A few weeks ago I photographed a Walk-a-Thon fund raising event at my kid's elementary/primary school. I shot 584 images with my K-3 with a DA 18-135mm lens. From this collection of images, 37 were erased prior to loading into Capture One for processing which left me with a grand total of 547. This number was further whittled down to 158. Based on an initial count of 584, my keeper rate is a lowly 27%.
A very small percentage were sharp but poorly composed (i.e. cropped off heads during pans, way too crooked horizons, etc). Most of the rejected images were cast aside because they were soft and out of focus. In a previous thread, I learned that my poor technique may have played a larger part in this low keeper count. My AF function was linked to my shutter button being pressed half way and I was using a AF single point. I also didn't engage burst mode. Using the rear AF button with multiple AF points and a burst mode may have resulted in a higher keeper count. Getting
258 images from
684 total shots would have been awesome! I understand this dynamic and I am practicing this "new to me" technique with my DA 18-135mm. The body/lens combo can certainly be made to focus more often. Anyone who looks at my Flickr account can tell I am mostly a static portrait enthusiast.
In parallel to improving my technique, I am questioning if my DA 18-135mm is a well suited lens for action photography in general. With a focal length ratio starting at f/3.5 that only gets larger as I zoom in, I think that the wide-open depth of field may be too big and the AF-C may not be triggered as much as if I were using a faster, constant wide-open aperture lens with a shallower depth of field. If I do purchase a new, faster lens then I want to know which one to get. A 17-50mm? A 28-75mm? What about a 70-200mm? I created a histogram of the focal lengths I used during the event. Each individual focal length as reported by Capture One is an individual bar below :
Is there a way that I ought to group the data for better presentation?
Shown as-is, I see the majority of my photographs lie between 28mm and 78mm. A lens like the DA 16-85mm would provide a very useful focal range for me in this situation. It would capture the majority of my shots and have a little extra zoom range to capture most of my extremes. However, I don't think it offers me enough to abandon my DA 18-135mm because it's not any faster of a lens. So where does that leave me? Tamron has the 28-75mm f/2.8 but it lacks the wide angle view of 18-28mm. Sigma has a 17-50mm f/2.8 but it lacks on the tele end. The 17-70mm from Sigma seems like a good choice but it is variable aperture. Perhaps the 17-70mm is the best lens on paper for what I do but I wonder about that variable aperture. There is no single f/2.8 lens that does it all.
I wonder if this means I would be better suited to carrying two bodies, each with their own lens, for different purposes. Could I mount a fast focusing f/2.8 lens on my K-3 and use a slower, broader lens on my u4/3 body? The K-3 would be great for tracking action whereas the u4/3 body would be good for static or slow moving shots.
I'd like to hear from my fellow forum members on how they would approach this shooting scenario. Would you simply give up some shots to get other shots? Would you go for a two body/lens system? Am I starting to cross over into equipment that would require me selling my internal organs oversea to fund new purchases at home?