If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The GX10/K10D really is sealed! (longish)
Went on a little jaunt in the Springbrook national park yesterday, and went
to capture a few shots of Natural Arch and it's associated waterfall. On the hike down we could hear a bit of a rumbling noise that sounded a little like thunder, but since what little of the sky we could see was clear, we put down to being a jet flying overhead. Got down to Natural Arch, started taking shots, went into the cave area and took a few more, then noticed that it was raining quite heavily outside. Sat & waited, & waited, but it just kept getting heavier. Then I noticed that the waterfall had grown quite considerably, and a quick recon revealed that if we didn't leave soon and the rain kept up, we could possibly be trapped in the cave where we were sheltering. The camera went into the (not remotely close to waterproof) bag, along with the wife's IXUS, and we started the dash in the torrential rain. About halfway back to the car we started getting peppered with golf-ball sized hailstones, so we sheltered the kids under a large rock and waited until the hail stopped before continuing to the car. When we finally got there, we were drenched to the bone, and so was the camera bag. A moment of horror as I opened the bag to see the back of the camera sitting in about half an inch of water. Lifted it out, wiped it dry, opened the battery and mem card covers and they were both dry. Turned the camera on and working without a drama. Fortunately the non-sealed lens was sitting up, so other than a few drops on the front element it was basically dry. Unfortunately, the wife's ixus wasn't so lucky. Might put one of the Lowepro AW cases on my wishlist for Christmas too. Here are a couple of my shots: http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdaj/1517818003/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdaj/1517827329/ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The GX10/K10D really is sealed! (longish)
On Oct 9, 8:45 pm, "Doug Jewell" wrote:
Went on a little jaunt in the Springbrook national park yesterday, and went to capture a few shots of Natural Arch and it's associated waterfall. On the hike down we could hear a bit of a rumbling noise that sounded a little like thunder, but since what little of the sky we could see was clear, we put down to being a jet flying overhead. Got down to Natural Arch, started taking shots, went into the cave area and took a few more, then noticed that it was raining quite heavily outside. Sat & waited, & waited, but it just kept getting heavier. Then I noticed that the waterfall had grown quite considerably, and a quick recon revealed that if we didn't leave soon and the rain kept up, we could possibly be trapped in the cave where we were sheltering. The camera went into the (not remotely close to waterproof) bag, along with the wife's IXUS, and we started the dash in the torrential rain. About halfway back to the car we started getting peppered with golf-ball sized hailstones, so we sheltered the kids under a large rock and waited until the hail stopped before continuing to the car. When we finally got there, we were drenched to the bone, and so was the camera bag. A moment of horror as I opened the bag to see the back of the camera sitting in about half an inch of water. Lifted it out, wiped it dry, opened the battery and mem card covers and they were both dry. Turned the camera on and working without a drama. Fortunately the non-sealed lens was sitting up, so other than a few drops on the front element it was basically dry. Unfortunately, the wife's ixus wasn't so lucky. Might put one of the Lowepro AW cases on my wishlist for Christmas too. Here are a couple of my shots:http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdaj/15...aj/1517827329/ You have a couple of very nice pictures there Doug. The getting wet tale you tell is something anyone who owns a 20D, 30D or 40D camera should take note of. Pentax cameras have always had a decent build quality compared to Canon's "slapped together" approach. I think the number one consideration for anyone likely to "go bush" with a camera should be either waterproof cases or a sealed camera. Have you have any issues with limited dynamic range or noise in shadows with that camera Doug? How does it handle high ISO? Not much is said about Pentax cameras here. Pity because they are cheap and well built. I for one would like to know how they stack up. CK |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The GX10/K10D really is sealed! (longish)
"Chon Kei" wrote in message ups.com... snip You have a couple of very nice pictures there Doug. The getting wet tale you tell is something anyone who owns a 20D, 30D or 40D camera should take note of. Pentax cameras have always had a decent build quality compared to Canon's "slapped together" approach. I think the number one consideration for anyone likely to "go bush" with a camera should be either waterproof cases or a sealed camera. Have you have any issues with limited dynamic range or noise in shadows with that camera Doug? Yes and no - how's that for hedging my bets. Coming from film, I find the limited dynamic range in the highlights to be a perpetual frustration. I've had the camera for about 3 months now, and am starting to get the intuitive feel for what I'll have to do to exposure to keep things under control. I haven't thoroughly tested but I feel that it has less highlight range than Velvia, so not much! I frequently find myself dialling in about -1 exposure compensation. But to be fair, I've used Canon, Nikon and Olympus DSLRs and run into the same highlight problem with all. I think highlight range improvement is going to be the next-big-thing in camera design - I hope so anyway. How does it handle high ISO? Not bad at all. 800ISO shots are very acceptable. 1600 is getting a bit grainy, but still not too bad. I've even tried underexposing by 1 stop at 1600ISO and bringing it back in post-processing (ISO 3200 equiv) and it's handled it fairly gracefully. It's certainly a gazillion times better than the Olympus E300 that I had. At 400 and below I can't see any issues with noise. At 800 and 1600, I guess it might be a little noisier than what I've seen from some of the canons, but not horrendously so. I don't find the noise that it produces to be ugly though, whereas some other cameras do produce ugly noise. I don't know the technical terms for what I'm seeing, just that I like what comes out. Not much is said about Pentax cameras here. Pity because they are cheap and well built. I for one would like to know how they stack up. As far as I'm concerned, any image quality differences between any of the big brands are so minor that it's not worth caring about. I've used pretty much every current DSLR except for the top-level pro stuff that's worth more than my car, and really I don't see any significant image quality differences. That's not to say there aren't differences, for example Canon's produce images that I don't like the look of. I can't pick exactly what it is, but I don't like them - they kind of look "plastic". Perhaps they are too perfect? The reasons I bought the GX10 are as follows: (bear in mind that the samsung is just a rebadged Pentax K10d with minor changes). 1) From the moment I first handled a K10D, I loved the feel of it. The position of the dials and buttons is perfect for me. The menu's are easy. All the commonly used functions are quickly within reach so I can continue shooting without having to look at the camera to see what I'm changing. 2) I have a small but significant investment in Pentax glass, so a Pentax/Samsung was probably always going to be the choice - although I'd almost given up on them bringing out something of the K10D class - if they never brought out something decent I probably would have changed to Nikon or Minolta/Sony. 3) Weather sealing in an affordable body was a plus - I've lost a couple of electronic film cameras to humidity in rainforests so without weather sealing there are a lot of places I go where the DSLR would have stayed home and one of my old manual film slr's or rangefinders would have done duty. This wasn't a huge thing for me, because when I purchased the DSLR it was always intended to be supplementary to film, not a replacement for it. After Monday's episode though I'm mighty glad I got a weather sealed camera. 4) I got the Samsung instead of the Pentax because I was able to get an arrangement through work that saved several hundred dollars. Plus I think the buttons and menus on the samsung look better than the Pentax. I guess the "S" word doesn't carry the same prestige as the "P" word, but I use the camera to take photos, not to have other people swoon over the gear I use. CK |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The GX10/K10D really is sealed! (longish)
"Doug Jewell" wrote:
Yes and no - how's that for hedging my bets. Coming from film, I find the limited dynamic range in the highlights to be a perpetual frustration. I've had the camera for about 3 months now, and am starting to get the intuitive feel for what I'll have to do to exposure to keep things under control. I haven't thoroughly tested but I feel that it has less highlight range than Velvia, so not much! That's true of just about any DSLR. The Fuji FinePix S5 is better than most DSLRs in terms of dynamic range. However, it still doesn't come close to the dynamic range offered by high quality colour negative film such as Kodak Portra 160 or Fujicolor Pro 160. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The GX10/K10D really is sealed! (longish)
Tony Polson wrote:
That's true of just about any DSLR. The Fuji FinePix S5 is better than most DSLRs in terms of dynamic range. However, it still doesn't come close to the dynamic range offered by high quality colour negative film such as Kodak Portra 160 or Fujicolor Pro 160. I'm just a bit concerned that I've recently taken some photos on FP4+ pulled to 80ISO and still got burnt out highlights - or at least to dense for may scanner. If I were skilled enough, but I am not, I think there is still detail on the neg, it's just too much for the scanner. Actually looking at the neg again there is perhaps still a little too much contrast, perhaps I should have downrated further! Can't use old Velvia 50 for toffee, always burnt out highlights. Fared better with Velvia 100 and rather like Provia. Does the above mean that at the moment digital is not for me? Pete -- http://www.petezilla.co.uk |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
pentax 40/2.8 vs 50/1.4?
Any thoughts on the value of the 40mm/2.8 pancake versus the 50mm/1.4? A
friend asked & I recommended the 50 unless he's desperate for compactness and requires something close to a normal focal length. It seems the 50 offers more variety departing from the kit lens. The only real strong point of the 40 I can see is the non-polygonal stopped down OOF rendering. I figure the kit lens is at about f/4 at 40mm (vs 2.8) but really that's not as compellingly different than the 50 at 1.4 which would really be more exciting and worth bothering with. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
pentax 40/2.8 vs 50/1.4?
"Paul Furman" wrote in message ... Any thoughts on the value of the 40mm/2.8 pancake versus the 50mm/1.4? A friend asked & I recommended the 50 unless he's desperate for compactness and requires something close to a normal focal length. It seems the 50 offers more variety departing from the kit lens. The only real strong point of the 40 I can see is the non-polygonal stopped down OOF rendering. I figure the kit lens is at about f/4 at 40mm (vs 2.8) but really that's not as compellingly different than the 50 at 1.4 which would really be more exciting and worth bothering with. Haven't used either, but from what I've heard both are very sharp. So personally I'd be inclined to go for the extra 2 stops of the 50/1.4. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
pentax 40/2.8 vs 50/1.4?
Paul Furman wrote:
Any thoughts on the value of the 40mm/2.8 pancake versus the 50mm/1.4? A friend asked & I recommended the 50 unless he's desperate for compactness and requires something close to a normal focal length. It seems the 50 offers more variety departing from the kit lens. The only real strong point of the 40 I can see is the non-polygonal stopped down OOF rendering. I figure the kit lens is at about f/4 at 40mm (vs 2.8) but really that's not as compellingly different than the 50 at 1.4 which would really be more exciting and worth bothering with. Optically any 50/1,4 (Pentax has had many versions of this lens)is better than 40/2,8. Angle of view is of course different, but if that is not the determining factor 50/1,4 is the one to prefer. If Your frend really needs a lens around 40 mm he/she should have a 43 mm 1,9 Limited. I use a M 50 mm f1,4 and even though this is not the very best 50/1,4 it is still superb. I have also used a 40/2,8, it is okey but not great. Väinö Louekari |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
pentax 40/2.8 vs 50/1.4?
"Doug Jewell" a écrit dans le message de ... "Paul Furman" wrote in message ... Any thoughts on the value of the 40mm/2.8 pancake versus the 50mm/1.4? A friend asked & I recommended the 50 unless he's desperate for compactness and requires something close to a normal focal length. It seems the 50 offers more variety departing from the kit lens. The only real strong point of the 40 I can see is the non-polygonal stopped down OOF rendering. I figure the kit lens is at about f/4 at 40mm (vs 2.8) but really that's not as compellingly different than the 50 at 1.4 which would really be more exciting and worth bothering with. Haven't used either, but from what I've heard both are very sharp. So personally I'd be inclined to go for the extra 2 stops of the 50/1.4. I wish Canon had a lens like that Pentax pancake lens, put that on a Drebel and you get a nice high performance small (ish) camera. For size only, it makes perfect sense. Jean |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
pentax 40/2.8 vs 50/1.4?
In article ,
Paul Furman wrote: Any thoughts on the value of the 40mm/2.8 pancake versus the 50mm/1.4? Paul- I have both. The 40mm f/2.8 "pancake" lens is not a KA lens, so is more difficult to use with an AF body. My 50mm f/1.4 is a KA lens, so all I have to worry about is manual focus. I think my 50mm has an edge in sharpness over the 40mm, if both are set to the same f/stop. If you don't have either, I'd recommend looking for a 50mm f/1.4 AF lens to go with an AF body. It looks larger sitting next to the pancake lens, but the difference may be trivial when mounted on the body. Especially compared to a zoom! Fred |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
OPHIDIOPHOBIACS HATE THE GX10 | Doug Jewell | 35mm Photo Equipment | 2 | October 9th 07 12:00 PM |
Samsung GX10 | loose chippings | Digital Photography | 6 | September 14th 07 04:58 PM |
LAUGHING JACKASSES LOVE THE GX10 | Doug Jewell | 35mm Photo Equipment | 7 | August 7th 07 07:33 AM |
Samsung GX10 ...using old Pentax lenses | confuseduser | Digital SLR Cameras | 3 | May 31st 07 10:24 AM |
Samsung GX10 / Pentax K10D | frederick | Digital SLR Cameras | 11 | September 26th 06 01:24 PM |