing.

I may be mistaken but if so, I would like to have some consistent info regarding the NR use with the K7, when shooting RAW.

JP

March 12, 2010

I too have a missing "link" at below 16mm and such a lens would be a welcome addition.

However, there are "rumours" that a DA*10-16 would be out, but that's a rumour, nothing more.

When I'll see an available lens comparable to the Sigma 8-16, but with a constant aperture of F2.8, and weather sealed ... that'll be a most interesting choice.

Until then, I am trying to keep my LBA under control!

JP

March 6, 2010

Did some shooting late last summer and fall 2009 and it did work OK; I agree that it hunts but it is "unuseable".

If there is too much AF hunting, just go manual, that'll solve your problem.

JP

March 3, 2010

Hi Andrew,

And thanks for the compliment!

I really like my DA*300/4: light, not too bulky so very easy to carry aound. There are times, however, when I could use a little more light but overall, it has been great even for handheld shots.

I wish I had the funds for a 400/2.8 but!! ... how do you carry this large piece of glass around?

Cheers.

JP

March 1, 2010

Hi Steve.

I use the DA*300/4, 90% of the time for birding. I know it is sometimes a bit short for this type of photography, but I get very good results ... without a TC, and pretty much all hand held shots. I use it on both the K20D and the K7.

Mind you, because of the focal length, I have to get as close as possible to the subjects.

On the other hand, it is rather light and can be carried all day without much strain on my neck or back/shoulders.

Here:

<a href="http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home#section=ARTIST&subSection=4372403&subSubSection=0&language=EN">http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home#section=ARTIST&subSection=4372403&subSubSection=0&language=EN</a>

you will find a few sample shots taken with this lens. Review the pics carefully because some were taken with "other" lenses. You will see when it says Pentax DA*300 F4.

Hope this helps.

JP

February 14, 2010

Just goes to show how hard/impossible it is to contact any high roller figure at any large corporation.

JP

February 14, 2010

William,

From personal experience, I can tell you that the Sigma 100-300/4 is one great lens. I can also tell you that the DA*300/4 is one great lens!

I sold my Sigma 100-300/4 only because I wanted the 300/4 for its more compact size and weight, and that it is a prime rather than zoom lens.

Both show great IQ but I found the DA*300 a bit faster (AF) when coupled with the K20D and the K7.

While some people have issues with the DA* SDM "engine", I haven't.

If you prefer having the latitude of the zoom, got for that.

If you prefer a prime, go for the DA*300.

Cheers.

JP

February 11, 2010

Andrew,

You sold the K7 because the K20D outperformed it when doing bird in flight photos. What was your "keeper rate" of the K20D vs. that of the K7?

And, what lens(es) were you using when performing the comparison ... your FA*300/f?

Personally, I use a DA*300 F4 with the K20D and the K7, and I find that the AF of the K7 is actually faster.

Just curious to find out.

JP

February 10, 2010

Dave,

Just a question:

Why did you use 1/100s at such a high ISO on the second shot, of the cardinal?

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by jacques c pelletier