[dosdan]

Ron, might be difficult using the FF's sensor greater sensitivity in sports. The theoretical improvement in SNR (18%) due to the bigger sensor is 1.2 stops (assuming the same quantum efficiency for each sensor).

Take your 300 mm FL f/4 lens. The equiv. FOV on a FF will require a 450mm FL. To get the equivalent DOF on FF, which has a shallower DOF at the same FL & aperture, with that lens you will need to stop down 1.2 stops i.e. f/6.3.

Say you are willing to accept a shallower DOF. Say your 450mm FL lens has a f/5.6 max aperture. Ev = Tv + Av (APEX formula), so the exposure is determined only by the shutter speed & the aperture. Take a shutter speed of 1/1000s & f/4 on APS-C. To get the same exposure on FF with your f/5.6 lens fully open, you will need to drop your shutter speed to 1/500s, and thus enjoy the 1.2 stops better SNR.

However, if you don't want to drop your shutter speed, and use 1/1000s instead. Let's bring ISO into it. Using a LV of 14 as an example:

LV 14 = 1/1000s, f/4, ISO100 (APS-C kit)
LV 14 = 1/1000s, f/5.6, ISO200 (FF kit)

So to keep the shutter speed up on the FF system you will also need to increase the ISO 1 stop. So the sensitivity difference has almost disappeared.

Under the same lighting conditions to fully use the greater sensitivity of FF you need either to:

• Lower the shutter speed (difficult for sports)
• Find a 450/F4 lens and accept the shallower DOF (will probably be very expensive)
• Alternatively, keep using a 300/F4 lens and accept the lower "magnification" (wider FOV) on FF (I know this is a DA lens, but I'm speaking generally)
• Use a 450/F5.6 lens and increase the ISO

Generally, FF's sensitivity advantage will be best in situations where you can tolerate slower shutter speeds.

Dan.

---

Last edited by dosdan; 12-09-2011 at 08:34 PM.

[RonHendriks1966]

Fantastic fog shots Ron!
What happened to the DA*60-250?

I sold the 60-250 in favor of having the Sigma 70-200mm/f2.8 EX DG OS HSM and I'm still not shure if that was my smartest descision this year. Bought the DA*300mm to complement the Sigma.

Ron, might be difficult using the FF's sensor greater sensitivity in sports. The theoretical improvement in SNR (18%) due to the bigger sensor is 1.2 stops (assuming the same quantum efficiency for each sensor).

Take your 300 mm FL f/4 lens. The equiv. FOV on a FF will require a 450mm FL. To get the equivalent DOF on FF, which has a shallower DOF at the same FL & aperture, with that lens you will need to stop down 1.2 stops i.e. f/6.3.

Say you are willing to accept a shallower DOF. Say your 450mm FL lens has a f/5.6 max aperture. Ev = Tv + Av, so the exposure is determined only by the shutter speed & the aperture. Take a shutter speed of 1/1000s & f/4 on APS-C. To get the same exposure on FF with your f/5.6 lens fully open, you will need to drop your shutter speed to 1/500s, and thus enjoy the 1.2 stops better SNR.

However, if you don't want to drop your shutter speed, and use 1/1000s instead. Let's bring ISO into it. Using a LV of 14 as an example:

LV 14 = 1/1000s, f/4, ISO100 (APS-C kit)
LV 14 = 1/1000s, f/5.6, ISO200 (FF kit)

So to keep the shutter speed up on the FF system you will also need to increase the ISO 1 stop. So the sensitivity difference has almost disappeared.

Under the same lighting conditions to fully use the greater sensitivity of FF you need either to:

• Lower the shutter speed (difficult for sports)
• Find a 450/F4 lens and accept the shallower DOF (will probably be very expensive)
• Alternatively, keep using a 300/F4 lens and accept the lower "magnification" (wider FOV) on FF (I know this is a DA lens, but I'm speaking generally)
• Use a 450/F5.6 lens and increase the ISO

Generally, FF's sensitivity advantage will be best in situations where you can tolerate slower shutter speeds.

Dan.

I know one problem is that loosing length with a Full frame is a trouble that can be corrected at a big expence (longer lenses). That's why I'm still in favor for an APS-H sensor sized camera. Bigger pixels on that bigger sensor (still not more then 16 megapixel as with K-5) should improve hi-iso performance. I would like to see the quality and options that are on the sensor that is in Nikon D3s, but then in a smaller format in a new Pentax camera.

As in this swimmingpool I need the 300mm and even having 400mm would be great. So on my wishlist there is a new DA*300mm/f2.8 with 1,4x TC to go with that, having 420mm/f4 as an option in my camerabag.

[RonHendriks1966]

You are doing extra well with you sports shooting and even I the serial pest for colour criticism can't find a thing wrong with your pics. You have got it down to a fine art.
Now carry on, and for heaven's sake don't fall into the drink.

Greetings

I did a preset white Balance in my K-5 with ExpoDisc and use that all three days. So notting done in postprocessing about the colours. The light is very well the same over the intire room. It is a big hall, with a 10-lane 50-meter pool and room around it for walking and room for 2000 spectators (or about that number). It is our national swimmingcentre. It's cald Pieter van den Hoogenband Zwemstadion after a fantastic multi goldmedal swimmingchampion.

[dosdan]

I know one problem is that loosing length with a Full frame is a trouble that can be corrected at a big expence (longer lenses). That's why I'm still in favor for an APS-H sensor sized camera. Bigger pixels on that bigger sensor (still not more then 16 megapixel as with K-5) should improve hi-iso performance

I think APS-H is a dying format. The theoretical advantage over APS-C in SNR (18%) is 0.5 stops. See Table Two

Take the 1D Mk.IV. Due to it's higher read noise and slightly lower QE, it actually has the same SNR (18%) at ISO200. See Table One

At higher ISO, where the effect of Canons higher read noise falls away, the 1DIV does have a better DR. The matter is complicated by the K-5 using non-defeatable NR above ISO1600. Including the D7000 into the mix, which does not have non-defeatible NR, the difference at ISO6400 is about -1 stop, but the K-5 has a slightly better DR slope than the D7000, even at ISO1600. Now this may just be measurement or sample variation, but the K-5, if it had no NR, would have about a -0.75 stops difference at ISO6400.

But the SNR (18%) difference at high ISOs is still very close.

DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

So for shooting rate, AF performance. pro support network, or lens range, you could consider it (although the loss of CF is about 17%), but for mainly high ISO performance it seems an expensive upgrade.

If I was going to spend that amount of money, I'd go for a D3s, where the high ISO improvement is more impressive. Of course you would loose any CF advantage.

DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

Dan.

---

Last edited by dosdan; 12-04-2011 at 01:39 PM.

[RonHendriks1966]

I think APS-H is a dying format. The theoretical advantage over APS-C in SNR (18%) is 0.5 stops. See Table Two

Take the 1D Mk.IV. Due to it's higher read noise and slightly lower QE, it actually has the same SNR (18%) at ISO200. See Table One

At higher ISO, where the effect of Canons higher read noise falls away, the 1DIV does have a better DR. The matter is complicated by the K-5 using non-defeatable NR above ISO1600. Including the D7000 into the mix, which does not have non-defeatible NR, the difference at ISO6400 is about -1 stop, but the K-5 has a slightly better DR slope than the D7000, even at ISO1600. Now this may just be measurement or sample variation, but the K-5, if it had no NR, would have about a -0.75 stops difference at ISO6400.

DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

So for shooting rate, AF performance or lens range, you could consider it (although the loss of CF is about 17%), but for mainly high ISO performance it seems an expensive upgrade.

If I was going to spend that amount of money, I'd go for a D3s, where the high ISO improvement is more impressive. Of course you would loose any CF advantage.

DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

Dan.

Well the sensor from Canon 1D Mark IV is already old and there must be some improvement with new design. So I would like the mix of Canon's APS-H (but I would even like a big 4:3th sensor of 28x21mm) with the sensor quality of the Nikon D3s, wich would lead to a pixelcount of only 12 megapixel (when Canon's 1Dx pixelssize is used) on that large 4:3th in a K-5 like camerabody (with integrated grip for all those electronics) for a Pentax price.

Wouldn't that be great?



Went to the swimmingstadium today and there was a new Dutch Record on the men's 1500 Freestyle number. Good enough to qualify for the London Olympics and at the time fast enough for reaching the finals there. Improvement is needed to get a medal, but still 8 months to work on that.

Job Kleinhuis:

[Bruce]

So, shots from Saturday, second round of the playoffs. Experimenting with shutter speed, first one at 1/8000 (yes Dan, I know I don't need to go that high, but thought i would try it out). Next few at 1/5000 (took most at this speed) and finally 1/3200. Had some trouble with light and colour rendition late in the day.

So next weekend the aim is lower the shutter speed and wind back the ISO, whilst keeping the aperture at 5.6.

[klh]

Well the sensor from Canon 1D Mark IV is already old and there must be some improvement with new design. So I would like the mix of Canon's APS-H (but I would even like a big 4:3th sensor of 28x21mm) with the sensor quality of the Nikon D3s, wich would lead to a pixelcount of only 12 megapixel (when Canon's 1Dx pixelssize is used) on that large 4:3th in a K-5 like camerabody (with integrated grip for all those electronics) for a Pentax price.

Wouldn't that be great?



Went to the swimmingstadium today and there was a new Dutch Record on the men's 1500 Freestyle number. Good enough to qualify for the London Olympics and at the time fast enough for reaching the finals there. Improvement is needed to get a medal, but still 8 months to work on that.

Job Kleinhuis:

Ron,

Excellent shots. I have to ask - what lens, what settings, and where from (were you on the deck or in the stands)?

Kevin

[RonHendriks1966]

Ron,

Excellent shots. I have to ask - what lens, what settings, and where from (were you on the deck or in the stands)?

Kevin

I used DA*300mm for this. F4 all the time and some differences for shuttertime in TAv from 1/320 to 1/640th. I was at around 4 meter high in the stadium lower seats. There was a stand for photographers, but that wasn't put in a good place since to many traffic infront of you standing there with swimmers, referee's, television crue.

Sendet these pictures for a newspaper, but got beaten by a photographer from a press-agency. He almost left just before this race, since a surprise this big wasn't to be expected. Got it into our biggest online news- sportsmagazine kienhuis en verschuren zeker van spelen | nusport.nl/zwemmen | Voor het laatste nieuws van elke sport Next time i have to be faster I guess.

[dadipentak]

[RonHendriks1966]

That is a strange picture. Did that defender lost his way in the sportsarena?

[dadipentak]

Did that defender lost his way in the sportsarena?

No it's the old "I don't have position so the best I can do is run past the shooter waving my arms in hopes of distracting him" maneuver.

[klh]

I used DA*300mm for this. F4 all the time and some differences for shuttertime in TAv from 1/320 to 1/640th. I was at around 4 meter high in the stadium lower seats. There was a stand for photographers, but that wasn't put in a good place since to many traffic infront of you standing there with swimmers, referee's, television crue.

Sendet these pictures for a newspaper, but got beaten by a photographer from a press-agency. He almost left just before this race, since a surprise this big wasn't to be expected. Got it into our biggest online news- sportsmagazine kienhuis en verschuren zeker van spelen | nusport.nl/zwemmen | Voor het laatste nieuws van elke sport Next time i have to be faster I guess.

Too bad on the newspaper, but the magazine looks good! Did you do any noise removal in post processing, or are those straight out of the camera?

After seeing your shots, I can't wait to get my K5 (for Christmas). It should help a lot with my swimming and diving photos.

[Bruce]

I used DA*300mm for this. F4 all the time and some differences for shuttertime in TAv from 1/320 to 1/640th. I was at around 4 meter high in the stadium lower seats. There was a stand for photographers, but that wasn't put in a good place since to many traffic infront of you standing there with swimmers, referee's, television crue.

Sendet these pictures for a newspaper, but got beaten by a photographer from a press-agency. He almost left just before this race, since a surprise this big wasn't to be expected. Got it into our biggest online news- sportsmagazine kienhuis en verschuren zeker van spelen | nusport.nl/zwemmen | Voor het laatste nieuws van elke sport Next time i have to be faster I guess.

Nice one Ron. You just about need to process and upload your photos on site! I suppose with the 'instant' society we have now it is almost expected

[RonHendriks1966]

Too bad on the newspaper, but the magazine looks good! Did you do any noise removal in post processing, or are those straight out of the camera?

Well I did process this in Lightroom, so there are some changes in the picture. A little more brightness, noise reduction, a cut-out off the frame, rezising and sharpening for screen.

Nice one Ron. You just about need to process and upload your photos on site! I suppose with the 'instant' society we have now it is almost expected

You need to be fast these day's or it is all old news.

[hilda4sea]

Hi,
I´am new K5 owner from Czech. I´m switched from Canon to the Pentax, because my bag was to heavy. Now I search solution for my sport shots. Cann you tell me what lens is the best for indoor shoting. My experience with Pentax lens is horrible. The AF speed is slow. I need somethink for the distance of 10 m in the gym and moving objekt (wushu, karate, aikido etc.).
Thank you for your tips.
Hilda