Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-12-2009, 11:20 AM   #1
Inactive Account




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6
newbie vacation questions

I'm taking a Pentax k100d Super on my trip to Disney in 2 weeks. I'm thinking of experimenting with using RAW and editing them later. I only have and own Picasa for photo editing. In the past it's all I've needed.

I'm also not sure how the quality of the photo will differ from shooting in raw vs jpg

Sorry. I just got my dslr recently and have never taken it to Disney before. I've always had my trusty Kodak p&s. Which will be staying home since it's broken.

I'm also taking along 3 overlaping lenses, but 2 of them I will have only had for a few days when they arrive so I'm worried that they won't be as smooth with AF as I'd like or that my fiance won't like them. He thinks the 28-80 is perfect.
We plan to take:
Sigma 28-80 Macro
Sigma 28-105 f 2.8
Sigma 28-200

Depending on how it goes we'll most likely cut down to just the 28-105 because the faster f stop is most important to me.

Sorry for the long post. I'm just worried about trying a new shooting option and enjoying my new camera in my favorite vacation spot.

Thank you all so much!

08-12-2009, 11:50 AM   #2
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by CharacterFan Quote
I'm also not sure how the quality of the photo will differ from shooting in raw vs jpg
Won't differ at all unless you need to do much PP - *that's* the reason to shoot RAW. It's going to have to be converted to JPEG (or the equivalent) to print or display anyhow; RAW only provides an advantage if you want to do much adjusting of exposure or color along the way.

QuoteQuote:
Sigma 28-80 Macro
Sigma 28-105 f 2.8
Sigma 28-200
I can't think of any reason to take all three lenses, or even two of them. The 28-105 is *not* f/2.8, at least not all the way. It's f/4 by the long end. Which is probably not much better than the 28-200 would be at that focal length - maybe half a stop at most? The f/2.8 could indeed be useful at the short end in the evening or indoors, although the 28-200 does f/3.5, which is only half a stop worse. Anyhow, i'd be choosing between those two, and not even considering the 28-80. It's not a true macro, and probably does only barely better in that department than the other two, besides, the bugs and flowers at Disney don't look much different than the bugs and flowers anywhere else.

I'd probably chosoe the 28-105, because hey, half a stop is half a stop, and the IQ is probably better than the 28-200, and Disney isn't a park where you need much in the way of long telephoto, at least not in the Magic Kingdom. Although if you mean Disney World in Florida, there are the other parks there to, and sure, a longer lens might be useful in Animal Kingdom. So you might take the 28-200, and leave it in the hotel room while visiting the magic Kingdom but take it instead of the 28-105 to Animal Kingdom.
08-12-2009, 02:40 PM   #3
Inactive Account




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
Won't differ at all unless you need to do much PP - *that's* the reason to shoot RAW. It's going to have to be converted to JPEG (or the equivalent) to print or display anyhow; RAW only provides an advantage if you want to do much adjusting of exposure or color along the way.
Thanks, I'll just continue to shot in jpg

QuoteQuote:
I can't think of any reason to take all three lenses, or even two of them. The 28-105 is *not* f/2.8, at least not all the way. It's f/4 by the long end. Which is probably not much better than the 28-200 would be at that focal length - maybe half a stop at most? The f/2.8 could indeed be useful at the short end in the evening or indoors, although the 28-200 does f/3.5, which is only half a stop worse. Anyhow, i'd be choosing between those two, and not even considering the 28-80. It's not a true macro, and probably does only barely better in that department than the other two, besides, the bugs and flowers at Disney don't look much different than the bugs and flowers anywhere else.

I'd probably chosoe the 28-105, because hey, half a stop is half a stop, and the IQ is probably better than the 28-200, and Disney isn't a park where you need much in the way of long telephoto, at least not in the Magic Kingdom. Although if you mean Disney World in Florida, there are the other parks there to, and sure, a longer lens might be useful in Animal Kingdom. So you might take the 28-200, and leave it in the hotel room while visiting the magic Kingdom but take it instead of the 28-105 to Animal Kingdom.
Until I can get a 50mm 1.4 af the 2.8 at the 28mm is the best I have for dark rides. 28-200 will be used mainly for animals, parades (the spot I use is pretty far from the parade). I don't shoot much outside of Disney. I've spent an hour photographing one area of flowers before. While they may not "look much different" they feel a lot different and are special to me. If I had the lenses now and knew them. I'd most likely only take the 28-105 and the 28-200 but I don't know them. I have the space in my bag. If I don't take them there will just be empty places in my bag. The bag is very light to me and I have no problem carrying them around for the chance at one shot. We have to carry a backpack because of other things we bring for the day. Regardless of camera and lenses.
08-12-2009, 09:59 PM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: nyc
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 564
I went to disney a few months back...granted, i traveled with the extended family, i brought most everything i had, and honestly found i primarily stuck with the 16-45. the only feedback on that was that i'd wished i had the 17-70 as there were a couple times where i wished for a bit more reach than i had, but it wasn't so bad or convenient that i could switch to the 55-300 or 50-135.

part of this was because it wasn't a photo vacation but a family one. part of it was because that 16-45 was really all i needed.

dark rides, for the ones i can recall, tend to be too dark to even bother. i think i took more with my wife's olympus point and shoot with a "night shot mode" versus trying to deal with my dSLR + watching one of our kids in the ride with me. the few shots i took in lower light-covered ride queue areas, etc, the ISO got bumped up and i got the noise (i left the auto ISO on and the range was covering all options, so thats my fault). you may differ, but i just felt enjoying the rides was more important than a picture of the inside of say, winnie the pooh or pirates of the caribbean.

i'd go with pack light and have fun.

08-13-2009, 12:06 AM   #5
Inactive Account




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jmdeegan Quote
I went to disney a few months back...granted, i traveled with the extended family, i brought most everything i had, and honestly found i primarily stuck with the 16-45. the only feedback on that was that i'd wished i had the 17-70 as there were a couple times where i wished for a bit more reach than i had, but it wasn't so bad or convenient that i could switch to the 55-300 or 50-135.

part of this was because it wasn't a photo vacation but a family one. part of it was because that 16-45 was really all i needed.

dark rides, for the ones i can recall, tend to be too dark to even bother. i think i took more with my wife's olympus point and shoot with a "night shot mode" versus trying to deal with my dSLR + watching one of our kids in the ride with me. the few shots i took in lower light-covered ride queue areas, etc, the ISO got bumped up and i got the noise (i left the auto ISO on and the range was covering all options, so thats my fault). you may differ, but i just felt enjoying the rides was more important than a picture of the inside of say, winnie the pooh or pirates of the caribbean.

i'd go with pack light and have fun.
Thanks. This will be my 30th trip and 15th in the past 3 years. I don't know if I can enjoy potc as much as my fiance these days. Trying to get a picture of Capt. Jack will I hope bring back the enjoyment of some of the rides I skip on solo trips, but DFi feels are important to ride each trip. I'm not planning on taking all my lenses. I'm leaving both of my fiance's manual focus lenses at home. I don't know if I'll carry my 18-55 kit lens around. It will most likely make the trip down to take some pictures of the resort buildings. I may also use it when I go for my site visit for the extra range to get photos of the entire room.
08-13-2009, 08:31 AM   #6
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by CharacterFan Quote
I don't shoot much outside of Disney.
I actually didn't mean outside Disney - I meant the Disney parks other than the Magic Kingdom - like Animal Kingdom in particular. I find at that amusement parks where it is all about giant outdoor rollercoasters and so forth, a longer telephoto lens can be nice to show closeups of people on the rides. On the other hand, I could longer telephoto lenses being useful for kind of specialized shots given you've kind of "been there, done that" on all the normal tourist shots. For instance, everyone has pictures of Cinderella Castle; how many have closeups of the railing around the second window from the left, third floor?

QuoteQuote:
I've spent an hour photographing one area of flowers before. While they may not "look much different" they feel a lot different and are special to me.
Understood, but you might question just how close you need to get in order to capture what makes them special - usually what makes flowers special in this context is the arrangement and context, not a closeup of one petal. Which is to say, any quasi-macro feature might not be all that important, particularly if it actually gives you only *barely* more magnification than another lens, which I suspect is the case here. Like, the 28-80 might do 1:2.5, but the 28-105 might do 1:3.

Anyhow, sure, bring whatever you like. Personally, I'd sell off that 28-200 and get a 50-200 or 70-300 and take that and the 28-105. But then, I'd also very much miss wide angle capability - 28 is not very wide on a Pentax DSLR.
08-13-2009, 02:35 PM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ste-Anne des Plaines, Qc., Canada
Posts: 2,014
QuoteOriginally posted by CharacterFan Quote
Thanks. . I don't know if I'll carry my 18-55 kit lens around.
I would definitively take that lens along. And the 28-200. If you intend on taking the scenery, the 18mm end is a must. And, with the 28-200, you get the "reach" so to speak. If you want to take along another accessory, look for a decent flash, so you can include people in shots with lit background.
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, disney, pentax help, photo, photography, sigma, vacation
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A Hello and few Newbie Questions jnash4 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 7 07-01-2010 12:53 PM
Few newbie questions~ afromouse Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 15 02-26-2010 11:07 PM
K20d newbie questions Schwatmann Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 03-06-2009 09:52 AM
540fgz newbie questions... leadbelly Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 6 01-21-2008 05:56 PM
Newbie w/ PP Questions highyellow1 Post Your Photos! 6 07-20-2007 04:08 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:16 AM. | 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