Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-22-2006, 04:16 PM   #1
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,515
Indoor shots no flash hand held?

for average indoor lighting, how much do you need a flash?
I know this is a general question, but if (with the k10) I can take most of my shots without a bigger flash, I am not sure if it is a good purchase. might need to get another glass instead
would I have to be in high ISO all the time to get indoors hand held without the flash?


any direction much appreciated

11-22-2006, 04:45 PM   #2
Senior Member
jsundin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 276
Slipchuck, I think if you want the best quality, indoor, non-flash shots, then you will be best served with a fast lens, such as a 50mm or 28mm lens. With these, you can get in the 1.4 - 2.8 range of f stops, greatly decreasing your need to bump up the ISO too much. You can get M versions of these very inexpensively. Good luck finding the AF versions these days, but they are in the $200 (US) range once you find them.

Otherwise, you can use the kit lens and bump up the ISO and do rather well. I took a lot of concert shots at high ISO and f6.3 out of necessity, since I don't own any fast telephoto lenses. They turned out nicely.

Hope that helps.

Jeff
11-22-2006, 05:22 PM   #3
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,515
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jsundin Quote
Slipchuck, I think if you want the best quality, indoor, non-flash shots, then you will be best served with a fast lens, such as a 50mm or 28mm lens. With these, you can get in the 1.4 - 2.8 range of f stops, greatly decreasing your need to bump up the ISO too much. You can get M versions of these very inexpensively. Good luck finding the AF versions these days, but they are in the $200 (US) range once you find them.

Otherwise, you can use the kit lens and bump up the ISO and do rather well. I took a lot of concert shots at high ISO and f6.3 out of necessity, since I don't own any fast telephoto lenses. They turned out nicely.

Hope that helps.

Jeff
how well do you think the pentax 16-45 do in such conditions?
I was thinking about getting this and a tamron 90mm macro.....but boy would I be stretching my pocket book.

ps I am trying to get my girlfriend to get the k100 with the flash so I can get the 2 lenses
11-23-2006, 12:01 AM   #4
Senior Member
jsundin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 276
I cannot say, as I just have the starter collection of lenses. I have the 50mm 17 and the 28mm 2.8 M lenses and have used them mainly outside for now. I was able to use a 135mm 2.5 indoors at a swimming pool with good success, and shot some water polo shots with the 50mm. I was just fooling around with those, so they are nothing spectacular.

Maybe someone else can chime in. Or, post a new thread asking about the 16-45 as an indoor lens. I have heard it is a nice one.

Jeff

11-23-2006, 09:58 AM   #5
Ole
Administrator
Ole's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,783
no flash

Indoor shots without flash are often more pleasing. Flash shots can get somewhat harsh. Of course, on the positive, a flash would help freeze action.

I took this when I just got the *istD and with my only autofocus lens at the time, 28-90/3.5-5.6, set at f/4. ISO 1600, no flash.

Karate

I do have an external flash. I usually leave it at home and carry an extra lens instead. I have found the built-in flash quite adequate for the traditional shots of "people at a table", or as fill-in flash.
11-23-2006, 03:48 PM   #6
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 198
Thanks, I'm off to basketball tomorrow and I hope to use the advice given here.

Will let you know.

Cheers
11-23-2006, 07:29 PM   #7
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,767
Get a flash!!

I think you would appreciate the benefits of a good flash. I have a Promaster 5750DX Pttl and it is very useful , in particular on macro shots. You can get this for about 1/2 the price of the Pentax 540, and while I won't argue that it is as good as the Pentax, it is plenty adequate for my needs. Flash gives you a lot better range and avoids high ISO settings. The little 2nd flash on the Promaster is great for macro use where you don't want to blow out the highlights.
12-01-2006, 02:51 PM   #8
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 230
I tend to agree with Rupert's heading - get a flash. I however would be more inclined to get your lenses and then get your flash via your girlfriend and if that doesn't work sell her car get a flash and give whatever is left over. Seriously I would try the 16-45 in your application and see if you can use it in conjunction with your pop-up. I have the Pentax 540 and for some of my 'average indoor lighting' I find I don't always mount it. I guess if you define your indoor average shooting it might help. If it is indoor average lighting but subject is 30' away well the pop-up won't do and you would be closing on the max distance of the 360 (as I recall or have I mixed that up, and that is the max of my 540?).

12-01-2006, 05:53 PM   #9
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,515
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jnorth Quote
I tend to agree with Rupert's heading - get a flash. I however would be more inclined to get your lenses and then get your flash via your girlfriend and if that doesn't work sell her car get a flash and give whatever is left over. Seriously I would try the 16-45 in your application and see if you can use it in conjunction with your pop-up. I have the Pentax 540 and for some of my 'average indoor lighting' I find I don't always mount it. I guess if you define your indoor average shooting it might help. If it is indoor average lighting but subject is 30' away well the pop-up won't do and you would be closing on the max distance of the 360 (as I recall or have I mixed that up, and that is the max of my 540?).
I can see your point, but I forgot one thing in the mix..... I would have to give up the flash and the grip too......
boy that grip makes a lot of sense when you turn the camera sideways.... and looks comfortable too!

I still have a bit of time to talk to her about it, but at this point she sees the pop up flash on the k100 good enough.

thanks for the advise, will be taken well into consideration

cheers

randy
12-01-2006, 06:18 PM   #10
WRB
Forum Member
WRB's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 80
I also would lean to the lenses and wait for the flash..
12-01-2006, 06:33 PM   #11
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 3
Unless your house is extremely well lit compared to mine or most I've been in, you will struggle to get anything above 1/50 at ISO 1600 at 1.8-2.8.

What may look bright to the eye is really pretty dark to the camera.

I can turn on all the lights in my living room/kitchen/dining area, plus the big screen TV and at F2 ISO 1600 I'm looking at 1/20 t0 1/60 or so depending on where in the room I am.

I would get the flash unless you have a LOT of light or no one actually moves
12-01-2006, 08:29 PM   #12
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,515
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by iL Medico Quote
Unless your house is extremely well lit compared to mine or most I've been in, you will struggle to get anything above 1/50 at ISO 1600 at 1.8-2.8.

What may look bright to the eye is really pretty dark to the camera.

I can turn on all the lights in my living room/kitchen/dining area, plus the big screen TV and at F2 ISO 1600 I'm looking at 1/20 t0 1/60 or so depending on where in the room I am.

I would get the flash unless you have a LOT of light or no one actually moves
we are not to bright (no pun intended ) here either. I am going to try to avoid 1600 iso if I can.
thanks for the tip

randy
12-01-2006, 08:55 PM   #13
Veteran Member
vievetrick's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Easthampton - Massachusetts - USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,175
QuoteOriginally posted by RussellW Quote
Thanks, I'm off to basketball tomorrow and I hope to use the advice given here.

Will let you know.

Cheers

Russsell low light I am sure you got with Bball - how did it go?
12-01-2006, 10:42 PM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 230
QuoteOriginally posted by iL Medico Quote
Unless your house is extremely well lit compared to mine or most I've been in, you will struggle to get anything above 1/50 at ISO 1600 at 1.8-2.8.

What may look bright to the eye is really pretty dark to the camera.

I can turn on all the lights in my living room/kitchen/dining area, plus the big screen TV and at F2 ISO 1600 I'm looking at 1/20 t0 1/60 or so depending on where in the room I am.

I would get the flash unless you have a LOT of light or no one actually moves
Yeah but you can also hit the little button to pop-up the onboard flash and get a person or two in the average living room/kitchen/dining area.

If you are just trying to catch one or two faces in an average room the pop-up flash will likely have enough power to make it across the 'average' house's room. If it is supposed to be a group across a larger room or a portrait or some serious work you may find that the pop-up is too limiting. If it is an average indoor lighting of the average elementary school gym or high school gym you should be able to get the shutter times above at 5.6 and maybe if you are lucky at 800 ISO, but still too slow for basketball. Now if it was an average college or better gym you will likely find even better lighting but still minimal for a camera especially for action and too much distance to cover with the pop-up.

What good is a body, a grip, a flash but no glass? If it were in my gear bag I'd say it was a back-up but if you don't have a primary pakage complete with glass...

But I think if you think of what type of pictures you want to be capturing you will be the best person to decide the order of aquisition.

My first Pentax system, a Super Program, in order, over about a week was the body, 50, 28, AF200T (or some such small Pentax flash), and 70-210. The system continued to grow at a slower rate but included a much better flash down the road. That first flash was the closest thing to a pop-up back then and it worked well in average indoor lite rooms, until my needs required something better.

Last edited by jnorth; 12-01-2006 at 10:49 PM.
12-02-2006, 07:15 AM   #15
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,515
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jnorth Quote
Yeah but you can also hit the little button to pop-up the onboard flash and get a person or two in the average living room/kitchen/dining area.

If you are just trying to catch one or two faces in an average room the pop-up flash will likely have enough power to make it across the 'average' house's room. If it is supposed to be a group across a larger room or a portrait or some serious work you may find that the pop-up is too limiting. If it is an average indoor lighting of the average elementary school gym or high school gym you should be able to get the shutter times above at 5.6 and maybe if you are lucky at 800 ISO, but still too slow for basketball. Now if it was an average college or better gym you will likely find even better lighting but still minimal for a camera especially for action and too much distance to cover with the pop-up.

What good is a body, a grip, a flash but no glass? If it were in my gear bag I'd say it was a back-up but if you don't have a primary pakage complete with glass...

But I think if you think of what type of pictures you want to be capturing you will be the best person to decide the order of aquisition.

My first Pentax system, a Super Program, in order, over about a week was the body, 50, 28, AF200T (or some such small Pentax flash), and 70-210. The system continued to grow at a slower rate but included a much better flash down the road. That first flash was the closest thing to a pop-up back then and it worked well in average indoor lite rooms, until my needs required something better.
thanks for the info, Inorth

I don't know if I mentioned it here, but yes I would be getting glass too....the sigma 17-70mm. do you consider this lens a "good" glass?

thanks
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, flash, hand, photography, shots
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone calibrate a hand-held meter? Wombat Pentax Film SLR Discussion 4 11-06-2010 06:09 AM
Thematic Winner & top picks--hand held photo contest charliezap Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 6 07-15-2010 03:55 AM
Thematic Hand held shootout-with prize charliezap Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 66 07-15-2010 02:29 AM
67 -vs- 645N hand held Matus Pentax Medium Format 2 06-03-2010 04:46 PM
Hand held flash jmbradd Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 3 06-09-2009 03:14 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:45 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top