[pete_pf]

i'm curious does my k100d have that burst capability like i see on other brands? in class some cameras just go insanely quick with the shutter seems like they can shoot 20 shots in a second :S

the other, why does raw format make the dimensions of the file so small? turns out to be a 4x6. how can i do any cropping when it comes out so small to begin with?

[Gooshin]

1. yes you can burst, hit the function button and select from there, the K100D can shoot something like 2.8 frames per second, depending on the battery charge. If you chooses RAW it will hit a buffer at around 9 images and need time to prosess, with jpegs you can get up to 16 iswh.. i think,i can be thinking of a different camera. Regardless this isnt a "burst" camera A, B i dont know what "class" you are in, but shooting burst is definetly not something a beginner needs to use, or even a pro... there is a time and a place for burst.

2. a K100D can create a maximum of a 6 megapixel file, meaning a maximum resolution of 3008 x 2008

an image resolved at 3008 x 2008 can be easily printed 10X12 without loss of detail (assuming you dont look at it 1 inch away).

[pete_pf]

1. yes you can burst, hit the function button and select from there, the K100D can shoot something like 2.8 frames per second, depending on the battery charge. If you chooses RAW it will hit a buffer at around 9 images and need time to prosess, with jpegs you can get up to 16 iswh.. i think,i can be thinking of a different camera. Regardless this isnt a "burst" camera A, B i dont know what "class" you are in, but shooting burst is definetly not something a beginner needs to use, or even a pro... there is a time and a place for burst.

2. a K100D can create a maximum of a 6 megapixel file, meaning a maximum resolution of 3008 x 2008

an image resolved at 3008 x 2008 can be easily printed 10X12 without loss of detail (assuming you dont look at it 1 inch away).

i hear some cameras that sound like machine guns lol

how come my raw files come out as 1024 x 1534? :S

[Gooshin]

i hear some cameras that sound like machine guns lol

how come my raw files come out as 1024 x 1534? :S

i'm sorry then, thats not a RAW file

your K100D should spit out files with the ".PEF" extention.


and the machine gunning cameras are the higher end models of canon and nikon, but they also cost much more than yours, since high FPS shooting is a factor of mechanical and software components, which are more expensive in nature.

[SpecialK]

... If you chooses RAW it will hit a buffer at around 9 images... i think,i can be thinking of a different camera. Regardless this isnt a "burst" camera A, B i dont know what "class" you are in, but shooting burst is definetly not something a beginner needs to use, or even a pro... there is a time and a place for burst.
.

You are thinking of a different camera. The K100D will do 3 RAW shots, then choke as it writes to the card. There is no "burst" with Pentax (except, I guess, the low-res 21 FPS with the K20D).

That is why some people say Pentax is not good for sports. At least fast sports. Lawn bowling might be OK.

[Canada_Rockies]

You are thinking of a different camera. The K100D will do 3 RAW shots, then choke as it writes to the card. There is no "burst" with Pentax (except, I guess, the low-res 21 FPS with the K20D).

That is why some people say Pentax is not good for sports. At least fast sports. Lawn bowling might be OK.

One does not need a high frame rate to take good sports pictures. One does need to know the sport well, study it, and learn where the peak action points are.

One needs to learn the lead time on the camera one is using. This is learned by taking pictures. Then one shoots for the peak action, allowing for the lead time of the camera. This will result in a surprisingly high rate of successful images, without the need to go through 20 images to find the good one.

I have taken quite a few photos of hockey and soccer, not to mention track and field, with an ancient first model Pentax. It had a lead time of about 1/4 second, and frame rate of 1 if I was in top shape and did not hit my eye while winding on. My printable success rate after a couple of months of practice was two out of 36 exposures on a roll. Success rate is defined as something the paper I shot for on the side would be happy to print.

Oh yeah, I was using a screw mount, preset aperture, 135mm f/3.5 lens.

[Gooshin]

One does not need a high frame rate to take good sports pictures. One does need to know the sport well, study it, and learn where the peak action points are.

One needs to learn the lead time on the camera one is using. This is learned by taking pictures. Then one shoots for the peak action, allowing for the lead time of the camera. This will result in a surprisingly high rate of successful images, without the need to go through 20 images to find the good one.

I have taken quite a few photos of hockey and soccer, not to mention track and field, with an ancient first model Pentax. It had a lead time of about 1/4 second, and frame rate of 1 if I was in top shape and did not hit my eye while winding on. My printable success rate after a couple of months of practice was two out of 36 exposures on a roll. Success rate is defined as something the paper I shot for on the side would be happy to print.

Oh yeah, I was using a screw mount, preset aperture, 135mm f/3.5 lens.

all that is irrelevant

because the guy with the burst shooting is going to get the shot, process it, and have it on his editors computer before you even get home to process your shot.

your 2 out of 36 success rate is no match to a 20 frames out of 1000 success rate, the % may be much less, but the other guy got 20 shots vs you.

at the end of the day, HE will get paid, and YOU wont.

[borno]

Wow, if I had to hit delete 980 times out of a thousand seeing a bunch of crummy shots I think I'd get a job selling shoes

[Gooshin]

Wow, if I had to hit delete 980 times out of a thousand seeing a bunch of crummy shots I think I'd get a job selling shoes

again irrelevant

with 8 gigabyte SD/FLash cards, memory does not matter

deleting in-camera is not necessary, you delete after the fact on a laptop/computer


come on guys, i'm tired of reading people say that you "dont need this or you dont need that"

ofcourse you dont "need it", but it certainly makes the job a heck of a lot easier.

[Canada_Rockies]

all that is irrelevant

because the guy with the burst shooting is going to get the shot, process it, and have it on his editors computer before you even get home to process your shot.

your 2 out of 36 success rate is no match to a 20 frames out of 1000 success rate, the % may be much less, but the other guy got 20 shots vs you.

at the end of the day, HE will get paid, and YOU wont.

I wish to point out that 2/36 was one half a soccer game or 1/3 a hockey game. The success rate at track and field is, of course, much higher. Did you miss the point that I was producing these images with a camera that did not even stop down to taking aperture by itself?

My success rate when up when I started using a KX with M 135/3.5 because the lens stopped down to taking aperture by itself. If went up again when I started using the SF-1 (built in winder, you know). The point I was trying (obviously unsuccessfully) was that it is more important to know the sport than have the latest high tech equipment.

[troywhite]

all that is irrelevant

at the end of the day, HE will get paid, and YOU wont.

Way to shoot someone down!! I'm beginning to see a pattern in your posting that I don't like. You really need to be less aggressive towards other posters.

If you have a fast lens on a K10D or K20D you are going to get ample pictures out of any sports session.

I believe Canada_rockies when he says that you can get sports shots without high FPS just by knowing the flow of the sport.

I don't believe any of the verbal diarrhea that you are posting.

come on guys, i'm tired of reading people say that you "dont need this or you dont need that"

Just like some of us are tired of people whinging and whining about "oooh it needs to be FF" or "ooooh it needs to be a machine gun".

Go out and take some photos!!

[Gooshin]

i take plenty of photos

and i'm not disagreeing that knowing the sport (or "photography" for that matter) can greatly aid in proper picture aquisiton.

but here we have engineers creating tools which make this act easier, fighting progress is silly.


i have "human ABS", perhaps one of the few people my age, i can drive a car devoid of modern tech as safely as anything new on the market today, does that mean everyone else should scoff at car manufactuers for creating safety features that ensure even the dumbest driver on the planet doesnt put his car into spin???

the technology is there, its not for everyone, but its there, and it SHOULD be used if the situation calls for it.

the last time i saw a serious post about people complaing about FPS was in the winter when rumors of the new pentax models were running around, and ti was made mostly by people who joined that same period and only had a handful of posts.

and i will not be less aggressive, suger coated humblings and hat tipping does nothing for straight forward discussion.

[troywhite]

and i will not be less aggressive, suger coated humblings and hat tipping does nothing for straight forward discussion.

There's nothing wrong with being aggressive, however there is a difference between arguing the topic and putting down another person.

Heck I often come across as an aggressive poster myself (especially in some other forums) but I'll never bluntly put down another poster.

Anyway..... I do agree with you that you should use the technology that is there for you to use rather than shun it. I don't think Canadian_rockies was trying to deter anyone from seeking out higher FPS, rather highlighting that you can work with what you have got.

[Russell-Evans]

all that is irrelevant
because the guy with the burst shooting is going to get the shot, process it, and have it on his editors computer before you even get home to process your shot.

your 2 out of 36 success rate is no match to a 20 frames out of 1000 success rate, the % may be much less, but the other guy got 20 shots vs you.

Last time I checked, Pentax didn't build or market a professional performance camera. In fact, Pentax goes to great lengths to define their cameras in another way.

I see complaining about Pentax cameras FPS rates about as pointless as getting on the quarter mile track in a minivan and complaining that the alcohol burning dragsters are kicking your butt. Duh, it's a minivan!

Thank you
Russell

[Gooshin]

Last time I checked, Pentax didn't build or market a professional performance camera. In fact, Pentax goes to great lengths to define their cameras in another way.

I see complaining about Pentax cameras FPS rates about as pointless as getting on the quarter mile track in a minivan and complaining that the alcohol burning dragsters are kicking your butt. Duh, it's a minivan!

Thank you
Russell

am i complaining about petnax FPS? where do you see me saying that i dont like my pentax because a lack of FPS? where? please, show.