[rfortson]

"I am not sure where anyone got the idea that I was comparing my 18-250 with her 30mm 1.4"

ok, so I'm still confused
She didn't shoot cheerleading w/ the D90? Or if she did, she didn't use the 30/1.4? Or did she use something else?
Head hurts...

Yeah, that's why I suggest she go ahead and try the D90. I think her mind is made up subconsciously, and she wants the D90. I've been there, and until I "scratch that itch", it's always going to bug me. Now, the "itch" can be wrong, or it can be right, but only time will tell.

Personally, I think her current system can work, assuming she gets the proper lenses, and is willing to try a little (not a lot) post processing. On the plus side of switching, though, she can use her friend's Sigma lens (and others). It's always nice to have someone to share equipment with.

[lapeen]

Okay now I get where you are coming from. My carry around kit consists of 18-250, FA50 1.4 and my AF360 flash. Is flash photography out of the question for you? One of the higher powered flash might get you enough light to use your current setup. Otherwise the best-in-class fast zoom to look at is the DA*50-135.

We have the same exact kit! Flash photography is not out of the question, but I did give it a shot at a couple games and the results were NOT good, IMO. Bright in the front and way dark in the back, red eyes... also I worry about distracting the kids and annoying those around me.




But I will say that I haven't really learned the flash ins and outs, because I don't really the looks of a flashed photo.

I should say I have 'an' answer.
And it is something I now wish I had done. I stuggled between the K20 upgrade or the D90 with its better AF and Flash system + the bonus Shallow DOF video... but like you I had money in lenses and I love the inexpensive old glass you can get for the pentax... and other than the known limits of the K100d I really enjoy the camera, so I ended up with the K20.

I now wish I had done it differently... I really like the K20 and sensor wise it is a real upgrade to the K100d (cropping ability is amazing)... but the issues I had with the K100 are still there with the K20... The ability to track a moving kid is still not up to the nikon. The Pttl flash system is... well inconsistant at best.

What I wish I would have done is to keep my K100d for my schnaportraits shots of the kids and for using all the old glass in the ways I love using it. Then commited to the Nikon D90 for what I want it to do... action shots of the kids and consistent flash shots . Plus those really fun "hollywood" shallow DOF video shots.

My kids are just going to get bigger and faster... I should have commited to that concept. And kept the pentax for the other side of this hobby.

That is what I would advise you to attempt if at all possible.
good luck

[Emotive45]

I know several folks who shoot with the Nikon 18-200 and are confused about why they can't take decent low-light shots and all of their images show a weird pattern of barrel distortion.

I suggest researching the longer, fast aperture lenses available in Pentax mount. It's not the camera.

The problem is I think that when your taking a variety of different shots and moving around and need close-up or full length shot in a studio in a portrait session, you need to be moving yourself, not the model and to do that you need a lens that can give you different focal lengths. I'd imagine it is the same for sports photography also. Trying to change a lens in those situations, you miss opportunities. I have always worked with my 50-200mm lens when doing portraiture for the above reason. Unless I was going into a shoot where I knew I was just looking for head shots or full length shots, I would not use a fix lens. Can't keep customers waiting whilst you mess about changing lenses and time is money.

[raider]

I personally would wait until PMA when Pentax reveal the next series of DSLRs and then wait for feedbacks and comments from fellow pentaxians before making this move right now. Maybe u should consider waiting for a short while.

[mike.hiran]

I am talking about different situations. The FA35 I think would be wonderful for our evening get-togethers and dinners out... always very low light... always a challenge with my camera w/ my 50mm 1.4.

The Cheerleading thing is a whole other ball o' wax THAT is where I will be needing to "plunk down a lotta cash" for a 2.8 zoom at some point.

well there's someone in the marketplace w/ a sigma 28-70 f2.8 for 250 https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographers-marketplace/51264-sigma-28-70mm-2-8-ex.html... it's from a new member though, so that person doesn't have a lot of history; you may want to wait for another opportunity. Personally, I find this focal length zoom great for indoor house events; it's wide enough for across the table shots, but has the ability to get the shots from less than 20 feet. So if you use the lens at f3.5 to get a little more sharpness, you can bump your shutter speed up to 1/180th w/ the same exposure to help freeze motion more. And if you also bump your ISO up one more notch, you can get even faster shutter speeds.

One other thing, I have found my focusing accuracy improves in lower light if I keep the camera on spot focusing and keep the focus indicator on a contrasty part of the image like on a line on a uniform or a hairline. Try not to point the camera's focus point at an area of solid color...

But honestly, when it comes to cheerleading, wrestling, or other events where people are generally staying at a constant distance, manual focus gives you the ability to shoot exactly when you want without delay or possible hunting. You no longer have to focus on a contrasty area either, just frame the shot and shoot. You'll still get a focus confirmation light, but your camera will shoot immediately no matter what. It does take some practice... but it doesn't take much time to get it down. Just know that the more you do it, the better you'll get. Maybe get the viewfinder magnifier or a split prism focus screen... both options cost around $30 bucks but I've installed both and have found manual focusing much easier.

[joele]

OK, well I have a D90, for shame I know.. Pentax hurry up and release that DA15 and DA30 I want...

anyway...

It really depends on your prioirties, the D90 and K20d are both great cameras and you can read the reviews to see their individual strengths and weaknesses.. And I think many in this thread have covered that.. I also find the flash system really amazing with Nikon...

Lenses: This is also an important area and it depends what you want?

- Nikon has a huge assortment of kit lenses, lol, much to the dismay of many Nikon users, but there is a lot of choice there.

- The Nikon 18-200 is one of the better (best?) super zooms, but you pay for it.

- Pentax has a much better range of wide to short tele AF prime lenses.. The new Nikon 35/1.8 when it arrives, may help, but their 20mm, 24mm, 28mm are all poor so they have nothing like the diminutive 21mm Ltd.. Their 35/2 doesn't compare to the 31ltd let alone even the FA35/2... The 85/1.8 is nice IMO but kinda solitary except when you jump up over $1,000 to the 85/1.4, 105/2 and 135/2... Lucky I prefer the voigtlanders, though no stabalization with them on F mount unlike on K mount.

- VR is usefull on very long lenses especially the high end telephotos like the 200/2, 200-400/4, 300/2.8 and 400/2.8 etc but for wide to normal ranges I think in body SR works better. Maybe thats just me?

- Nikon's non-VR mid range tele lenses seem neglected the Nikon 180/2.8 is a very old model and isn't as good IMO as the DA200/2.8.. But if you have a lot of money and want those super expensive telephotos then you have little choice..

- If you want 3rd party than Nikon and Canon both get faster releases and more models, one I really wanted for Pentax (and got for Nikon) was the Sigma 150/2.8 macro (still not available for Pentax).

- With Pentax all those primes and 3rd party lenses will be stabilised, Nikon only has one stabalised prime under 200mm being their 105VR macro, which is kinda silly as VR doesn't work at macro distances..

Another alternative is a used 80-200/2.8 in the Nikon world...fairly cheap...you can get one for $600 (wayyy cheaper than you can find a Pentax FA*80-200). It's screw drive, and not nearly as fast as the 70-200/2.8 but fast enough.

Be careful with that one many people (including me) found it could not take sharp shots at close focus distances (near its limit), I complained to Nikon and they refunded me in full (known problem apparently).. But for anything about 1m above its near focus limit it was super sharp and fast for a screw drive lens...

---

Last edited by joele; 02-23-2009 at 01:41 AM.

[denisv]

Well, or he could, you know, get the Sigma 30/1.4 in Pentax mount if he likes that lens. Though I think it's HSM/SDM only so if I recall correctly it won't AF on a K100D body...

It's not HSM, unfortunately. Sigma took it out for the Pentax mount. It costs the same as the HSM version for other mounts though, ha ha!

Regardless, it's an awesome lens. It doesn't leave my K20D.

[Ben_Edict]

I have no comparison. She just got the d90 and cheering is over. I have only used my 18-250 at cheering competitions so far. (This is the first year she decided to cheer, before this she only played field hockey and outdoors I have been nothing but happy with my camera and lenses)

Sorry, but if you use a 18-250 super-zoom for shooting indoor sports, you are bound to lose out, whether on a Pentax or a Nikon. Also, your White Balance is off, which makes the images dull and unpleasant to look at.

First, I think you are comparing apples and pears: The K100D is an old, outdated camera, the D90 is brand new and in a different price class. If it would not perform much better, Nikon hadn't make their homework.

Event he K20 is now more than a year old and bound to be somewhat lacking in certain areas (video), where the D90 should have more or better developed features. If you buy the D90 now, you will look back to Pentax in half a year, when the next generation Pentax body is on the shelves.

My suggestion would be: buy faster lenses. Thena you will achieve improved images, because your zoom is completely inadequate for the high expectations you seem to have. Whether these fast lenses are mounted on a Pentax or Nikon body is only secondary. And these fast lenses will cost you much more in Nikon mount, especially as you want the VR versions for indoor use, whereas the SR is a camera feature with Pentax.

If you look at a current Pentax model, you will also find, that high ISO performance has been very visibly improved and I shoot ISO 800 with the K20 and the new K-m (which I gave my partner for a christmas present, but obviously I have a chance to try it every now and then) any time and am very happy with ISO 1000 - 1600 on the K20.

I usually do not shoot sports, but I am following the progress our little son makes. Yesterday he started to ride on his bicycle and also he had a riding class in the afternoon - both activities with a lot of movement. I used the K20 with a Sigma 70-200/2.8 and a 50-500 and the K-m with a Tamron 18-200 and was surprised by the performance of both cameras - that is, positively surprised!

Even for head-on movement of our son on hise bike the tiny K-m could follow him easily and got about 90+% of the shots sharp. I usually use the K20 only with center AF, but for this occasion I switched the camera to autmatic AF selection andit performed superbly in AF-C mode - much better than I ever expected and much better, than many critics report.

I don't want to talk you away from switching to Nikon. I am just not sure, that a simple exchange of cameras will improve anything for you, especially as you have been satisfied with the K100 in other circumstances. If you switch, you need fast glass, better suited for the purpose, too.

Ben

[MrApollinax]

We have the same exact kit! Flash photography is not out of the question, but I did give it a shot at a couple games and the results were NOT good, IMO. Bright in the front and way dark in the back, red eyes... also I worry about distracting the kids and annoying those around me.




But I will say that I haven't really learned the flash ins and outs, because I don't really the looks of a flashed photo.

Flash is something I am still working on right now as well. However it just seems that your flash/camera setup just doesn't get enough light towards the back of the formation. Looking at that picture your ISO is 800. I have found that even 1600 can produce very nice pictures with the K100D so you might want to try setting the ISO to 1600. You have already found what I know about the 18-250; with plenty of light it is a great performer. when it starts to drop off you will see the short comings of the megazoom. Looking at all your cheer pictures I see that you will range in the 18-55 focal lengths. So you might want to consider a tamron or sigma 17-70 f/2.8. For your cheer pictures for as close as you get this seems to be the sweet spot for you. Outdoors your 18-250 works great since you aren't allowed too close to the action like with field hockey and you have plenty of light to work with. You may still want to try to work out how to use your flash because it will freeze action for you and limit the motion blur you have in your pictures.

[rparmar]

Nervemind all the technical advantages of one lens over another or one body over another. This is what it's really all about:

I will also get to feel like everyone else on my Visual Imaging degree and blend in with the other guys instead of being the only one with a Pentax. It's a bit of a standing joke at the moment and I don't feel professional. Images are no less quality, but somehow I feel left out when they're all raving about their kits etc.

It's an emotional response. You feel left out, not part of the club. I suggest you buy the Nikon and feel better about yourself. This will help you take better photos as much as a new lens. Given that all camera systems can take a "professional" picture, there are no technical barriers to you using Sony, Nikon, Canon, Pentax, whatever. So go with what feels right. The factor of social inclusion is obviously important and should not be ruled out. Also, you will get to share lenses etc. with other people around you.

Me, I'm the opposite. I like being the odd one out. The one with no car, no TV and a Pentax camera.

[Ben_Edict]

Nervemind all the technical advantages of one lens over another or one body over another. This is what it's really all about:



It's an emotional response. You feel left out, not part of the club. I suggest you buy the Nikon and feel better about yourself. This will help you take better photos as much as a new lens. Given that all camera systems can take a "professional" picture, there are no technical barriers to you using Sony, Nikon, Canon, Pentax, whatever. So go with what feels right. The factor of social inclusion is obviously important and should not be ruled out. Also, you will get to share lenses etc. with other people around you.

Me, I'm the opposite. I like being the odd one out. The one with no car, no TV and a Pentax camera.

I can understand this emotional factor. There is also the reported perception, that Pentax is not taken seriously by other pros. I cannot testify to that, but I don't shoot sports. But whenever I am with other pros, they give my Pentax equipment more than just an interested look and we often (if time permits) get into some gear talk. Sometimes people are impressed by the build quality, but usually they are just as tied to their system as I am, because you have many expensive lenses - and that is what counts more, than the body. You are completely right: any decent DSLR delivers high quality images.

I think the pro factors you need to take into account, to be taken seriously with your Pentax:

• at least the K 10 and K20 are much louder, than Nikon and, what's that other brand, cannon? - the acoustic noise level is really impressive!
• with the battery grip and my additional massive QR plate underneath plus handgrip it looks quite as big as a D3 or 1MKIII, that's also very important.
• my bags look heavily used, never take a new camera bag with you - also very important
• ofcourse the bag (a big one) needs to be filled with lenses. It is not important to actually use them, but they need to be visible to others.

Ben

[Erik]

I think the pro factors you need to take into account, to be taken seriously with your Pentax:

• at least the K 10 and K20 are much louder, than Nikon and, what's that other brand, cannon? - the acoustic noise level is really impressive!
• with the battery grip and my additional massive QR plate underneath plus handgrip it looks quite as big as a D3 or 1MKIII, that's also very important.
• my bags look heavily used, never take a new camera bag with you - also very important
• ofcourse the bag (a big one) needs to be filled with lenses. It is not important to actually use them, but they need to be visible to others.

You forgot something:



Wear it always, preferably backwards. Noone will ever question your pro status again.

[kenyee]

I think the pro factors you need to take into account, to be taken seriously with your Pentax:

• at least the K 10 and K20 are much louder, than Nikon and, what's that other brand, cannon? - the acoustic noise level is really impressive!
• with the battery grip and my additional massive QR plate underneath plus handgrip it looks quite as big as a D3 or 1MKIII, that's also very important.
• my bags look heavily used, never take a new camera bag with you - also very important
• ofcourse the bag (a big one) needs to be filled with lenses. It is not important to actually use them, but they need to be visible to others.

LOL. This is classic!
You forgot: - always use a big lens hood on the biggest lens you have.
My K20D looked so small compared to the Nikon D700 w/ BG and 24-70 lens (hood on, of course) at the Canon meetup I attended. It dwarfed nearly everything the Canon users had but the guy was big enough that it didn't hurt his back

[Mister Guy]

LOL. This is classic!
You forgot: - always use a big lens hood on the biggest lens you have.
My K20D looked so small compared to the Nikon D700 w/ BG and 24-70 lens (hood on, of course) at the Canon meetup I attended. It dwarfed nearly everything the Canon users had but the guy was big enough that it didn't hurt his back

I was shooting some fashion work in a bar with two other photographers a few weeks ago. I'd already finished and packed up most of my stuff, but one of the other guys was late and still getting a few more shots in. Since I'd already put my lights away, I was shooting off the modeling lights in his softbox and the neon lights on bar signs. I had to crank the ISO way up and put my 50mm f/1.7 wide open to get enough life, and it was still challenging to hand hold at those shutter speeds.

When one of the professional guys saw me put my camera down, he immediately started in with, "Ha, what is that, a little baby camera? That combination is so TINY!". Shortly after browsing my pictures it was more like, "How'd you do that with such a tiny lens"