Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-25-2021, 11:17 AM - 1 Like   #31
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 170
Original Poster
Motion: example based on advice received.

Better, but still learning.

Thanks again

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-50  Photo 
11-25-2021, 01:18 PM - 2 Likes   #32
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
pschlute's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Surrey, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,252
QuoteOriginally posted by Banskojoe Quote
Better, but still learning.
Practice makes perfect ! Keep at it you are on the right track.

Something else you could try in addition is to do some panning shots. As the subject runs past you, track them with your camera as you take pictures in continuous shooting mode. You will inevitably get some blur on the subject, especially arms and legs, and even more blur on the background, but this can lead to a shot giving more impression of movement. The good thing is for these kind of shots you actually want to lower your shutter speed.

This is an image I took of a vintage open top car with passengers that was racing past me. This might be a bit extreme for some, but it certainly gives the impression of speed . I chose 1/6 second for this exposure.

11-25-2021, 03:53 PM - 1 Like   #33
Des
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Des's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Sth Gippsland Victoria Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,473
QuoteOriginally posted by Banskojoe Quote
Better, but still learning.
Yes, much better. 1/160th still isn't fast, but at 6400 ISO and f5.6 there wasn't much room to move. At 18mm the maximum aperture for that lens is f3.5. If you had shot wide open that would have allowed 1.3EV faster shutter speed (ie about 1/400th). But (there's always a catch) wide open at 18mm is one setting where the DA 18-135 (well, my copy anyway), isn't sharp even in the centre. So you are at the limit of what you can get in dull conditions without adding light.

I love Peter's (@pschlute) example. It's a good illustration of thinking outside the box. Panning requires a bit of practice and you need the subject to fill a reasonable portion of the frame for it to be effective.
11-25-2021, 04:54 PM - 2 Likes   #34
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 15,197
QuoteOriginally posted by Banskojoe Quote
Better, but still learning.

Thanks again
Yeah, your lens is too slow for the job, Banskojoe! There are many days where the sun isn't out and shining.

1/160s is simply not fast enough for sports, and ISO 6400 is too high - you're getting both motion blur and noise grain.

The closer you can get to an f2.8 zoom, the better.

You can go less than f2.8 with a prime, but there are then only certain distances you can compose and shoot your grandchild from, it will be an unsatisfactory experience. You want to be able to get her head to toe in the shots as she approaches from the distance and take a sequence of shots, zooming out precisely between bursts.

As she gets nearer and you're now at your widest focal length, you can flip the camera from landscape to portrait orientation and get some more shots before she's too close.

This is what's possible when you 'get your ducks in a row':




Last edited by clackers; 11-25-2021 at 10:57 PM.
11-26-2021, 06:14 AM - 1 Like   #35
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Avalon Peninsula, Newfoundland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,015
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
Yeah, your lens is too slow for the job, Banskojoe! There are many days where the sun isn't out and shining.

1/160s is simply not fast enough for sports, and ISO 6400 is too high - you're getting both motion blur and noise grain.

The closer you can get to an f2.8 zoom, the better...
Yeah...For some reason I just cannot warm to my Sigma 17-50 f2.8's rendering of landscapes, in particular, and since that is my preferred use in that range, bought a 16-85. But I have kept the 17-50 for indoors, low light, people shots, city streets, and dark/night shots which render just fine for me but which are not my usual subjects.

Last edited by jgnfld; 11-28-2021 at 08:45 AM.
11-28-2021, 08:33 AM - 1 Like   #36
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 21,030
QuoteOriginally posted by Banskojoe Quote
Better, but still learning.

Thanks again
I think if you waited until they were closer and shot a little underexposed with a higher shutter speed it would be perfectly fine. The extra background elements here donít add much and you lose the focus on the subject I think.
11-28-2021, 09:09 AM - 1 Like   #37
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 170
Original Poster
More thanks

I appreciate the additional advice and input. That particular shot is one of usually a couple hundred at any given meet. I try to capture the whole team and make the shots available to the school for distribution. Not all parents (or grandparents) can make all the meets and we hope this helps a little.

11-28-2021, 09:12 AM   #38
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,919
There's also the last-gen DA*16-50 f2.8... if you're looking for a gear upgrade...
It has a reputation for focus motor failures but can be converted to screwdrive.
Those are often available for a reasonable price, and they have a very nice rendering, I think.
Mine worked very well on my K-01, which was famous for having lousy autofocus.

Back in the film era, I shot a lot of sports with a 135mm f2.8 just for the faster aperture.
It was manual focus, but for cross country, that should be less of an issue, as you can pre-focus on a point before they pass.
If you can pick your location well ahead of time, you may be able to shoot farther off, getting a pack of runners, then refocus and recompose when they get close to get one or two...

And a manual focus 135mm f2.8 can be extremely inexpensive if you can work around fully manual exposure.
They are pricer with the "A" contacts needed for automated exposure...

-Eric

Last edited by TwoUptons; 11-28-2021 at 09:16 AM. Reason: had more ideas...
11-28-2021, 05:48 PM - 1 Like   #39
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 21,030
QuoteOriginally posted by Banskojoe Quote
I appreciate the additional advice and input. That particular shot is one of usually a couple hundred at any given meet. I try to capture the whole team and make the shots available to the school for distribution. Not all parents (or grandparents) can make all the meets and we hope this helps a little.
That is a fair point and makes sense. I would say combine what youíre doing with some tighter shots of two or three runners at a time if you arenít already doing so. The DA* 16-50 converted to screw drive is a nice faster lens but wide open it may not give enough depth of field for those shots.
11-29-2021, 03:21 PM   #40
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 15,197
QuoteOriginally posted by jgnfld Quote
Yeah...For some reason I just cannot warm to my Sigma 17-50 f2.8's rendering of landscapes, in particular, and since that is my preferred use in that range, bought a 16-85.
I wouldn't advise the OP to buy the 16-85 for sports, Jgnfld ... it doesn't open up wide enough!

For your landscapes, you might be shooting at f11 with long exposure times, she wants to hit 1/1000s or more for her runners.
11-29-2021, 03:43 PM - 1 Like   #41
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Avalon Peninsula, Newfoundland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,015
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
I wouldn't advise the OP to buy the 16-85 for sports, Jgnfld ... it doesn't open up wide enough!

For your landscapes, you might be shooting at f11 with long exposure times, she wants to hit 1/1000s or more for her runners.
Poor writing on my part, I guess. That was my point. So...yes.
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!
camera, pentax help, photography, troubleshooting
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Depicting motion: Panning and motion blur slackercruster Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 109 09-07-2021 09:59 AM
Rhythm, Motion, and all that jazz robgski General Talk 2 05-07-2021 01:08 PM
Abstract Motion Blur Abstract cg57 Post Your Photos! 4 01-08-2020 02:24 AM
Trouble with motion blur Crust Pentax K-01 10 02-11-2013 04:02 PM
stopped motion with motion at a bar help no694terry Photographic Technique 9 10-20-2012 10:26 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:20 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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