Photographing a small fast moving child most likely in good and bad light

normhead · 06-27-2016, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by swisscow

Yep, I noticed K1 was the answer to the life the universe and everything else.

Thanks for taking the time to answer the question and share the great pics. It certainly helps with the decision making.
I'd be happy if my kid could run after a ball that quick :-)

Could I ask the lens you used?

Those taken with the DA*200, which is not even a particularly fast focusing lens.

swisscow · 06-27-2016, 12:05 PM

Originally posted by max_pyne

I took some pics of my friend while he was ski surfing. The K-3 did a great job actually I was really impressed by the performance. Had the DA*300 on it.

That lens will be on my list, once I can justify it to she who must be obeyed.

---------- Post added 06-27-16 at 09:07 PM ----------

Originally posted by normhead

Those taken with the DA*200, which is not even a particularly fast focusing lens.

Ok, thanks good to hear. I'm hoping the 16-85 will be as successful

tuco · 06-27-2016, 12:09 PM

Also bear in mind when people show their successful shots is how many were missed focus. The hit-rate is important if you are in the business of taking action pictures and not as critical when you're not. Anyone owning only one camera brand all their life may not have the most rounded experience at that.

swisscow · 06-27-2016, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by tuco

Also bear in mind when people show their successful shots is how many were missed focus. The hit-rate is important if you are in the business of taking action pictures and not as critical when you're not. Anyone owning only one camera brand all their life may not have the most rounded experience at that.

It's true. I thimk it's a case between finding (and using) something successfuly enough and not missing too myna of those once in lifetime moments. Reading between the lines to get past brand loyalty can be a difficult thing....

normhead · 06-27-2016, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by tuco

Also bear in mind when people show their successful shots is how many were missed focus. The hit-rate is important if you are in the business of taking action pictures and not as critical when you're not. Anyone owning only one camera brand all their life may not have the most rounded experience at that.

Also keep in mind that someone owning another camera brand or someone who owns multiple systems, may use the system that's best for what they want to accomplish. SO if they have a D750 they use for action or whatever, they may not even be aware of the potential of a K-3 even if they own one, just because they don't use it for action, and probably shouldn't.

If you want to bear in mind relevant information, there's a lot to cover. A guy who can show you how to do what you want with your camera system is worth more than some guy who just knows how to use what's best for the job. having more than one system probably means you aren't as proficient on any of those systems as someone who really tries to make one system do everything and really learns the camera inside out.

Photographers can be "jacks of all cameras, masters of none."

I've had some sequences using tracking, like the ones above, where there were no missed focus images in the whole 23 exposure run. For those 23 images, it doesn't matter what you shoot, you can't do better. Perfect is perfect. In fact, better AF capability rarely leads to better images for most shooters. Occasionally it does, but that has to be weighed against the cost of more advanced AF systems.

And if you can keep every image in focus on every sequence you shoot, you're wasting your money on a better AF system, you have what you need, there's no benefit to buying better.

**volley** · 06-27-2016, 12:24 PM

Originally posted by tuco

Also bear in mind when people show their successful shots is how many were missed focus. The hit-rate is important if you are in the business of taking action pictures and not as critical when you're not. Anyone owning only one camera brand all their life may not have the most rounded experience at that.

True, but the OP was asking if a K3II would be able to get the job done. I have no doubt about that. The question was not, if the K3II's AF is the best on the market. We all know that even better solutions might be out there.

tuco · 06-27-2016, 12:29 PM

Originally posted by volley

True, but the OP was asking if a K3II would be able to get the job done. I have no doubt about that. The question was not, if the K3II's AF is the best on the market. We all know that even better solutions might be out there.

And he also said a D750 was on the table so that makes a comparison to that camera significant.

**volley** · 06-27-2016, 12:29 PM

Originally posted by swisscow

Not at all, I'm well aware of my limitations. These are pin sharp. Got any in not so good light?

I think these fall into the "not so good light category

Under these conditions AF hit rate is getting lower, naturally.

[IMG]

[/IMG]

[IMG]

[/IMG]

normhead · 06-27-2016, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by tuco

And he also said a D750 was on the table so that makes a comparison to that camera significant.

I think it goes without saying the D750 would be better, and a lot more expensive, but if money is no object...

I've had long extensive back and forth's with a couple D750 shooters, and I'm satisfied it's better for many things. For example dogs running straight at you. However during the course of the discussion I discovered i really don't care much for photos of dogs running straight at me, and that the reason I have so few images of them running straight at me is, I delete them, in focus or out of focus doesn't matter. I'm not sure children, that are really not that fast moving would be a problem for a K-3.

So while someone might suggest that the K-3 isn't as good as a D750 for that kind of thing in general terms, for the individual and what they shoot, it's also possible they'd never use the potential of the D750 and really a K-3 was all they needed in the first place.

My basic philosophy is save money by buying what you actually need. Others seem to have a "buy the most expensive ting with the most capability out there that's spec sheet is vaguely related to what you might be doing."

As noted, AF systems are exponentially expensive. And there are situations where the K-3 superior frame rate is going to leave a D750 in the dust. That more complicated AF system comes with a possible price to pay in overall prefermance. Sometimes it helps, sometimes it gets in the way.

Funny, I'm not the one who owns a D750, but I'm the one who ends up discussing it. Wat wid dat? Do I have to sell every camera system in existence?

tuco · 06-27-2016, 12:39 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by normhead

I think it goes without saying the D750 would be better, and a lot more expensive, but if money is no object...

Yes. Price per performance is also a big factor but one not asked about. And don't take offense, Norm, but I have no agenda when it comes to cameras. They are just tools to me. I own a lot of brands. But your history is a one of camera religion and adding more people to the Pentax congregation. That's how I see it anyway.

swisscow · 06-27-2016, 12:49 PM

Thanks everyone for your input. It's certainly helpful to see and hear people's views. I'd like to head down the k3ii route and this helps to confirm I won't be wasting my hard earned.

Best to all

**UncleVanya** · 06-27-2016, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by swisscow

Thanks everyone for your input. It's certainly helpful to see and hear people's views. I'd like to head down the k3ii route and this helps to confirm I won't be wasting my hard earned.

Best to all

Enjoy the new camera. I think you will like it. I have the K3 and a Panasonic GX7 - I know what you mean about the EVF not being as nice as an OVF. However I find that both are fun to use in their own way and so I'm hopelessly in the camp of owning two system cameras.

TheOneAndOnlyJH · 06-27-2016, 02:57 PM

When you do take the plunge and get a feel for your new camera stop back in this thread and let us know what you think of it compared to the OMD! I know I've read about some other people considering switching the other direction, so a firsthand experience and impressions would be useful.

I've been thinking about an Olympus m43 for a light travel kit when my K-3 is too big, but I'm not sure if it would be satisfied. Before my K-3 I used a 12MP DMC-GF3 µ4/3 (circa 2011). When I pick it up now I love the compact form factor but feel very limited in anything but bright light. (Even an iPhone 5S takes better pictures in the dark!) I've heard things have changed quite a bit in the past five years though.

normhead · 06-27-2016, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by tuco

Yes. Price per performance is also a big factor but one not asked about. And don't take offense, Norm, but I have no agenda when it comes to cameras. They are just tools to me. I own a lot of brands. But your history is a one of camera religion and adding more people to the Pentax congregation. That's how I see it anyway.

Did someone ask you for this opinion are you just offering it out of the kindness of your heart?

You're a nasty piece of work dude.

I mean really.... that was just nasty "No offence." my derriere.

The difference between me and you... about 3000 likes.

Quit being an idiot and do something nice for somebody.

Share a freaking image or something.

mgoblue · 06-27-2016, 09:39 PM

I hope you might report back how it goes SwIsscow. I've been struggling with a K50 missing focus on children runing towards the camera indoors or at dusk. Outdoors in bright light, with f5.6 or narrower it works pretty well for it. I'm wondering if a k3 would make a big difference at 2.8 or wider open in dim light. Your experience would be helpful to hear about. Randomly running kids are tricky.

06-27-2016, 12:22 PM	#20
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by tuco Also bear in mind when people show their successful shots is how many were missed focus. The hit-rate is important if you are in the business of taking action pictures and not as critical when you're not. Anyone owning only one camera brand all their life may not have the most rounded experience at that. Also keep in mind that someone owning another camera brand or someone who owns multiple systems, may use the system that's best for what they want to accomplish. SO if they have a D750 they use for action or whatever, they may not even be aware of the potential of a K-3 even if they own one, just because they don't use it for action, and probably shouldn't. If you want to bear in mind relevant information, there's a lot to cover. A guy who can show you how to do what you want with your camera system is worth more than some guy who just knows how to use what's best for the job. having more than one system probably means you aren't as proficient on any of those systems as someone who really tries to make one system do everything and really learns the camera inside out. Photographers can be "jacks of all cameras, masters of none." I've had some sequences using tracking, like the ones above, where there were no missed focus images in the whole 23 exposure run. For those 23 images, it doesn't matter what you shoot, you can't do better. Perfect is perfect. In fact, better AF capability rarely leads to better images for most shooters. Occasionally it does, but that has to be weighed against the cost of more advanced AF systems. And if you can keep every image in focus on every sequence you shoot, you're wasting your money on a better AF system, you have what you need, there's no benefit to buying better. Last edited by normhead; 06-27-2016 at 12:33 PM.

06-27-2016, 12:29 PM	#23
volley Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Springe Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,693	Originally posted by swisscow Not at all, I'm well aware of my limitations. These are pin sharp. Got any in not so good light? I think these fall into the "not so good light category Under these conditions AF hit rate is getting lower, naturally. [IMG][/IMG] [IMG][/IMG] [IMG][/IMG]

06-27-2016, 12:34 PM	#24
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by tuco And he also said a D750 was on the table so that makes a comparison to that camera significant. I think it goes without saying the D750 would be better, and a lot more expensive, but if money is no object... I've had long extensive back and forth's with a couple D750 shooters, and I'm satisfied it's better for many things. For example dogs running straight at you. However during the course of the discussion I discovered i really don't care much for photos of dogs running straight at me, and that the reason I have so few images of them running straight at me is, I delete them, in focus or out of focus doesn't matter. I'm not sure children, that are really not that fast moving would be a problem for a K-3. So while someone might suggest that the K-3 isn't as good as a D750 for that kind of thing in general terms, for the individual and what they shoot, it's also possible they'd never use the potential of the D750 and really a K-3 was all they needed in the first place. My basic philosophy is save money by buying what you actually need. Others seem to have a "buy the most expensive ting with the most capability out there that's spec sheet is vaguely related to what you might be doing." As noted, AF systems are exponentially expensive. And there are situations where the K-3 superior frame rate is going to leave a D750 in the dust. That more complicated AF system comes with a possible price to pay in overall prefermance. Sometimes it helps, sometimes it gets in the way. Funny, I'm not the one who owns a D750, but I'm the one who ends up discussing it. Wat wid dat? Do I have to sell every camera system in existence? Last edited by normhead; 06-27-2016 at 12:49 PM.

06-27-2016, 04:10 PM	#29
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by tuco Yes. Price per performance is also a big factor but one not asked about. And don't take offense, Norm, but I have no agenda when it comes to cameras. They are just tools to me. I own a lot of brands. But your history is a one of camera religion and adding more people to the Pentax congregation. That's how I see it anyway. Did someone ask you for this opinion are you just offering it out of the kindness of your heart? You're a nasty piece of work dude. I mean really.... that was just nasty "No offence." my derriere. The difference between me and you... about 3000 likes. Quit being an idiot and do something nice for somebody. Share a freaking image or something. Last edited by normhead; 06-27-2016 at 04:18 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Credible? next Pentax 645 will most likely have a 100MP Sony sensor	rfkiii	Pentax Medium Format	46	04-11-2016 03:53 PM
Is K-30 AF good for fast moving subjects?	drabina	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	09-13-2013 05:38 AM
A Pentax Model you most likely do not have!	Tom S.	General Talk	8	03-13-2012 02:36 PM
Good Photos in Bad Light	casil403	Photographic Technique	2	01-07-2011 12:11 PM
Photographing a very dark, moving subject (my black dog)	switters	Photographic Technique	12	09-09-2010 06:38 PM

06-27-2016, 12:00 PM	#16
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by swisscow Yep, I noticed K1 was the answer to the life the universe and everything else. Thanks for taking the time to answer the question and share the great pics. It certainly helps with the decision making. I'd be happy if my kid could run after a ball that quick :-) Could I ask the lens you used? Those taken with the DA*200, which is not even a particularly fast focusing lens.

06-27-2016, 12:05 PM	#17
swisscow New Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Bern Posts: 22 Original Poster	Originally posted by max_pyne I took some pics of my friend while he was ski surfing. The K-3 did a great job actually I was really impressed by the performance. Had the DA300 on it. That lens will be on my list, once I can justify it to she who must be obeyed. ---------- Post added 06-27-16 at 09:07 PM ---------- Originally posted by normhead Those taken with the DA200, which is not even a particularly fast focusing lens. Ok, thanks good to hear. I'm hoping the 16-85 will be as successful

06-27-2016, 12:09 PM	#18
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,025	Also bear in mind when people show their successful shots is how many were missed focus. The hit-rate is important if you are in the business of taking action pictures and not as critical when you're not. Anyone owning only one camera brand all their life may not have the most rounded experience at that.

06-27-2016, 12:15 PM	#19
swisscow New Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Bern Posts: 22 Original Poster	Originally posted by tuco Also bear in mind when people show their successful shots is how many were missed focus. The hit-rate is important if you are in the business of taking action pictures and not as critical when you're not. Anyone owning only one camera brand all their life may not have the most rounded experience at that. It's true. I thimk it's a case between finding (and using) something successfuly enough and not missing too myna of those once in lifetime moments. Reading between the lines to get past brand loyalty can be a difficult thing....

06-27-2016, 12:24 PM	#21
volley Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Springe Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,693	Originally posted by tuco Also bear in mind when people show their successful shots is how many were missed focus. The hit-rate is important if you are in the business of taking action pictures and not as critical when you're not. Anyone owning only one camera brand all their life may not have the most rounded experience at that. True, but the OP was asking if a K3II would be able to get the job done. I have no doubt about that. The question was not, if the K3II's AF is the best on the market. We all know that even better solutions might be out there.

06-27-2016, 12:29 PM	#22
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,025	Originally posted by volley True, but the OP was asking if a K3II would be able to get the job done. I have no doubt about that. The question was not, if the K3II's AF is the best on the market. We all know that even better solutions might be out there. And he also said a D750 was on the table so that makes a comparison to that camera significant.

06-27-2016, 12:39 PM - 1 Like	#25
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,025	Originally posted by normhead I think it goes without saying the D750 would be better, and a lot more expensive, but if money is no object... Yes. Price per performance is also a big factor but one not asked about. And don't take offense, Norm, but I have no agenda when it comes to cameras. They are just tools to me. I own a lot of brands. But your history is a one of camera religion and adding more people to the Pentax congregation. That's how I see it anyway.

06-27-2016, 12:49 PM	#26
swisscow New Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Bern Posts: 22 Original Poster	Thanks everyone for your input. It's certainly helpful to see and hear people's views. I'd like to head down the k3ii route and this helps to confirm I won't be wasting my hard earned. Best to all

06-27-2016, 12:53 PM	#27
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Originally posted by swisscow Thanks everyone for your input. It's certainly helpful to see and hear people's views. I'd like to head down the k3ii route and this helps to confirm I won't be wasting my hard earned. Best to all Enjoy the new camera. I think you will like it. I have the K3 and a Panasonic GX7 - I know what you mean about the EVF not being as nice as an OVF. However I find that both are fun to use in their own way and so I'm hopelessly in the camp of owning two system cameras.

06-27-2016, 02:57 PM	#28
TheOneAndOnlyJH Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Buffalo, NY Posts: 351	When you do take the plunge and get a feel for your new camera stop back in this thread and let us know what you think of it compared to the OMD! I know I've read about some other people considering switching the other direction, so a firsthand experience and impressions would be useful. I've been thinking about an Olympus m43 for a light travel kit when my K-3 is too big, but I'm not sure if it would be satisfied. Before my K-3 I used a 12MP DMC-GF3 µ4/3 (circa 2011). When I pick it up now I love the compact form factor but feel very limited in anything but bright light. (Even an iPhone 5S takes better pictures in the dark!) I've heard things have changed quite a bit in the past five years though.

06-27-2016, 09:39 PM	#30
mgoblue Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: California Posts: 79	I hope you might report back how it goes SwIsscow. I've been struggling with a K50 missing focus on children runing towards the camera indoors or at dusk. Outdoors in bright light, with f5.6 or narrower it works pretty well for it. I'm wondering if a k3 would make a big difference at 2.8 or wider open in dim light. Your experience would be helpful to hear about. Randomly running kids are tricky.