Originally posted by UncleVanya
How does shooting in HyperP and TAv differ practically? I'm not clear myself. I'm trying to get used to trying TAv but if HyperP makes more sense sell me on it.
Nothing to sell. They are very related and I've used both over the years. What I like about Hyper P is that the camera is already set up with general exposure settings for a whole sequence of shooting while you control only your specific needs to make a specific shot within that environment.
For example, when a bird-in-a-thicket shot comes up on the trail, I can instantly set the speed much higher while the system will automatically compensate aperture. If I want to take a landscape shot, I will often close down the aperture a bit over the camera defaults. Etc. Pressing the green button returns things to more general optimization values. The return is the only diff for me at least. There's nothing to return to with TAv. If you set yourself up to shoot a little bird with TAv, that's what you are set up for. Nothing else. In P you start out from what to me, at least, feels like a much better place.
This is the only difference I've seen in practice. But I like it as for me it minimizes what I need to think about for a specific shot, and especially any sudden, specific shot. Since most of my shooting involves hiking--often more than a bit backcountry--and coastal sailing--sudden targets-of-opportunity are quite common for me to deal with as well as large changes in lighting condition in short periods of time or even in the same general area. And for this P has become my preferred way over TAv after trying both out extensively over a period of years since my first K50. But I have no problem using TAv either at all.
I have read that the Hyper P mode on the K3iii will incorporate TAv more directly. And supposely M more than presently as well. Not sure if that will change its essential nature or not.
Last edited by jgnfld; 02-28-2021 at 05:55 AM.