Anybody shooting manual-focus lenses on a DSLR?

[Mike Umscheid]

All good points.

That's pretty much what I do too. Date/Description based folder ordering, which makes sense to me but probably wouldn't to anyone else. ;-) I also agree on making change in RAW overlays, which are preferable in many ways. Those PS files can get huge! CS3 even strains my new quad core 3 Ghz Intel machine, which has 3 Gbs of ram. Too crazy.

I was thinking Dell XPS 730 with Intel® Core™2 Extreme QX9770 (12MB,3.2GHz Factory O/C'd to 3.8GHz) for my upcoming purchase, stuffing as much RAM as I can into it. Any advice you might offer before I pull the trigger?

Sorry for the thread hijack... I feel dirty

 

[Rob Wadsworth]

Thank You for you reply, Mr. Umsheid

My use of photographic equipment is simpler than yours is - I believe.
I take DSLR photos to send to the NWS/eSpotter program for backup of my reports - when possible.
I also collect these photos for my own photo album, which I share from time to time with others. My needs for high-quality image software may not need to have the $600+ Adobe CS3. This is my exact dielemma. What would be the next best thing besides going all the way with PS CS3? Would Lightroom2 be too much - or is PSPX2 still too little? You are the only one that I know of that has used ALL of the above - so you are in the best position to advise.

That is - if you would - please?

Annd you're quite right about having to keep up with the Joneses' gear. It's too easy to go broke with a photgraphic monkey-on-your-back. Unless you are getting an income from it - of course.

I have an AMD dual 3Ghz w/2Gb v.fast RAM and a 10k Raptor HDD. My monitor is a 22" Viewsonic; I am trying to save money by buying the PSPX2 to be able to afford an 'eye1 monitor calibrator. Not just for pictures, but for games and other computers in the house that need good adjustment.

 

[Mike Umscheid]

Hi Rob. IMHO, I think Photoshop CS3 is overkill unless you really want to spend a lot of time in post-processing and plan to do a lot of professional-like printing work which requires the utmost color management and things of that sort. A lot of stand-alone RAW converters, like Lightroom, are perfect for doing basic and even a bit more complex processing. As a matter of fact, I could probably get by with just Lightroom alone, but since I choose to spend a lot of extra time "perfecting" my more memorable images, I use more than just a RAW converter.

Unfortunately, I do not have any advice for you regarding PSP X2. I just have the "X" 2005 version. I did a bit of research on PSPX2 and a lot of the new "bells and whistles" aren't really geared for professional photographers... but I think they may very well be geared for someone like you. Does PSP X2 offer a trial? The only thing I could recommend is "try before you buy". I doubt that Lightroom 2 would "be too much", but again, I think Lightroom 2 may be quite a bit different than what I am using, which is version 1.4. I'm using some antiquated stuff! What works fine for some doesn't work well for others. Hope this helps..

 

[James Langford]

I was thinking Dell XPS 730 with Intel® Core™2 Extreme QX9770 (12MB,3.2GHz Factory O/C'd to 3.8GHz) for my upcoming purchase, stuffing as much RAM as I can into it. Any advice you might offer before I pull the trigger?

Sorry for the thread hijack... I feel dirty

Well, here's what I did for what it's worth. I wanted a machine I could use for photography, as well as for gaming. I bought a Dell Inspiron 530 with a Q6600 quad core, 3Gbs of RAM (the most Vista 16 bit can use is 3.2 Gb), a nice 512 Mb video card, a sound blaster gaming card, and a tv tuner card. I spent a lot of time watching for good deals on fatwallet.com, and ended up saving like $400 on the whole machine by using a coupon. Total cost was around $700. It would probably be possible to get this for cheaper by buying individual components, but it would be a lot of work. I overclocked the 2.4 q6600 to 3.0 by taping over a pin on the chip, which is pretty easy to do if you are comfortable with electronics. If not, then not so easy. The q6600's are hard to come by for this reason, as the 3.0 Ghz chip is much more expensive.

The XPS systems are very nice, and pretty much come setup for everything right out of the box. The one you mention would be excellent. For me, since I work with computers a lot, it was pricier to go that route, and didn't really give me much gain. If you do get an XPS, check out fatwallet.com to find out when Dell offers their "so much" off of $1000 or whatever coupons. Also, you could look at refurbished systems on their outlet site, as these are fully warranteed, and you can get some great deals there.

Let me know if you need any other info.

James

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

Hmm, I have an HP computer that is now a couple years old. I think I got it in early 2006. It's possible I got it in 2005. It's a single core with 1 gig of ram. I have CS1 and this computer handles things just fine. Pretty much zero waiting when working with 8mp 16 bit TIFF files that are about 46 megs....while tacking on 6+ layers. I can see the file getting over 500 megs on the thing below in CS. Still, there is zero problem handing it. The computer fan rarely comes on. Oh yeah and I'll have audio streaming online in the background, several tabs open in Firefox, Neat Image open, RawShooters Essentials open....all at the same time as CS and whatever I'm working on.

I also have a copy of DxO optics I was given. If I run that thing by itself to convert a RAW file....LOL.....my fan doesn't stop running. That thing is the biggest hog ever, so I won't use it. But CS, seems to be far from a hog since this computer handles it and other stuff at once as smoothly as you get. Maybe CS2 or CS3 have become a hog? CS isn't. Of course I don't have the HOG that is Vista on here either.

As for CS and $600+. When I got mine a couple years ago I got it on Ebay for around $300 new. What the Ebay store was doing is selling you a PS 6 or 7 cd and an upgrade cd of CS. Much cheaper route.

I noticed while messing with Lightroom 2 trial my fan was running a bit more frequently, much more than CS, but nothing like DxO optics.

 

[James Langford]

Thank You for you reply, Mr. Umsheid

My use of photographic equipment is simpler than yours is - I believe.
I take DSLR photos to send to the NWS/eSpotter program for backup of my reports - when possible.
I also collect these photos for my own photo album, which I share from time to time with others. My needs for high-quality image software may not need to have the $600+ Adobe CS3. This is my exact dielemma. What would be the next best thing besides going all the way with PS CS3? Would Lightroom2 be too much - or is PSPX2 still too little? You are the only one that I know of that has used ALL of the above - so you are in the best position to advise.

That is - if you would - please?

Annd you're quite right about having to keep up with the Joneses' gear. It's too easy to go broke with a photgraphic monkey-on-your-back. Unless you are getting an income from it - of course.

I have an AMD dual 3Ghz w/2Gb v.fast RAM and a 10k Raptor HDD. My monitor is a 22" Viewsonic; I am trying to save money by buying the PSPX2 to be able to afford an 'eye1 monitor calibrator. Not just for pictures, but for games and other computers in the house that need good adjustment.

What kind of camera do you have? Most DSLRs come with their own RAW conversion programs (Canon Digital Photo Pro for example). These programs do an excellent job of converting RAW files to TIFF or JPG. You could then use Adobe Photoshop Elements to do your final processing. It is a fraction of the cost of CS3, and does everything you will need. I used it for many, many years before transitioning to CS3 to gain more control.

Something to think about,

James

 

[James Langford]

Hmm, I have an HP computer that is now a couple years old. I think I got it in early 2006. It's possible I got it in 2005. It's a single core with 1 gig of ram. I have CS1 and this computer handles things just fine. Pretty much zero waiting when working with 8mp 16 bit TIFF files that are about 46 megs....while tacking on 6+ layers. I can see the file getting over 500 megs on the thing below in CS. Still, there is zero problem handing it. The computer fan rarely comes on. Oh yeah and I'll have audio streaming online in the background, several tabs open in Firefox, Neat Image open, RawShooters Essentials open....all at the same time as CS and whatever I'm working on.

I also have a copy of DxO optics I was given. If I run that thing by itself to convert a RAW file....LOL.....my fan doesn't stop running. That thing is the biggest hog ever, so I won't use it. But CS, seems to be far from a hog since this computer handles it and other stuff at once as smoothly as you get. Maybe CS2 or CS3 have become a hog? CS isn't. Of course I don't have the HOG that is Vista on here either.

As for CS and $600+. When I got mine a couple years ago I got it on Ebay for around $300 new. What the Ebay store was doing is selling you a PS 6 or 7 cd and an upgrade cd of CS. Much cheaper route.

I noticed while messing with Lightroom 2 trial my fan was running a bit more frequently, much more than CS, but nothing like DxO optics.

In addition to my desktop, I run CS3 on a Windows XP dual core 2.4 Ghz laptop with 1 Gb of RAM. I kill of pretty much all running processes, and CS3 is still a dog on that machine. Memory management, I think, is very poor, and 1 Gb just isn't enough to cut it. After about 1/2 hour of use, it starts paging out frequently and must be completely restarted. Processor wise, I don't have any issues with it on that machine. On my 3 Gb Vista machine, it works very well and doesn't page much that I can see.

What do you think of DXO? I played around with that a few years back, and it was kind of neat, but pricey. Having to pay for profile for different lenses turned me off to it, but I did like some of the lens correction you could do with it.

 

[Darren Addy]

but I did like some of the lens correction you could do with it.

It is my understanding (based upon no personal experience yet) that PTLens is all you need to know about lens correction.

Yes? No?

 

[Darren Addy]

Not to get this thread back on topic or anything but one other advantage of using these vintage manual focus lenses on your DSLR is that they were designed for a 35mm format. That means (if you AREN'T shooting full frame DSLRs) that your smaller sensor is getting the sweet spot in the center of the lens (even when it is wide open, where lenses are supposed to not perform as well. In effect you are shooting it stopped down (as far as the better corrected glass is concerned) without the light sacrifice of actually stopping down the lens.

This is in comparison with lenses that are MADE to fit your sensor size with the image circle. It is THOSE lenses that you need to stop down to achieve the best optical performance (in effect, eliminating the weaker performing edges of the lens from the image creation equation).

The principles above would apply to ANY lens designed for a full frame sensor/35mm film (and used on a smaller sensored camera) not just manual focus lenses. But it's another reason to consider them.

 

[Rob Wadsworth]

Mr. Langford;
I have/use a Canon XTi. RAW conversion quality is mportant, I am just trying to avoid the price of CS3

Mike H:
But do you LIKE Lightroom2?
Pros/Cons?

Mr. Umscheid:
Thank You for addressing my concerns. I see PSPX2 on eBay for as little as $40 shipping included. Built-in noise reduction, and lots of goodies. Is it your opinion this program doesn't these things well enough to be considered pro/semi-pro?

The one question that remains that I don't yet know about with PSPX2 is - does it make a separate copy of the image - or does it eat the original?

Thanks to all...

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

What do you think of DXO? I played around with that a few years back, and it was kind of neat, but pricey. Having to pay for profile for different lenses turned me off to it, but I did like some of the lens correction you could do with it.

For me, it was a bit much. I'm not that critical of lens issues. I played with it, but the fact my computer fan would run constantly turned me off from it.

That PT thing will work well enough if I want to fix a building or something. I can't remember the last time I bothered. Most times it takes too much of the image to fix leaning objects anyway. And that's not even lens distortion, just the shooting angle and not using a tilt-shift.

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

Mr. Langford;

Mike H:
But do you LIKE Lightroom2?
Pros/Cons?

To be honest, I'm actually trying to redo my whole prints section and stock section, so having to screw with a billion images. I need my hands for that, and the way they are anymore, I have to limit time spent holding that stupid mouse. So, I've not let myself mess with Lightroom2 other than the couple minutes this morning.

Avoiding carpal tunnel should be a thread, lol. A stickied one at that. My image working days seems seriously numbered anymore. Like the warning you get that you've done it too much for too long, is too late. Ok, I'm thread-jacking the already jacked thread. Related to this, lol, just last night I had a kitchen knife to the bottom of my mouse. Take it from me, make your mouse so that it slides as easily as possible. It's slider thingies are completely flat, not rounded. But I bought a mouse pad recently that is really slick, kind of like graphite with tiny bumps on the pad. Well, the mouse slides soooooo much better after carving the 4 posts under it. It just amazes me how after a while, your hands will easily fatigue to tiny amounts of friction using a mouse. I could use one for 14 hours straight in the past and not have problems. Now, I get about 1-2 hours and I am ready to be done. You'd think that would go away and get back to like it was....nope. It's a great arguement for paying someone to teach you all the tricks, so you don't spend all your time messing with the same images over and over, learning on your own. Man how I'd love to travel back in time.

 

[James Langford]

Mr. Langford;
I have/use a Canon XTi. RAW conversion quality is mportant, I am just trying to avoid the price of CS3

No Mr Langford required. Just James.

I have a Canon 10D and 30D, which use very similar chips to the XTi. Give Canon Digital Photo Professional a try. Personally, I think it does a slightly better RAW conversion than CS3, and best of all it is free. You can output TIFF or JPG files from it, which you can work with further in Photoshop Elements or some other program.

Here's the download for DPP:

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/c...ategoryid=215&modelid=14256#DownloadDetailAct

You can also download a demo of Photoshop Elements here:

https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/tdrc/index.cfm?loc=en_us&product=photoshop_elements

You have to register with Adobe, and it is only active for 30 days. It should help you decide if it will work for you. It's $55 on Amazon.

Good luck!

James

 

[James Langford]

For me, it was a bit much. I'm not that critical of lens issues. I played with it, but the fact my computer fan would run constantly turned me off from it.

That PT thing will work well enough if I want to fix a building or something. I can't remember the last time I bothered. Most times it takes too much of the image to fix leaning objects anyway. And that's not even lens distortion, just the shooting angle and not using a tilt-shift.

That's most of my problems too, being that my 20mm prime I use most of the time has very little distortion. I've considered getting a 24mm T/S, but they are big $$$s. Maybe when I win the lottery or get a big photography deal.

 

[James Langford]

but I did like some of the lens correction you could do with it.

It is my understanding (based upon no personal experience yet) that PTLens is all you need to know about lens correction.

Yes? No?

I think you are right on the money there. I used this backend many many years back, and it was very cryptic and hard to use. My understanding is that it is much improved now, and much easier to use. I have many friends who swear by it, and by PTGUI.

James