[simico]

I really want the K5 but man do I love the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8

I can tell you that K-5 + Sigma 50-150 absolutely rocks, I love this combo

[Rondec]

Ok so I had a portrait session today and I used the K7 with the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8, all natural light. I attached two images, one normal size and one the crop. It was shot at ISO 1100 and no noise reduction was applied, just a little exposure boost and fill light. What did I find out?

1) The Sigma is simply amazing! The sharpness was awesome from every focal length and all apertures from what I saw. I missed focus on the shots that were not sharp or my shutter speed was too slow and I had camera shake.

2) The K7 High Iso isn't bad when nailing the exposure BUT the noise is still there which causes the image to be less clean when blown up

3) Because the High ISO past 1600 isn't that good even when nailing your exposure, you have to use a slower shutter speed to compensate (when the sun is falling lower) and this causes camera shake and blurred shots, especially when photographing kids and using a longer lens.

4) The dynamic range is not the best and some shots were ruined because I didn't have the correct settings. I could have gotten the shot but it would have been nice to have the K5 to recover the images where there were blown highlights.

5) I need to learn to use the K7 better. Coming from the Kx it's like a whole new camera almost.

6) I need to learn to use the SIgma 50-150mm better as well. The shots that were in focus were great but I missed focus a lot and had camera shake because of the slow shutter speeds which sometimes were caused by my hesitation to up the ISO, which is where having the K5 would have helped since I could up my ISO.

I could have used my Kx when it got darker but the Kx doesn't remember lens adjustments so my focus would have been off with the Sigma.

--- I really want the K5 but man do I love the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8...the focus is fast and the lens is very quiet and it's sharp throughout all focal lengths and apertures once you adjust it correctly ( I adjusted mine +5 on my K7 ). The K5 will arrive Thursday May 12 and now I'm wondering if I should keep it, if I do the Sigma and K7 would need to be sold ----

Learn to use flash. It will help out a huge amount in these kinds of situations. Just a touch of fill flash and shutter speeds will be manageable. I find that an external flash really helps to keep my high iso needs down and helps dramatically as light fades out.

[audiobomber]

Learn to use flash. It will help out a huge amount in these kinds of situations. Just a touch of fill flash and shutter speeds will be manageable. I find that an external flash really helps to keep my high iso needs down and helps dramatically as light fades out.

Absolutely! The ability to control the light allows more flexibility with shutter speed, aperture and ISO. But even more than that, artificial lighting done creatively can greatly enhance a photo, eliminating or creating shadows, and ensuring nice catchlights in the eyes.

[ggeorge11]

4) The dynamic range is not the best and some shots were ruined because I didn't have the correct settings. I could have gotten the shot but it would have been nice to have the K5 to recover the images where there were blown highlights.

5) I need to learn to use the K7 better. Coming from the Kx it's like a whole new camera almost.

6) I need to learn to use the SIgma 50-150mm better as well. The shots that were in focus were great but I missed focus a lot and had camera shake because of the slow shutter speeds which sometimes were caused by my hesitation to up the ISO, which is where having the K5 would have helped since I could up my ISO.

The one thing in common issue here is "I need to learn" That is cool. So many people complain the camera does not do this, or the lens does not do that. The odds are it is the operator 80-90% of the time. IMHO. I test military computer systems, and I have a saying, "Just because it is not doing what you want, does not make it wrong or broken"

I will bet that almost every shot that did not work for me-- was because of me. BTW, those are some pretty darn good shots. !

[Winder]

I just don't think it's reasonable anymore, now that bodies come with one kind of film built into them, to suggest that glass is all that matters. It's like your heart or your lungs - which is more important? If either stops working, you die.

I'm not saying that the lens is all that matters. I'm saying that bodies have progressed to the point where professional IQ can be achieved with almost any currently produced DSLR and even some mirror-less. If someone is not getting really good results with a camera like a K-x then they need to look at their lenses and their own ability, because the K-x is capable of very good images.

[Winder]

Ok so I had a portrait session today and I used the K7 with the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8, all natural light. I attached two images, one normal size and one the crop. It was shot at ISO 1100 and no noise reduction was applied, just a little exposure boost and fill light. What did I find out?

1) The Sigma is simply amazing! The sharpness was awesome from every focal length and all apertures from what I saw. I missed focus on the shots that were not sharp or my shutter speed was too slow and I had camera shake.

2) The K7 High Iso isn't bad when nailing the exposure BUT the noise is still there which causes the image to be less clean when blown up

3) Because the High ISO past 1600 isn't that good even when nailing your exposure, you have to use a slower shutter speed to compensate (when the sun is falling lower) and this causes camera shake and blurred shots, especially when photographing kids and using a longer lens.

4) The dynamic range is not the best and some shots were ruined because I didn't have the correct settings. I could have gotten the shot but it would have been nice to have the K5 to recover the images where there were blown highlights.
-

Show us a processed image. Are you using LR3.4?

[Rupert]

I have a good friend that was looking for a nice camera last year and I recommended the Kx. He loves it, and thanks me every time I see him. Would I recommend the K5 to him? No.

His Kx does all he needs to do, satisfies both his needs and his desires, and the added expense and all the extra dials and learning curve would be more detrimental than beneficial. I've seen his photos, the K5 would not make him a better shooter for what he does, and he does very well!
Best Regards!

[Rondec]

I'm not saying that the lens is all that matters. I'm saying that bodies have progressed to the point where professional IQ can be achieved with almost any currently produced DSLR and even some mirror-less. If someone is not getting really good results with a camera like a K-x then they need to look at their lenses and their own ability, because the K-x is capable of very good images.

Very true. In general, the weakest link in the chain is the photographer. Any current SLR (and even last couple of generations SLR) is more than capable of making good photos if used well. There have been improvements in sensor technology that certainly make it easier to get good results, but I find the K7 more than capable in most situations.

Money is a big deal and so you have to make decisions wisely. If you happen to be independently wealthy you just buy everything (FA limiteds, a couple of K5's, maybe a 645D for good measure), but for most people a decision has to be made and often it comes down to glass versus body. With the cost of good glass, compared to a K5s cost, I think I could get more bang for my buck with glass than a new camera body.

[JohnBee]

Learn to use flash. It will help out a huge amount in these kinds of situations. Just a touch of fill flash and shutter speeds will be manageable. I find that an external flash really helps to keep my high iso needs down and helps dramatically as light fades out.

Aaaaw cute!

[crossover37]

Yea, I know how to use flash but didn't yesterday. Why? I'm not sure, my mind was just all over the place and all the things I wanted to do on the shoot didn't all happen. I'm serious, when it comes to an actual paid shoot, it's like I forget everything I worked so hard to learn.

[Rondec]

Make lists. Seriously, check lists are key. Also, print off a page or two of thumbnail photos of poses you want to try to emulate. This is even more important in a wedding, where it is easy to over look a specific shot that you want to get.

[jstevewhite]

I'm not saying that the lens is all that matters. I'm saying that bodies have progressed to the point where professional IQ can be achieved with almost any currently produced DSLR and even some mirror-less. If someone is not getting really good results with a camera like a K-x then they need to look at their lenses and their own ability, because the K-x is capable of very good images.

Oh, ok. Fair enough. I agree, for most professional applications, nearly any currently available DSLR will serve most needs, as they out-resolve the target media in both available dpi and dynamic range in most cases. But I think that's true of lenses, as well. Barring certain visual effects (DOF), I'd bet you couldn't tell the difference between the A* 135 f1.8 and, say, a good copy of the Tak M 135 f2.5, once it was screened out, processed, and printed on an 8.5x11 bleed. One is a $1300+ lens, the other is a $100+ lens.

For that matter, I bet the kit lens meets the same criteria for publication quality.

[audiobomber]

I'm serious, when it comes to an actual paid shoot, it's like I forget everything I worked so hard to learn.

LOL! That's not my usual problem. My problem is that I plan what gear I'm going to bring and how I'm going to shoot. Then I change the plan at the last minute. Unfortunately the new plan is never as good as the carefully crafted original.

[jstevewhite]

LOL! That's not my usual problem. My problem is that I plan what gear I'm going to bring and how I'm going to shoot. Then I change the plan at the last minute. Unfortunately the new plan is never as good as the carefully crafted original.

Oh, there are many, many comical stories about commercial shoots gone wrong through equipment failure, system failure, subject failure, and yes, photographer failure.

On a 4x5 shoot for a rich fellow that insisted his new line of lingerie really needed the 'look' of 4x5 (shooting chicks in lingerie with a 4x5 is more of a technical challenge than one might imagine!) I once shot 8 takes - and that's a lot of time with a 4x5 - with *empty film holders*. Somehow I decided the wrong case was the right case. This in spite of the fact that I had a "system" that made it clear they were empty. Perhaps I was distracted by the subject matter. Fortunately, I realized it "in time", and we re-shot the images (and I pro-rated my day rate for that time, of course).

Another time I inexplicably metered for 400 ISO film (ASA in those days) while shooting 100 ISO film. That was a complete disaster, and caused me to develop a system for avoiding that the next time. I have forgotten critical gear, broken gear while on set using it, exposed film accidentally... LOL. It was a lot of fun. I miss it sometimes.

[jstevewhite]

Make lists. Seriously, check lists are key. Also, print off a page or two of thumbnail photos of poses you want to try to emulate. This is even more important in a wedding, where it is easy to over look a specific shot that you want to get.

This. If you'd doing pro work, checklists can SAVE YOUR LIFE, and sometimes, your CAREER