Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Pictures from Pentax *ist DS + 27-y-o Tamron 85-210 lens

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 9:56:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I went out with the Pentax *ist DS on Friday evening, and I've put up a
selection of my better efforts at
http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/helenedithuk/album?.di... in an
Album called 2005-03-18 Monument/London Bridge Area.

The Monument was absolutely gorgeous against the sky, and these
photos don't really do it justice. I might go back and try again using
tungsten white balance.

The other photos in the album were taken from the north bank of The
Thames with a variety of white balance settings - and I've changed one
or two a bit in PhotoShop as well.

The lens used was my 27-year-old manual Tamron 85-210. I've used it
quite a bit on the DS, mostly with very good results, although a couple
of times I've got some rather peculiar red fringing with it which I
don't recall ever seeing when I've used it on a film camera.

I do like the 2-second mirror lock-up feature on the DS, but admit that
it's making me lazy: I used this feature with the shutter button rather
than putting on my cable release:-)

I did lug a tripod up to Town on this occasion, mainly because I know
that there's no convenient bean-bag resting place near my vantage point
for photographing The Monument. I do use a bean-bag a certain amount,
and did so for this picture of HMS Manchester:
http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/helenedithuk/album?.di...

One comment I have to make about using the DS for taking long exposures
(many around 15 seconds) is that it seems to take as long to process the
image and write it to the card as the shutter is open for; and that
while it's doing so, it doesn't want to take another picture. So much
for frame bursts. I am curious to see what will happen when I use the DS
to take a *really* long exposure: if I do a 7-minute moonlight exposure,
will it take 7 minutes before it's ready to take another picture? It's a
full moon in about a week, and I might be tempted out into the local
park to find out.

HelenEdith

Helen Edith Stephenson <helen at baronmoss dot demon dot co dot uk>
--
(I'm sure you can figure out what I mean!)
http://www.baronmoss.demon.co.uk
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 9:56:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <OCmLoCApdcPCFwqZ@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

[ ... ]

>One comment I have to make about using the DS for taking long exposures
>(many around 15 seconds) is that it seems to take as long to process the
>image and write it to the card as the shutter is open for; and that
>while it's doing so, it doesn't want to take another picture.

I suspect that what it is doing is gathering statistics on the
clocking noise and other such things with the shutter closed, to
subtract from the actual exposure, and thus minimize visible noise.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
Anonymous
March 20, 2005 10:44:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <OCmLoCApdcPCFwqZ@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>I went out with the Pentax *ist DS on Friday evening, and I've put up a
>selection of my better efforts at
>http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/helenedithuk/album?.di... in an
>Album called 2005-03-18 Monument/London Bridge Area.

I like the shot of Southwark Cathedral tower.

>The lens used was my 27-year-old manual Tamron 85-210. I've used it
>quite a bit on the DS, mostly with very good results, although a couple
>of times I've got some rather peculiar red fringing with it which I
>don't recall ever seeing when I've used it on a film camera.

That purple fringing effect is common with digital cameras.
It can be caused by extremely high-contrast edges, or by the
angle at which light rays fall on the sensor. As a very
broad generalization, that is a property of the lens (and,
with a zoom, the focal length being used).

>One comment I have to make about using the DS for taking long exposures
>(many around 15 seconds) is that it seems to take as long to process the
>image and write it to the card as the shutter is open for; and that
>while it's doing so, it doesn't want to take another picture. So much
>for frame bursts. I am curious to see what will happen when I use the DS
>to take a *really* long exposure: if I do a 7-minute moonlight exposure,
>will it take 7 minutes before it's ready to take another picture? It's a
>full moon in about a week, and I might be tempted out into the local
>park to find out.

Yes - it will. There's a feature in the camera called Noise Reduction
(briefly mentioned on P140 of the manual) that takes a blank exposure
immediately after a long exposure (30 seconds or longer, I believe) to
measure the noise in the sensor, and subtracts this from your exposure.
This blank exposure is the same length as your original exposure.

If you want your camera back before 7 minutes, turn the feature off.
Related resources
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 12:00:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d1kjqf$n7v$1@reader1.panix.com>, John Francis
<johnf@panix.com> writes
>In article <OCmLoCApdcPCFwqZ@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
>Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>I went out with the Pentax *ist DS on Friday evening, and I've put up a
>>selection of my better efforts at
>>http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/helenedithuk/album?.di... in an
>>Album called 2005-03-18 Monument/London Bridge Area.
>
>I like the shot of Southwark Cathedral tower.

That was taken with tungsten white balance. I tried one with auto white
balance as well, but the tungsten one was better:-)

>>The lens used was my 27-year-old manual Tamron 85-210. I've used it
>>quite a bit on the DS, mostly with very good results, although a couple
>>of times I've got some rather peculiar red fringing with it which I
>>don't recall ever seeing when I've used it on a film camera.
>
>That purple fringing effect is common with digital cameras.
>It can be caused by extremely high-contrast edges, or by the
>angle at which light rays fall on the sensor. As a very
>broad generalization, that is a property of the lens (and,
>with a zoom, the focal length being used).

I was a bit surprised that artefacts like that would turn up when using
a telephoto lens, as I'd assume that the light rays fall on the sensor
at fairly close to 90 degrees. My physics isn't good enough to say
whether that's a good assumption, but I thought it was logical and that
the lenses where you'd need to worry about light ray angles would more
likely be the wide angle lenses.

>>One comment I have to make about using the DS for taking long exposures
>>(many around 15 seconds) is that it seems to take as long to process the
>>image and write it to the card as the shutter is open for; and that
>>while it's doing so, it doesn't want to take another picture. So much
>>for frame bursts. I am curious to see what will happen when I use the DS
>>to take a *really* long exposure: if I do a 7-minute moonlight exposure,
>>will it take 7 minutes before it's ready to take another picture? It's a
>>full moon in about a week, and I might be tempted out into the local
>>park to find out.
>
>Yes - it will. There's a feature in the camera called Noise Reduction
>(briefly mentioned on P140 of the manual) that takes a blank exposure
>immediately after a long exposure (30 seconds or longer, I believe) to
>measure the noise in the sensor, and subtracts this from your exposure.
>This blank exposure is the same length as your original exposure.
>
>If you want your camera back before 7 minutes, turn the feature off.

Ahhhh....

I did wonder about it taking so long before the shutter would release
again. That sounds like a very annoying feature to have switched on if I
decide to get into star trails and the like, so I think I'll be looking
for that menu item. Thanks for alerting me to it.

It could also be a serious drain on the batteries. As it was, I got onto
a second set of rechargables on Friday evening and I only took 48
images. I did use the back panel to do quite a bit of reviewing, though,
which is probably heavier on batteries than actually holding the shutter
open.

Helen

Helen Edith Stephenson <helen at baronmoss dot demon dot co dot uk>
--
(I'm sure you can figure out what I mean!)
http://www.baronmoss.demon.co.uk
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 12:23:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <BQRocPA0RePCFwLG@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <d1kjqf$n7v$1@reader1.panix.com>, John Francis
><johnf@panix.com> writes
>>In article <OCmLoCApdcPCFwqZ@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
>>Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>I went out with the Pentax *ist DS on Friday evening, and I've put up a
>>>selection of my better efforts at
>>>http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/helenedithuk/album?.di... in an
>>>Album called 2005-03-18 Monument/London Bridge Area.
>>
>>I like the shot of Southwark Cathedral tower.
>
>That was taken with tungsten white balance. I tried one with auto white
>balance as well, but the tungsten one was better:-)

Shoot raw in tricky lighting, and you can make those decisions post-exposure.

>It could also be a serious drain on the batteries. As it was, I got onto
>a second set of rechargables on Friday evening and I only took 48
>images. I did use the back panel to do quite a bit of reviewing, though,
>which is probably heavier on batteries than actually holding the shutter
>open.

It is - much heavier. Even so, 48 is far too early to replace anything
(except regular disposable AA batteries). Are the rechargeables new?
It can take a few charge/discharge cycles to get everything behaving.
Pentax claim you can get 5 hours of playback time with rechargeables.

I use a D, not a DS. But with just one set of rechargeables (1800mAh),
three second review, and using a current-draining microdrive I get
several hundred exposures before needing to change (and that's before
getting the battery grip, which doubles the number of shots available).
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 2:17:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d1kpkk$mbc$1@reader1.panix.com>, John Francis
<johnf@panix.com> writes
>In article <BQRocPA0RePCFwLG@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
>Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>In article <d1kjqf$n7v$1@reader1.panix.com>, John Francis
>><johnf@panix.com> writes
>>>In article <OCmLoCApdcPCFwqZ@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
>>>Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>I went out with the Pentax *ist DS on Friday evening, and I've put up a
>>>>selection of my better efforts at
>>>>http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/helenedithuk/album?.di... in an
>>>>Album called 2005-03-18 Monument/London Bridge Area.
>>>
>>>I like the shot of Southwark Cathedral tower.
>>
>>That was taken with tungsten white balance. I tried one with auto white
>>balance as well, but the tungsten one was better:-)
>
>Shoot raw in tricky lighting, and you can make those decisions post-exposure.

There's just one problem with that: I'm still using Win98 and the RAW
software with the DS won't work under Win98, and the PhotoShop plug-in
for the D won't work with DS RAW files. I've got a spare partition on my
hard drive just waiting for WinXP, but I'm trying to put off spending
the money.

I think I'll also need to seriously expand my collection of SD cards
once I start shooting in RAW.

>>It could also be a serious drain on the batteries. As it was, I got onto
>>a second set of rechargables on Friday evening and I only took 48
>>images. I did use the back panel to do quite a bit of reviewing, though,
>>which is probably heavier on batteries than actually holding the shutter
>>open.
>
>It is - much heavier. Even so, 48 is far too early to replace anything
>(except regular disposable AA batteries). Are the rechargeables new?
>It can take a few charge/discharge cycles to get everything behaving.
>Pentax claim you can get 5 hours of playback time with rechargeables.

The rechargeables I was using have been charged about ten times by now.
I fished them out when I got a "battery low" message and put in another
set which hadn't previously been used at all. I was a little surprised
at how quickly they ran down, but I've had the same set of batteries run
down completely during daytime use as well, although with about double
that number of exposures. It will be interesting to see how the set I've
got in the camera now perform, as they're a different brand.

>I use a D, not a DS. But with just one set of rechargeables (1800mAh),
>three second review, and using a current-draining microdrive I get
>several hundred exposures before needing to change (and that's before
>getting the battery grip, which doubles the number of shots available).

I think I need to cut down on my reviewing time. I'm still learning my
way around the camera and have only just figured out that half pressing
the shutter button turns off the review. I think some of my reviews have
lasted quite a long time.

Helen

Helen Edith Stephenson <helen at baronmoss dot demon dot co dot uk>
--
(I'm sure you can figure out what I mean!)
http://www.baronmoss.demon.co.uk
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 2:20:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d1kopb$he3$1@fuego.d-and-d.com>, DoN. Nichols <dnichols@d-
and-d.com> writes
>In article <OCmLoCApdcPCFwqZ@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
>Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> [ ... ]
>
>>One comment I have to make about using the DS for taking long exposures
>>(many around 15 seconds) is that it seems to take as long to process the
>>image and write it to the card as the shutter is open for; and that
>>while it's doing so, it doesn't want to take another picture.
>
> I suspect that what it is doing is gathering statistics on the
>clocking noise and other such things with the shutter closed, to
>subtract from the actual exposure, and thus minimize visible noise.
>
> Enjoy,
> DoN.
>
You're the second person to say that:-) I'm going to look into it, as I
really don't want it to spend an inordinate amount of time on such a
project if I'm taking exposures measured in minutes rather than seconds.
I may prefer to live with some noise and turn the feature off.

For exposures in the 15-30 second range, I'm prepared to live with it,
though.

Helen

Helen Edith Stephenson <helen at baronmoss dot demon dot co dot uk>
--
(I'm sure you can figure out what I mean!)
http://www.baronmoss.demon.co.uk
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 2:20:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <AeAIPfAzUgPCFwL0@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <d1kopb$he3$1@fuego.d-and-d.com>, DoN. Nichols <dnichols@d-
>and-d.com> writes
>>In article <OCmLoCApdcPCFwqZ@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
>>Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>>>One comment I have to make about using the DS for taking long exposures
>>>(many around 15 seconds) is that it seems to take as long to process the
>>>image and write it to the card as the shutter is open for; and that
>>>while it's doing so, it doesn't want to take another picture.
>>
>> I suspect that what it is doing is gathering statistics on the
>>clocking noise and other such things with the shutter closed, to
>>subtract from the actual exposure, and thus minimize visible noise.
>>
>> Enjoy,
>> DoN.
>>
>You're the second person to say that:-) I'm going to look into it, as I
>really don't want it to spend an inordinate amount of time on such a
>project if I'm taking exposures measured in minutes rather than seconds.
>I may prefer to live with some noise and turn the feature off.

See what it looks like for a single long exposure before
committing to that. I understand that with really long exposures, you
wind up with strange patterns which are artifacts of the layout of the
chip wiring patterns and where heat (e.g. from amplifiers) may be coming
from. I doubt that they would add such a nuisance "feature" unless they
felt it to be quite necessary.

Good Luck,
DoN.

--
Email: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 4:05:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <E+DJ3bA9RgPCFwpY@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>I think I'll also need to seriously expand my collection of SD cards
>once I start shooting in RAW.

One nice thing about digital photography is that you can change "film"
(ISO, recording mode, etc.) for every frame.

>The rechargeables I was using have been charged about ten times by now.
>I fished them out when I got a "battery low" message . . .

Ah. That may be your problem. The battery charge indicator on the
Pentax is next to useless - if you happened to be doing too much at
the time it decides to sample the voltage, you'll get a spurious
"battery low" indication. Try half-depressing the shutter (or,
if you really want to be sure, powering the camera off and back on).
Most of the time that "battery low" indicator will go away.


>I think I need to cut down on my reviewing time. I'm still learning my
>way around the camera and have only just figured out that half pressing
>the shutter button turns off the review. I think some of my reviews have
>lasted quite a long time.

I have the review time set to three seconds. If I want to take a
longer look at a particular shot, pushing the playback button puts
the most recent shot on the display, and leaves it there.


[I see you are now in the area where I grew up - I went to Chis & Sid]
Anonymous
March 21, 2005 10:43:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:
: One comment I have to make about using the DS for taking long exposures
: (many around 15 seconds) is that it seems to take as long to process the
: image and write it to the card as the shutter is open for;

It is doing noise reduction - shooting a "dark frame" as a reference.

You can turn that off, but then you won't (natch) have noise reduction!

And, yes, with NR on, a 7-minute exposure would take you 14 minutes.

-Charles

--
Charles Robinson
Minneapolis, MN
charlesr@visi.com
http://charles.robinsontwins.org
Anonymous
March 22, 2005 12:00:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d1l6l5$pon$1@reader1.panix.com>, John Francis
<johnf@panix.com> writes
>In article <E+DJ3bA9RgPCFwpY@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
>Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>I think I'll also need to seriously expand my collection of SD cards
>>once I start shooting in RAW.
>
>One nice thing about digital photography is that you can change "film"
>(ISO, recording mode, etc.) for every frame.

Yes, it's a *huge* advantage. It's made several of my film bodies
obsolete in one go:-)

>>The rechargeables I was using have been charged about ten times by now.
>>I fished them out when I got a "battery low" message . . .
>
>Ah. That may be your problem. The battery charge indicator on the
>Pentax is next to useless - if you happened to be doing too much at
>the time it decides to sample the voltage, you'll get a spurious
>"battery low" indication. Try half-depressing the shutter (or,
>if you really want to be sure, powering the camera off and back on).
>Most of the time that "battery low" indicator will go away.

Interesting. I noticed the other day that the battery indicator seemed
to indicate nearly exhausted batteries one minute and then be fine again
the next minute. I will take its messages with a pinch of salt in
future.

>>I think I need to cut down on my reviewing time. I'm still learning my
>>way around the camera and have only just figured out that half pressing
>>the shutter button turns off the review. I think some of my reviews have
>>lasted quite a long time.
>
>I have the review time set to three seconds. If I want to take a
>longer look at a particular shot, pushing the playback button puts
>the most recent shot on the display, and leaves it there.

I've got the review time set to the factory default, which I think is
rather less than three seconds. I'm forever pushing the playback button
and leaving the most recent shot on the display.

>[I see you are now in the area where I grew up - I went to Chis & Sid]

Yes, I've lived in the Bromley area for a good many years now, although
I'm Antipodean by birth:-)

Helen

Helen Edith Stephenson <helen at baronmoss dot demon dot co dot uk>
--
(I'm sure you can figure out what I mean!)
http://www.baronmoss.demon.co.uk
Anonymous
March 22, 2005 12:02:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d1ldmo$mkc$1@fuego.d-and-d.com>, DoN. Nichols <dnichols@d-
and-d.com> writes
>In article <AeAIPfAzUgPCFwL0@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
>Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>In article <d1kopb$he3$1@fuego.d-and-d.com>, DoN. Nichols <dnichols@d-
>>and-d.com> writes
>>>In article <OCmLoCApdcPCFwqZ@baronmoss.demon.co.uk>,
>>>Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> [ ... ]
>>>
>>>>One comment I have to make about using the DS for taking long exposures
>>>>(many around 15 seconds) is that it seems to take as long to process the
>>>>image and write it to the card as the shutter is open for; and that
>>>>while it's doing so, it doesn't want to take another picture.
>>>
>>> I suspect that what it is doing is gathering statistics on the
>>>clocking noise and other such things with the shutter closed, to
>>>subtract from the actual exposure, and thus minimize visible noise.
>>>
>>> Enjoy,
>>> DoN.
>>>
>>You're the second person to say that:-) I'm going to look into it, as I
>>really don't want it to spend an inordinate amount of time on such a
>>project if I'm taking exposures measured in minutes rather than seconds.
>>I may prefer to live with some noise and turn the feature off.
>
> See what it looks like for a single long exposure before
>committing to that. I understand that with really long exposures, you
>wind up with strange patterns which are artifacts of the layout of the
>chip wiring patterns and where heat (e.g. from amplifiers) may be coming
>from. I doubt that they would add such a nuisance "feature" unless they
>felt it to be quite necessary.
>
> Good Luck,
> DoN.
>
That's good advice. Chip wiring patterns would be unlikely to enhance my
photography:-) Some experimentation is in order.

Helen

Helen Edith Stephenson <helen at baronmoss dot demon dot co dot uk>
--
(I'm sure you can figure out what I mean!)
http://www.baronmoss.demon.co.uk
Anonymous
March 22, 2005 12:04:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <113u8v88ge5ekf1@corp.supernews.com>, Charles Robinson
<charlesr@visi.com> writes
>Helen Edith Stephenson <helen@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>:
>: One comment I have to make about using the DS for taking long exposures
>: (many around 15 seconds) is that it seems to take as long to process the
>: image and write it to the card as the shutter is open for;
>
>It is doing noise reduction - shooting a "dark frame" as a reference.
>
>You can turn that off, but then you won't (natch) have noise reduction!
>
>And, yes, with NR on, a 7-minute exposure would take you 14 minutes.
>
> -Charles

:-(

Some experimentation is definitely in order here. It depends on what the
noise actually looks like, but if it just gives the image grain, it
might be quite acceptable. If it turns out to be chip wiring patterns,
then I think I'm stuck with it.

Helen

Helen Edith Stephenson <helen at baronmoss dot demon dot co dot uk>
--
(I'm sure you can figure out what I mean!)
http://www.baronmoss.demon.co.uk
!