[rfortson]

Okay, this really has nothing to do with the conversation, but I didn't want to create a new thread for this, especially as this isn't really a Pentax comment.

But... I just wanted to share some pictures I've taken. You can see them here.

All were taken with a Canon Rebel XT and a Casio Exilim point and shoot.

Why am I posting this stuff here where it doesn't belong?

Honestly, I just wanted to get a little feedback and also share some stuff with everyone since I've mostly just been asking a bunch of questions.

This is the first photography forum I've been to where I've had some good exchanges. I had a pretty bad experience on dpreview several years ago that turned me off from visiting any of these places for quite a while.

Anyway, if whoever patrols this place feels the need to delete this post, that's cool. Completely understand. Wasn't sure what the "rules" were for posting things from other cameras.

Well, seeing as how it's a Pentax forum, you might not get the feedback you're looking for. But in general, most people here are civil.

As for posting pictures, I'd put them in the gallery and ask for feedback. Just be prepared for the occasional comment that's Pentax-specific ("adjust the gnorton valve using custom mode 94"), but other than that, welcome aboard!

[johnsherwood]

Honestly, I just wanted to get a little feedback and also share some stuff with everyone since I've mostly just been asking a bunch of questions.

This is the first photography forum I've been to where I've had some good exchanges. I had a pretty bad experience on dpreview several years ago that turned me off from visiting any of these places for quite a while.

I agree.......I'm so NOT a forums/IM/facebook/twitter kind of person, but the exchanges here are tasteful, civil, informative and passionate.........and of course Pentaxtastic!!

Okay, sorry about that one........way funnier in my head!

John

[WheresWaldo]

Okay, this really has nothing to do with the conversation, but I didn't want to create a new thread for this, especially as this isn't really a Pentax comment.

But... I just wanted to share some pictures I've taken. You can see them here. Not the best stuff I've taken - I don't have a lot of my pictures any more (poor system for keeping photos).

All were taken with a Canon Rebel XT and a Casio Exilim point and shoot.

Why am I posting this stuff here where it doesn't belong?

Honestly, I just wanted to get a little feedback and also share some stuff with everyone since I've mostly just been asking a bunch of questions.

Honest feedback, many of the Canon shots are overexposed, especially the swimmer, grieving family and the snow dog, although the snow scene would be hard for any camera to expose properly, typical Canon. Love the composition on the swimmer. Watch the framing on some of your shots, Trinity had the top of the close balloon cut off, otherwise sharp.

I am no expert photographer either and I also use a Casio as a casual P&S. You did ask.

[Marc Sabatella]

I agree with Russ that if you're looking to just get general feedback on your pictures, there's probably better palces on this site than this specific forum. I don't think you'll see many people copping an attitude of "hey, that's not Pentax!" - it's not like we're worried about hordes of Canon shooters coming here and flooding the forums.

I'll restrict my comments here to just one kind of on-topic remark: the shot of the swimmer is a classic example of why people say Pentax underexposes. No way would a Pentax camera have chosen that exposure. I totally understand *why* Pentax would have chosen a darker exposure (protect all those highlights on the white markers, also aim for an overall average of a little darker than 18% gray like the textbooks say). And I also totally understand why most people (myself included) would nevertheless *prefer* the exposure you got (blown highlights and all). In Pentax-land, you simply expect to need exposure compensation to get that shot, and you learn when and how to do that.

[ EDIT: my post and WheresWaldo's above crossed, so I didn't see his comments before writing mine. Interesting that we both zeroed in on the swimmer! I like the shot, and the exposure. There's no denying the highlights are blown, but who cared about those particular highlights anyhow. The Funeral shot, though, is indeed just plain overexposed - the blown highlights in the face are more potentially bothersome. Unless that was specifically the effect you were going for. It looks from the EXIF to have had exposure compensation applied, which could explain *why* it was overexposed - and that's why I didn't mention that one. Although I'm not sure what "0/2" indicates regarding the exposure compensation. Similar story on the Snow Dog - it looks like maybe it was *deliberately* exposed by "0/2" (whatever that means). Here, I like the overall exposure in terms of the figures, but do wish that the highlights in the snow had been recovered in PP - or, if impossible, that the shot were taken at a lower exposure and then had the shadow levels brought up to get the same effect. ]

---

Last edited by Marc Sabatella; 02-05-2009 at 08:32 PM.

[Edward B.]

Just wanted to say thanks to everyone again for their input.

I ordered a K200D, charger, 4 gig card, and two sets of Eneloops.

Biggest reasons for choosing the 200D over the XSi.

1) Build quality and ergonomics. The day I placed the order, I went to my local Wal-Mart to try out the XSi one more time. It still felt small and a little uncomfortable in my hand. Like I said, I do shoot with the first generation Rebel for work. I don't know if I just got use to it while working or if it was slightly different or what. In any case, the 200D just felt better in my hands.

2) Batteries. Maybe this is stupid, but I like the AA batteries that one review labeled "arcane" power. My girlfriend pointed out that it would be an unlikely scenario where I wouldn't be able to charge a battery for the XSi, but I still like the feeling that I can pick up some AA's just about anywhere if I need to.

3) Picture quality. I looked for pics from both cameras. Although I found less interesting photographs taken by the 200D, I believe this is due to the proliferation of the XSi. In actual image quality, I found no noticeable difference.***

4) I spent 15-20 minutes talking with two photographers at two different camera shops about both cameras. I was already leaning toward the 200D, but I didn't tell either one, I just asked for their opinions. Both recommended the Pentax over the XSi. One shoots primarily Nikon but has used Canon and Pentax in the past. The other was the owner of a camera repair shop. He complained about Pentax withdrawing their equipment from his shop because he didn't order $100,000 worth of merchandise a year from them, but he still said he'd pick the 200D over the XSi if he didn't have any equipment already. And he shoots primarily with Canon. I know, I know, opinions are just opinions, but it made me feel better about my decision even if that makes me stupid.

I only have one big concern remaining with my purchase:

1) Autofocus. I hope this camera can do what I'd like it to for action sports. If I wanted to take action shots, I shouldn't have gotten the 200D, right? Well, I scoured the Internet and found lots of people who complained about the lackluster autofocus, but I also found people who said it worked adequately and both of the photographers I spoke to said the AF was adequate for what I'd like to do.

I was a little worried because I could find no great action shots taken with the 200D.

If the 200D is capable of regularly producing shots like these (which were taken with an XSi) I'll be satisfied.

[unkabin]

Just don't expect miracles from the autofocus. Also, you can expect to improve as you learn the camera's tendencies. I shot for three months with a Canon 40D, and although the autofocus may have been a fraction faster, and I was shooting 6 frames per second, I still had a hell of a time getting sharps shots of my dog fetching in the back yard. The upside of digital in this case--no film processing costs. Swing away. Shooting a game from the sidelines, however, is much less demanding than a dog running toward the lens.

[unkabin]

Oh, and congratulations on the new Pentax

[alderfall]

I concur. Good choice. I shoot football (soccer) at a local college. My K200D has come since the season ended but I am looking forward to trying it next season.

One thing I might suggest to you is this. The auto focus issue will most likely be quite secondary to this issue:

Small buffer for taking shots

I see this as a bigger concern for a sports action photographer. What this means is that you may have to be a bit more selective and attentive to what is going on. You won't be able to just push the shutter button down endlessly. I personally don't see this as a real problem for myself as I love composing shots and I think ahead of the action. I may not get every available frame, but I do pretty well.

Oh, and congratulations on the new Pentax

[lostkj233]

The XSi, and most under $1,000 Canon cameras I have found, shoot very soft photos. I find them so soft that my stomach turns. ...

I think you need a new monitor, or thicker glasses. Lenses make the pics soft, not the sensor!!!

Heres a few straight out of the camera jpeg's from my $300 XTi and $130 50mm mk I, the first two have been cropped 50%






Heres a crop of the focus point, the pen tip

[redpigeons]

but he still said he'd pick the 200D over the XSi if he didn't have any equipment already. And he shoots primarily with Canon.

first congratulation!

now about that guy... PENTAX!! give us lenses that we can keep!!!
I want in ten years to say I am getting Pentax BC I have all these amazing Pentax lenses and not I have all this DA lenses that no one can use. I want to shoot Pentax for a long time... think about that every time I am buying a lens that will last you are keeping a costumer for the next years

[alderfall]

I think you need a new monitor, or thicker glasses. Lenses make the pics soft, not the sensor!!!

Although it is true that a lens is highly influential in the softness of an image, depending on the strengths and weaknesses at what apertures. However, it would be foolhardy to contend that a sensor itself or in camera processing of any kind would not also prove to be a culprit.

Also, notice I used the word "most" and not all Canons under $1,000 (this would include all Canon models in this price range).

As with most things, there is no person with perfect eyesight and I am sure some people would be superior at judging sharpness. However, I have had enough experience with photography and sharing images with folks in various formats to know when the general consensus indicates a camera setup(s) does not provide a sharp or clear image.

My personal experience with Canon setups in this price range do not allow for the kind of sharpness I, or my customers, demand considering the kind of shooting I do.

Some folks may shoot with the right glass, or with certain settings that allow them the flexibility needed but I could not find that magic setup and many of my customers also agreed with that assessment.



YMMV...

[chhayanat]

.... The auto focus issue will most likely be quite secondary to this issue:Small buffer for taking shots....You won't be able to just push the shutter button down endlessly.

A quick clarification please. In a real life situation, what does the photographer do after exhausting the buffer of the k200d with a four frame burst of an African Fish Eagle? How long is the wait before the camera recyles, and another similar burst is possible? Haven't seen anything explaining this.

[alderfall]

A quick clarification please. In a real life situation, what does the photographer do after exhausting the buffer of the k200d with a four frame burst of an African Fish Eagle? How long is the wait before the camera recyles, and another similar burst is possible? Haven't seen anything explaining this.

Excellent image there. I am a serious birder and love to see any bird photos I can see. Thanks for showing that one off.

I just did a real world test with an assistant here. I was able to get 9 shots in 5 seconds on an object moving both right and left and forward/backward in JPEG sports mode.

In RAW, we got 8 in the same time frame.

Hope that gives you a good idea.

Jason

[Canada_Rockies]

I know I'm in the minority here, but I have yet to set burst mode on my cameras, except as an experiment. I was taught by a newspaper that I worked for as an accountant to take sports photos because my kids were very competitive sports people. I was using an original Pentax, the 1957 model, complete with two shutter speed dials and preset aperture lenses. I used a 135/3.5 Takumar (not super, smc, even) and took a roll of film each half. After three months I got a photo that they actually published.

I shoot to hit the peak action. Period. I practise with my camera to find the delay from pressing the shutter to the actual image, and manage to get more often than not the baseball/football/soccer ball/hockey puck in close proximity to the player.

The trick is to know the sport reasonably well, and to know the camera very well. After that it is only practise.

I use the same technique for birding.

[lostkj233]

I could not find that magic setup and many of my customers also agreed with that assessment.

You didn't look very hard. Any sub $1000 Canon such as the XT, XTi, XS or XSi with Canon L or EF glass will get you sharp pics. You also have third party lenses such as the Sigma 17-70 and Tamron's 24-70mm 2.8's.

I get sharper jpeg pics with my XTI and Sigma 18-125mm OS/HSM than I ever did with my K10d and Pentax glass. Maybe I'll take a few raw shots tomorrow and post some really sharp pics with the ole 50mm. You can't beat Canon when it comes to sharp images!!! But then again Pentax's FA 50mm 1.4 isn't to shabby either.