Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-09-2010, 03:54 PM   #151
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by fikkser Quote
But why make a slow camera if it could be a fast one? What does a nature photographer lose from using a fast camera? .
The K-7 is a fast camera. A faster camera is the size and weight of a medium format camera. Pentax view is that if you want to carry 1,5kg in the field it better be for image quality. At 8fps you miss 92/100 of the action anyway....

07-09-2010, 03:58 PM   #152
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by noser Quote
More is better, for me.

Shooting live subjects with the manual focus 50mm f/1.2 is a challenge. One of the techniques I've learned to be very successful with is "bracketing for focus".!
You should rather stop the lens down for usable images. Then it will appear that you actually master elementary technique.
07-10-2010, 07:18 AM   #153
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary, AB CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You should rather stop the lens down for usable images. Then it will appear that you actually master elementary technique.
No, I shoot some subjects in some situations at f/1.2 (or, yes, f/1.4) because it has a specific look that my clients pay me for. This is about as elementary as a technique gets (give 'em what they want, they give you $$$). Besides, I like it... I think the quote (in jest) that I heard once goes something like "the world looks better at f/1.2"

Anyway, most of the time (80%?) I actually have the 50-135 or 16-45 mounted. Where did you read that I shoot 100% of my images with that one lens at f/1.2? Stop trying to bait.
07-10-2010, 07:22 AM   #154
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary, AB CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
The K-7 is a fast camera. A faster camera is the size and weight of a medium format camera. Pentax view is that if you want to carry 1,5kg in the field it better be for image quality. At 8fps you miss 92/100 of the action anyway....
Actually, at 3fps, you get 3 'moments' per second. At 9fps you get 10.

That's 3x more chances not to get a family shot without the ringbearer with his finger up his nose, Aunty Mary with her dentures in, and Uncle Bob to have his comb-over not flying in the wind.

07-10-2010, 08:31 AM   #155
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 886
QuoteOriginally posted by noser Quote
Actually, at 3fps, you get 3 'moments' per second. At 9fps you get 10.

That's 3x more chances not to get a family shot without the ringbearer with his finger up his nose, Aunty Mary with her dentures in, and Uncle Bob to have his comb-over not flying in the wind.
First off, how in the world do you get 10 'moments' at 9fps?

Second off, people always make those justifications for needing more fps. But it really doesn't make much of a difference. It's just another magic bean that people think will make their photography better, and help them stop missing shots. But non of your examples are a good argument for needing more fps. Is the ringbearer really moving his finger to and from his nose so many time per second that you need 9 fps to catch a shot with his nose clear? Same with Aunt Mary and Uncle Bob. Those are all examples where good timing is needed, not more fps. I'm not trying to single you out or say you suck, you just happen to be the one who made those examples.

If you figure your shutter speed is 1/200th, then there are 20 possible moments to capture in that second. In fact, there are infinite moments to capture, but that's just too complicated. So if you're shooting at 3 fps, you will catch three out of 200 moments. If you shoot at 9 fps you will catch 9 out of 200 moments.

When I only had a K10d and K20d, I always felt that the fps was too slow and I could never capture good moments on burst mode as well as I could just shooting single frames and timing them well. Then when the k-7 came out with 5.2, I was all excited and thought, now I'll be able to catch great moments on burst speed. Well, guess what, I still find that I'm more able to catch great moments shooting well timed single frame than blasting on burst mode.
07-10-2010, 08:32 AM   #156
Junior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 33
I think the biggest issue is we all want to see that Pentax is still developing new products!
07-10-2010, 09:35 AM   #157
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary, AB CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by FullertonImages Quote
First off, how in the world do you get 10 'moments' at 9fps?
Ya, that was a typo on my part. I was going to say 10fps, but 9fps is 3x of 3fps, so...

QuoteOriginally posted by FullertonImages Quote
Second off, people always make those justifications for needing more fps.
I don't make them, my customers do when I'm looking thru proofs with them and the *perfect* shot (according to them, which is content based, not technically based) isn't there.

QuoteOriginally posted by FullertonImages Quote
But it really doesn't make much of a difference.
It makes a huge difference if you're selling prints, because nobody buys a print when their hairdo is hovering over their bald head.

QuoteOriginally posted by FullertonImages Quote
It's just another magic bean that people think will make their photography better,
Nothing to do with 'better', you missed the point. Everything to do with getting the client images they like, and will buy.

QuoteOriginally posted by FullertonImages Quote
and help them stop missing shots. But non of your examples are a good argument for needing more fps. Is the ringbearer really moving his finger to and from his nose so many time per second that you need 9 fps to catch a shot with his nose clear? Same with Aunt Mary and Uncle Bob. Those are all examples where good timing is needed, not more fps. I'm not trying to single you out or say you suck, you just happen to be the one who made those examples.
I totally get what you're saying. I never said that I just hammer the shutter button from sun-up to sun-down, but during critical moments that have large unpredictability in them, it helps. Most of the time I do take great care to time my shots. But when there are a group of people and all these unpredictable things are happen 'at once', you have a 3x greater chance of getting a shot where everyone has their eyes open, looking generally in the same direction, and nobody is accidentally photobombing the shot.

QuoteOriginally posted by FullertonImages Quote
If you figure your shutter speed is 1/200th, then there are 20 possible moments to capture in that second. In fact, there are infinite moments to capture, but that's just too complicated. So if you're shooting at 3 fps, you will catch three out of 200 moments. If you shoot at 9 fps you will catch 9 out of 200 moments.
I'd actually argue this point, because the 9 shots are spread out over the one second. So are the 3 shots at 3fps, but the key thing is to capture more of those in-betweens. I guess it's that I perceive the passage of time differently.

If you combine this with shooting portraits at f/1.2 (or f/1.4) and the subject is untrained (not a model) then you have that many more shots where, for example, the eyes will be tack-sharp because the person isn't trained to sit still relative to the glass.

QuoteOriginally posted by FullertonImages Quote
When I only had a K10d and K20d, I always felt that the fps was too slow and I could never capture good moments on burst mode as well as I could just shooting single frames and timing them well. Then when the k-7 came out with 5.2, I was all excited and thought, now I'll be able to catch great moments on burst speed. Well, guess what, I still find that I'm more able to catch great moments shooting well timed single frame than blasting on burst mode.
I still only have the K10D and K20D. I like the K10D because Pentax cheaped out on the image pipeline on the K20D and is basically trying to push 1.5x the number of pixels thru the K10D circuitry ... so the K10D can do longer sustained bursts.

Should I have upgraded to the K-7 to get the higher burst? At the time, the $2200 CDN (or whatever it was) didn't justify the 2.2 fps increase, neither did the other features. Between then and now I've gone pro, and I'm coming up against the limits of the K20D for that particular style of shooting, which I only use about 10-15% of the time during those particular events.

What I've found is that when you have exposure, general composition, focus, and most importantly mood of the subject nailed , you can time when to shoot a burst, and the keeper rate that you can select from becomes much much higher. I then delete the shots that do not absolutely rock, and to all outward appearances I've captured every moment perfectly. You and I (and everyone else reading this) know this isn't true, but it doesn't matter at all to the client. They are just really, really happy.

Does this mean that for this style (machine gun, spray and pray, whatever) I should be shooting a 1DsMkIII? Probably, yes. But I just love all my old glass... It's tough to give up!

Maybe a D700, 5DMkii or whatever is coming out in the fall. I've heard that both are getting a refresh at the same time Pentax announces it's offerings. Maybe I'll switch, maybe I'll just get a canikon rig to shoot for that style... we'll all know our personal choices in a few months!
07-10-2010, 05:28 PM   #158
Senior Member
Eigengrau's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Colorado
Photos: Albums
Posts: 250
QuoteOriginally posted by noser Quote
Ya, that was a typo on my part. I was going to say 10fps, but 9fps is 3x of 3fps, so...

I don't make them, my customers do when I'm looking thru proofs with them and the *perfect* shot (according to them, which is content based, not technically based) isn't there.

It makes a huge difference if you're selling prints, because nobody buys a print when their hairdo is hovering over their bald head.
I have heard of people using FPS for action, but if you rely on it for group portraits, "ur doin it wrong". I will often take a 3-shot burst to compensate for blinking, but people standing still just don't change fast enough to necessitate 10 shots in a one second interval. I've got the k-7 and the K20, and both of them are more than fast enough for portraiture.

And, honestly, timing is much more useful than a million shots a second with this. In you flailing combover example, it works better to gauge the wind and use that predictive computer in your head to decide when to hit the shutter. With more FPS you'll just get more blowing combover pictures to choose from, unless you get your timing right or just have people sit still for 20 seconds while you hold the button down.

07-10-2010, 08:44 PM   #159
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,236
QuoteOriginally posted by Eigengrau Quote
I have heard of people using FPS for action, but if you rely on it for group portraits, "ur doin it wrong". I will often take a 3-shot burst to compensate for blinking, but people standing still just don't change fast enough to necessitate 10 shots in a one second interval. I've got the k-7 and the K20, and both of them are more than fast enough for portraiture.
I use the 2-3 frame technique and it works great. Either the person's eyes were not fully open in one, one of the frames turned out slightly sharper, or even slightly more interesting framing when I'm hand holding. It's quite useful. This works with either continuous speed mode of the K-7 and might even be more useful in low speed mode as it gives a bit more time between frames.
07-11-2010, 05:09 AM   #160
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary, AB CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by Eigengrau Quote
I have heard of people using FPS for action, but if you rely on it for group portraits, "ur doin it wrong". I will often take a 3-shot burst to compensate for blinking, b
Since I use the K20D/K10D at 3fps, it would appear that we are both "doin it wrong"

But it works, right, so what the hell...
07-11-2010, 10:49 AM   #161
Senior Member
Eigengrau's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Colorado
Photos: Albums
Posts: 250
My point above was that you don't need HIGH fps to make it happen. Any digital body can crank out enough frames for these purposes - tripling the frames per second doesn't offer any advantage. My K100 worked for this, even though the buffer was tiny in comparison.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How you can tell you're obsessed... Aperturae Pentax DSLR Discussion 20 12-20-2009 06:42 PM
Top 15 Reasons You Might Be Obsessed with Photography jgredline General Talk 29 02-15-2009 04:55 PM
71 people obsessed simulaneously! newarts General Talk 10 12-20-2008 04:44 PM
Yes, being a Pentaxian is being a little obsessed. ebooks4pentax Photographic Technique 10 08-10-2008 05:15 PM
For Sale - Sold: FS: Pentax K1000 (Body only)+body cap+leather case+ strap Not Registered Sold Items 3 11-02-2007 07:51 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:47 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top