eric_mark_palmer

<p>Thank you <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=5189561">Wouter Willemse</a> I had not really thought about the working of zoom sucking in dust but it does make sense. The Pentax was my selection as can use old lenses bought for Ricoh XR7 the Nikon was my sisters given to me by my dad when my sister died. As a result it's kept in the bag most of the time.<br>

Although I should know better when using the zoom lens with the Nikon the Tamron B008 18-270mm I tend not to realise how much I have zoomed in and go past the point where it can be used hand held. With the Pentax 28mm prime is hardly used mainly use the Pentax-DA 18-55mm which is only coupled lens. The 95 - 210 is rather old and like the 28mm using without being wide open is a lot of messing around. The 400mm pre-set is very basic but as a result very long which I find a great aid to holding steady where tripod is not used. With tripod it is connected to lens not camera. Also have bellows for Pentax K and reversion ring for 95 - 210 and close-up filters for Pentax-DA 18-55mm. Remote cable release and wireless release for Pentax plus 3 batteries (2 for Nikon) so yes the Pentax is used far more than the Nikon. So with Pentax still using lenses bought in early 1980's.</p>

<p>hank you all I was beginning to think my maths was even worse than I thought. I could not believe how small compact sensors were and so was thinking I had made a huge error somewhere.<br>

Since the calculation is not a precise figure but just approximation not sure if really worth altering program to work with the approximate value. <br>

As to the way colours are done I have seen the normal and special sensor the latter to give high dynamic range and that was not a problem.<br>

I have seen such an improvement from my Old Pentax with CCD and my Nikon with CMOS I do realise how important the sensor is. However still love my Pentax I just feel at home with it.<br>

I inherited the Casio EX-Z600 and I have been rather impressed so small and easy to take anywhere. Always feel even the K10D Pentax says mug me and the Nikon D7000 with a Tamron 18 - 270 mm lens is really only used when I have some one with me. A few draw backs with the Casio EX-Z600 are no RAW files and no view finder and auto focus often fails to find the subject however the Nikon D7000 with the Tamron lens is not that good either I thought the Pentax K10D was bad until I started using the Nikon but I suppose with such a huge zoom only to be expected.<br>

My Father-in-law has the Fugifilm Finepix S2900 Series and I was impressed. Really odd manual warns about aerial erection and one wonders what that has to do with a camera? But I have got use to the idea of only a casual glance at the display when taking photos and any colour correction or similar can be done latter even if done in camera. I always take RAW pictures so was looking at the idea of a compact with RAW and a reasonable ISO and f-stop for the lens.<br>

The 4/3 has a lot going for it keeping the interchangeable lens option but my K10D has been a problem with dust. My own fault treated like a film camera and did not appreciate how careful one needs to be about dust and so not being able to remove lens does have some advantages the lens has never been removed from my Nikon D7000 and likely never will be.<br>

Seeing the size of sensor on a compact at least explains the poor ISO but the K10D is not that good only the D7000 has a CMOS sensor and a really good ISO capability. But in the main using a tripod I get away with the slow exposures. Although the Nikon sensor is really good the Pentax anti-shake leaves the Nikon well behind and so simply reading reviews does not really help.<br>

Main reason for Nikon and Canon is being able to hire a lens since I have no intention of hiring a lens there is really no need to pay the extra for the pair and money better spent getting a good camera. <br>

I expect it to be a few years before I buy but still try to keep abreast of developments. I was rather surprised at Nikon finding it would not work with CS4 even with CS5 it needed an upgrade to be able to read the RAW files but then I realised Nikon is 14 bit where Pentax is only 12 bit with RAW files. As to if the 2 bits really make a difference I don't know? But as a result I would not dream of converting Nikon RAW to DNG but have used the DNG save option with the Pentax.<br>

With so much to consider it will take years before I have the skill required to select the next camera I had the Ricoh XR7 45 years before I upgraded to the K10D and in the main selected as it could use all the old lenses.<br>

I still have a IBSOR D.R.P. bellows compact camera my dad bought for 6D in 1945 so I am a little slow to catch up with technology. <br>

</p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p>I was considering a new compact camera and was comparing spec with D-SLR and compact but when it came to sensor size the D-SLR gave width and hight of sensor but with the two compacts I have been using it say “1/2.3 – in., square-pixel CCD with primary color filter” with Fugi and similar with Casio 1/2.5 and try as I will these figures don't seem to bare any relation to the focal length and the equivalent focal length for a 35mm film camera.<br>

Working on basis film is 24 x 35 mm giving a diagonal of around 42 mm I wrote a program which would show me how this related to a D-SLR and what an old for example Pentax lens would do with a new cropped sensor SLR. Since many gave the equivalent size I could also work back to give sensor size from the real focal length and 35mm focal length together with pixals the latter to give aspect ratio.<br>

Works it would seem A1 with D-SLR data but however I try to convert the compact data it just does not seem to compute. My calculator http://gw7mgw.co.nf/Camera-Lens.html is here it was at first rather simple but I just can't seem to find what that “1/2.3 – in., square-pixel CCD with primary color filter” means. If the area was 1/23 of an inch then it would be some where near but can't see both Casio and Fugi making a mistake with decimal point so has to refer to something I can't see.<br>

Eric</p>

 

<p>To me RAW is the default setting. At any time in camera you can convert RAW to Jpeg and with a +/- 2 EV you can correct so much. Forget about out of camera with Photoshop you can convert before it leaves the camera. So there may be special where Wifi cards are used to transfer Jpeg files to phone to send direct to newspapers where Jpeg is the format required. But to me the whole idea of having a D-SLR is so we can take control be it shutter speed, use of flash, aperture, ISO or RAW and time constraints often means we have to use auto settings for many of the functions but with RAW except for very special times we have all the time in the world to convert to Jpeg so it must be one of the last functions we would set to automatic mode.</p>

<p>If I need to print or other wise submit a photo that day then maybe I would use Jpeg. But both of my cameras will allow you to produce a Jpeg from the RAW file in camera so I see no real reason to use RAW + Jpeg as I can get a Jpeg at any time after.<br>

I did use Jpeg when controlling the camera from the PC as if light levels are low RAW files can lock up the software with Pentax K10D but with Nikon D7000 saved on camera card in RAW and transferred to PC in Jpeg. <br>

Adobe software is very good at handling RAW so would not dream of using Jpeg now. However the bundled software with both cameras was not much good and to get all the 12 bits of information using free software is not easy. I was trying Gimp and I did find I was able to produce two Jpeg images from the same RAW file in camera one +2 and one -2 EV stops and auto combine with Gimp to produce a picture with a much higher dynamic range then you would ever get from a Auto produced camera Jpeg but it did take me all night to find out how to combine.<br>

I would say if you don't want to pay for software then used RawTherapee but Lightroom RAW has the edge on other Adobe RAW as it has history the rest do not.</p>

<p>Picturestoexe seems to be the software for AV's and the evaluation is free works like full paid for but has banner across the top. There are AV competitions and I have seen some really good examples. Proshow seems to the the other one used by many. Never tried it.<br>

I have in the past used Flash and Picturestoexe works very like flash so I found it easy to use. However other have found it hard. </p>

 

<p>I found with built in flash on Pentax the flash triggered slave would fire with the pre-flash however using the 3500 there was no pre-flash so all worked A1. Just re-scanned manual now at http://gw7mgw.co.nf/Vivitar_3500_flash.html I am still getting requests for the PDF version I had done so felt time to convert to HTML.<br>

All best Eric</p>

 

<p>Manual now at http://gw7mgw.co.nf/Vivitar_3500_flash.html</p>

<p>I have at last re-scanned and the manual now in HTML format is at http://gw7mgw.co.nf/Vivitar_3500_flash.html</p>

<p>My email address has changed to gw7mgw@sky.com I still have the pdf of the manuals. Since I have been asked so many times I will see if it can be converted to html if so I will place on my website http://gw7mgw.co.nf/index.html but it's on the to do list not there yet.</p>

<p>You are correct using a non electric lens the slave flash works A1 using cameras built in flash.<br>

As to using the hot shoe with the Vivitar which is only flash gun I can use on hot shoe due to voltages there are a few odd things. Only two contacts not three as for older camera so in fully auto green mode I find the following.<br>

1) Auto focus has a problem and often needs putting in manual focus mode.<br>

2) The flashing spark to show flash is required will become solid once flash is charged.<br>

3) The speed will change as soon as flash is charged to between 1/30 and 1/180 of a second.<br>

4) When there is no spark shown in the view finder the flash will not fire.<br>

Once one leaves Auto (Green) Mode then you can use the flash for fill-in but not in Auto (Green) Mode. Selecting X will fire flash, but in Both auto modes and AV mode it tells you when you need a flash and without the second contact the camera will not know there is a flash gun attached or if it's charged. So questions are:-<br>

What Mode did you try to use hot shoe with?<br>

Is the flash gun suitable have you checked the voltage?<br>

Have you ever used another flash gun which use high voltages which could have damaged the camera.<br>

I was lucky I never have tried using anything but the Vivitar 3500. The other flash guns including the other Vivitar all have voltages of around 200 volt so should not be used with a D-SLR camera.</p>

<p>I was given a load of Canon stuff and among it was a remote flash trigger which will set of second flash from first with no wired connection just uses the flash.<br>

So tried it with Pentax K10D and the result was darker than using just built in flash. So I tried with Vivitar 3500 and it worked OK. So thought I must have some setting wrong. Tried 1/30sec and 1/180sec still dark. Tried leading and trailing still dark. Tried flash compensation still dark.<br>

Using tripod with Vivitar 3500 on camera and second flash below I got some really good pictures of berries in the wood. However it took for ever working out exposure. Set to about 12 inches and altered f stop until right as for example f9 at 1/180 second ISO100 so moved to next with same settings again 12 inches away. This time f22 at 1/180 second ISO 100.<br>

Wanted to use for wedding but so unpredictable not really an option. However I can explain why. The sensor which see the light is all well and good in a room but out doors not aimed at subject but scene beyond. Found the only way was to set to motor drive. Manual was too strong. <br>

However the built in flash is TTL so works far better. But has a shadow with close up and needs some extra light from below but for some reason it switches it off premature. <br>

If I can work out why then maybe I can work out a way around the problem.<br>

Of the 6 flash guns I own only the Vivitar 3500 can be used on the hot shoe. The others have around 200v on the contacts. And the Vivitar 3500 is rather powerful and quite a long way from lens. Good for red eye but not close up.<br>

Although I have the dedicated base it was for earlier Pentax so only two contacts not three. In auto mode (Green) very unpredictable. I am guessing camera only fires flash when light is too low but not very good for fill in flash. So I seem to end up in manual mode. But being a powerful flash in motor drive mode it runs on about 1/20 of full power so very short duration of about 1/20000 of a second. Very good for freezing motion. And on manual with zoom can still use with 400mm f6.8 lens. But with the three auto metering modes only works indoors outside it's a dead loss.<br>

Has anyone else used one of these old flash guns and if so how have they got on?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>There will always be a place for the older systems but the mirror means the lens if further from the CCD so they have to be larger and cost more. We have already lost the penaprism and split screen focusing I would guess the mirror will be next. By removing the mirror or at least allowing the camera to be used with mirror locked up and displaying the image with a digital display it allows movies to be taken. So even where there is a mirror often now you can lock it up.<br>

Using a display on back of camera does have problems especially in bright sun light but the camcorders have had small black and white monitors built into a view finder for years no reason why a compact can not have the same.<br>

Bringing the lens closer to the CCD also allows wider angle lenses to be made cheaper. <br>

As to smaller CCD that's another question and one needs another thread to ask that question. The same applies to non interchangeable lenses.<br>

So why do I use a D-SLR? Simple it uses same lenses as the camera I bought back in 1981 and I can use all my old stuff one of the advantages of being a Pentax user. If however I wanted a new camera and to change would result in having to buy all new lenses then I would not want another D-SLR however I would want a view finder and be able to view through the lens.</p>

<div></div>

<p>I have just got a load of old equipment with includes 4 flash guns.<br>

The Prinz Jupiter 177 and Sunagor 160B seem straight forward the Mikona MV-328 refers to Wide and Normal but I see nothing to alter the angles but I am sure with some experiments I will work out the guide number but the Hanimex TZ1 has a sensor and three position switch M blue dot and orange dot together with a zoom and bunch of filters.<br>

I want to use the flashes with a remote slave using either the Pentax K10D built in flash or my Vivitar 3500 which has the Pentax module which although not really for this Pentax works well plus for that one I have instructions. <br>

I would think the Hanimex TZ1 is similar to the Vivitar 3500 so on manual (I assume M) it should work OK but interested in the sensor part and the setting up to use with sensor.<br>

It needs some repairs so as yet untested.<br>

What I am hoping is I can place the Hanimex TZ1 in front of the camera where I expect wild life will wander retire with telephoto lens and Vivitar 3500 on camera and for one flash to set off the other giving me a greater range.<br>

The Prinz Jupiter 177 works with flash triggered remote and as yet not run any tests in the field. So any advice or any instruction manuals would help.</p>

 

<p>I am sure now all sorted but since my last post I have bought more old lenses and used them on the K10D but not straight forward. I set the camera to over expose by two stops then close lens by two stops and it works. But the big problem is the range finder fitted to old cameras has gone and the setting of the viewfinder to match one's eye is now very important when not using an auto focus lens. <br>

Using very old pre-stop down lenses with no camera connection is easier than those with the auto stop down and it is temping to always use lens wide open.<br>

One advantage is old lenses work far better with reversing rings than the new ones, and zoom lenses work very well with reversing rings as the zoom control becomes focus.</p>

<p>When opening RAW files with Photoshop CS4 changes you make are not saved to the RAW file which I think is good. It does however make a note of the changes you have made and when you re-open the RAW file it auto displays the changes you have made. From the xmp file.<br>

You can open it in Notepad but hard to read. However if you open in Excel you get one item per line and easy to read. For example <crs:Contrast>+25</crs:Contrast> means I had increased contrast by 25.<br>

In contrast when opening a Jpeg file with Photoshop it strips out some of the information. Using the Pentax Photo browser I can see with unaltered Jpeg files lens type as well as setting with aperture, speed and sensitivity but once loaded into Photoshop although some info remains Capture mode, Autofocus, Flash etc are removed. And Firmware/Software is changed to Adobe Photoshop CS4 Macintosh it also can no longer be displayed with the camera.<br>

I would say the idea of leaving the file as it is and adding an extra file 8k file rather than a second 12.4Mb file saves a lot of space on storage media and must be good.<br>

However when opening the same file with Pentax Photo Laboratory all the info stored by Photoshop is ignored so I have to start again from scratch. And I can't save the changes to the RAW file it has to be as Jpeg or TIFF so yes I do like the CS4 ability however I have Version 7 at home and can't really justify the expense to upgrade my home edition. <br>

I will admit at first I did wonder what the xmp files were but lucky I am at college so could ask lecturer.</p>

<p>To date 14 people have asked for a copy and I have no problem with that number. I have heard of one person using a slave with it and I would like to learn more about that function. It is in PDF format if that is a problem I can put on web site. Email still ericmark@talktalk.net</p>