Elliven: I have Windows 8 (32) on my computer and have recently downloaded and installed the Lightroom 5 beta. My problem is that in importing images into Lightroom 5, they just show up as gray tiles in the library and develop areas.
A friend suggested that my display driver may need to be upgraded but I have checked and it is the most up to date driver for my system. ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650 (Microsoft Corporation- WDDM v1.1)
Every other photographic program I have installed, including Photoshop elements 9 and Picasa, all display perfect images.
Grey tiles happened to me with V4 and Win 7, and it has to do with your screen color profile. Go to control panel, Color Management, and set the screen ICC profile to sRGB.
Sgt_Strider: So can one safely say that the C1 software is the best for X-Trans sensors at the moment?
Have Adobe even acknowledged that their converter needs improvements? I wonder if they'll put in the effort to produce better results for X-Trans sensors going forward?
I don't understand the remark wrt Silkypix. Have you tried Silkypix DS Pro 5 rather than the 2+ generations old free version that ships with the cameras ?
Bravo Oly, a little surprising but well deserved no doubt. Curious about the K-01 getting its own side remark, especially given that DPR didn't even review the camera themselves but rather cut-and-pasted someone else's review ! The DPR team has obviously not remained indifferent to it though if they thought it deserved a "special mention" ! Tx DPR, any publicity is good for Pentax ;-)
Heie2: The Pentax K-01, while many hate on the basis of looks alone, is BY FAR the greatest value for money to hit the world of photography in a very long time.
The Pentax K-30 mirrors that sentiment for DSLR's.
It is indeed, right now, a great value regardless of the circumstances that brought the price down, and now that more people are actually owning and using it, the feelings towards it are also changing for the more positive.
Toccata47: My vote would have gone to the k-01 if it dpreview had included it on the list of appropriate selections.
It's a perfect bridge camera in the sense that it combines the best iq available in a 16m sensor with full manual controls with the advantage of a 40 year backlog of available lenses....and it's the size of the omd and 1/3 the price.
It's a camera that is easy to miss the point of, obviously.
Fair share of problems ? Misconceptions or dislikes perhaps, but problems I am not aware of a single one. AF is as good if not better than the OM-D, size in this case is a real advantage, obvious to anyone that actually held it with a larger lens on it, IQ the best of its class, lens compatibility the best of its class, but it's a different look and design than all others I'll admit, and leaves no one indifferent that's for sure, including DPR.
Very colorful, tx and Merry Christmas too.
kadardr: DPR completely forgot about Samsung EX2F
Indeed, as they pretty much did for the EX1. Don't understand why, it's a mistery to me; this must be frustrating for Samsung.
VivaLasVegas: Does anybody know if this is made in China?
I read somewhere that BENRO, a Chinese Manufacturer, used to be a sub-contractor to Gitzo, hence the many similarities in design and construction. Don't know if this is true or not.
MatsudaMan: Was this camera designed by a bunch of people in an insane asylum? It looks ridiculous and the large size serves no purpose - look at all the wasted space. I'm sorry, you can't just make things and wacky colors and expect it to be a smashing success. Do they really think people are that stupid? Pentax is really in danger of completely going under....wow.
Wow... your really don't get it !
CJ Lan: I am neither Canonian, Nikonian, Pentexian, or micro 4/3 users. I use/like a camera as long as it is good in features and practical. Honestly speaking, I do not quite understand the philosophy behind the Pentax design engineers. Not getting into full frame market before jumping into very expensive medium format 645, interchangeable lens system with tiny p&s sensor (Q), now a bulky mirrorless camera. and who knows the next in the future. Correct me if I am wrong. I thought the main purpose getting rid of mirror is to achieve portability of a interchangeable lens camera system. What does K-01 try to accomplish in this regard? If just for using the existing line of lenses, I would rather stick with K-5 or any other Pentax APSC for their professional looks, not this as bulky and toy-looking "SLR".
Mirrorless design has many advantages AND disadvantages. Possibility to reduce lens to sensor distance (hence smaller body design) is but one possible advantage. Amongst other, more accurate AF not dependent on the lens used, lens design can include protrusion further into body allowing for better wide angle lens design (which otherwise have to use a reverse tele design), no mirror slap = sharper images, less mechanics = more reliability, no need for expensive optical VF = reduced costs are all good reasons to remove the mirror.
28mm at the wide end still... very disappointing.
I like the K-01 design. Whether it's a camera for me or not will depend on how the AF/MF is implemented (especially MF). With my current P&S (EX-1), I find it extremely difficult (if not impossible) to focus and recompose while maintaining the focus range constant (especially at close range). MF is impossible to see accurately, even zoomed it unless on a tripod. If in MF mode the camera is able to show me (red hot dot would do) what elements of the images are in focus as I move the focus ring, without having to zoom in (when you waste time and loose distance coming in and out of that mode) then it will be a contender. Failing that, I simply cannot work with it (or any other mirrorless on the market for that matter).
Well, on one hand the client has to understand the costs associated with the service provided, but on the other hand, to be credible, the photographer needs to be more careful with her calculations, attributing costs spent over12 months for an activity that lasts only 4 months (e.g. car rental) etc. If you actually apply the costs directly incurred in support of the business of wedding photography and pro-rate the yearly costs for items that are used on other purpuses than the wedding business, she makes an annual net revenue of approx. $34,000 after expenses from wedding photography (not including camera equipment costs which should be amortized over 5 years), i.e. about $1,700 per wedding. It ain't as bad as she makes it sound; it's pretty darn good actually.