|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
01-16-2011, 07:56 AM
|
| |
I have two bodies (K20 & K100DS).
I shoot sports with the K20 so I keep a Tamron 200 on it all the time. It shoots sharp images.
My K100 is my daily all around camera. I alternate between a few lenses. It always shoots sharp images.
I have a Sigma 20-40 f/2.8 that I use when I need a fast wide lens. It is a good lens and has always shot well on the K100.
The last couple of times I have used it on the K20 the images just aren't sharp.
The lens moves, so the AF is working. It seems to try and focus.
This is the only combination that seems to produce OOF images.
As my K100 gets older it will probably get retired and the K20 will move down and make room for a new body. So having all my lenses work well is important.
Is there something obvious that I am missing?
I have not tried to adjust the focus on the K20. Does it link to just one lens or affect all lenses?
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
12-14-2009, 10:11 AM
|
| |
It would have to be head and shoulders above my K20 at higher ISO's to be real usable for decent sized prints. I have been only marginally happy with the K20's performance in the upper ISO range. (hence the thread that I started last week).
The f/2.8 also gives you a very good DOF for those great sports bokeh shots. You need those to isolate the subject at times, especially when the BG is not appealing in the first place.
And at some places you just don't have enough light during evening games to shoot with a slower lens.
The problem with getting a camera is that is the cheapest thing you will buy... then comes the lenses... then you realize that you need this or that lens and you spend more... and looking back the camera was a cheap "starter drug"...
About the size of the new bodies, I actually like the larger size of the K20. Not that the *ist or K100 was uncomfortable... but I do prefer the bigger grip. I bought a battery grip for my film *ist because it was so tiny. (that was a nice camera!)
There are plenty of ways to work around all the problems... the bad thing is that most take money... and the best ways take the most....
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
12-14-2009, 08:53 AM
|
| |
I had a *ist, then moved to a K100DS. I shot a lot of sports with the 100, it is a good camera. The biggest need for sports is a fast lens. You need a f/2.8, even for shooting day games. You want a wide aperture so you can catch the action, or when shooting in poor light you can still get decent shots.
A good 200 lens will do a lot of what you want. I would get the fastest lens you can afford.
The FPS is a bit of a issue. Unless you get the upper end Canikons you won't get a fast enough camera to really do those amazing shots.
What you have to do is watch and learn when to shoot, it doesn't take long to catch on the time and you can get some great action.
I shot a lot of series shots (players fielding or sliding) with the slower FPS of my K100 and my newer K20, so it can be usable as it is.
The AF, that is just a trick. My K20 will catch something at times and ruin a series of shots.. so it is something you have to learn and work around.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-09-2009, 02:04 PM
|
| |
Lowell; About the 500 shutter speed... I use this for almost all sports in low light. The Nikon shooter uses 350 (or whatever) typically and the arms and feet are blurred. These girls are fast.. really fast.
My shots are much better in the "movement" area than his. I like a little bit of ball movement, but I don't want an entire arm blurred.
Speaking of quality.. yes the behind camera function is the cause of most of my trashed shots.
With the exception of football. No matter where a ref is on the field, if I have a good shot coming I will always get a ref in the shot blocking my main subject. There is a scientific formula for the potential "WOW" impact of the shot and how often a ref will run in front of me as I hit the shutter.
I get a runner coming down my sideline... straight for me... perfect conditions.. plenty of time.. the AF working perfectly.. no ref in sight.. I start to salivate thinking of how good the shot will be... and BOOM out of nowhere comes a blur of black and white stripes...!!!
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-09-2009, 01:47 PM
|
| |
Let me know before you put your old one on eBay!!! :p
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-09-2009, 01:45 PM
|
| |
Here is a daytime shot.. I am happy with the performance with decent lighting.
 |
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-09-2009, 01:34 PM
|
| |
Eric: I have seriously thought about Noise Ninja, for the price it certainly seems like a good idea. It might help for my more higher PP shots. But I feel like the camera could do a better job.
Lowell; I need to stick with at least 500 for a shutter speed. I still have blurred parts of my image, enough to give a feel of movement but without ruining the shot. Going to the 100-300 range just makes the hands, feet and balls too blurred for my taste. It is even more of a problem when I shoot baseball as the bats and balls really move fast!
About WB... sheesh... the lights are from Mars or somewhere.. and each gym/field is different. I usually just do a WB on the shots that I PP, by selecting a part of the white shirt or something else. I have better luck with that. And at times I get gyms that have yellowish walls that are just plain ugly with a regular WB, so I try to tweak the color to make it look less like puke and more like a gym wall.
I have never set the WB using a white card. I probably should try that. There are a couple of WB cards or filter caps that people swear by...
As far as the settings... heck I don't know. As I said, I set it up based on some sports shooter, then reset them based on another article I read.. so it is probably way off. I really don't know how to set it properly.
Overall I have been happy with my lens. When I shoot football in daylight I get great shots. There is nothing wrong with the quality of the Tammy lens.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-09-2009, 12:35 PM
|
| |
Here is a sample, just off the camera at full size. Cropped to a reasonable image. This is from a volleyball game, so it is hands above the net. This is typical lighting.
Perhaps I am missing something, the EXIF data is intact. Maybe I really need to spend some time testing different settings.
Marc; I was toyed with getting a 100 f/2.8, since really a lot of my indoor shooting is about that length. I have a prime 50 f/1.4 from my old manual film days. I have thought of using it and a 2X to see if I can get brighter shots.
Lowell; I have compared the other shots online to mine, so they are apples and apples, or perhaps PC's.... as the case may be.
 |
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-09-2009, 07:19 AM
|
| |
I guess I should have stated that my largest prints have been 8x10. I really haven't had the need to go larger. Although I have a larger print on order now, but it was a daytime game so lots of light.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-09-2009, 06:58 AM
|
| |
Lowell: I might try to work on resetting everything and starting from scratch. I was following some guidelines for the K20 based on a sports shooter's suggestions on some website somewhere... perhaps here.. I originally set the K20 for that because it is just my sports camera.
Yves: If ISO is ISO then yes I should be able to shoot the same as the D700. But my shots are under exposed well before I get down to his range. We are both shooting f/2.8 lens, same lighting. He tends to shoot slightly slower shutter speeds, but I prefer my cleaner shots. I think (obviously) that it is because the camera is 3 times as much as my camera... so his just works better....
I typically shoot JPEG for my sports shots. I am usually in a hurry to get them PP'd and sent off. And many of the prints I have sold are suitable for up to 8x10.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-08-2009, 01:37 PM
|
| |
I have a Tammy 70-200 f/2.8. It does a very good job at 800 or when I shoot daylight games.
Specifically it is the noise at the higher ISO settings that is the problem.
I bought the Tamron lens because it was the first that I could get for the Pentax mount.
I also have a slow Pentax 300 zoom that shoots very good images... but needs light!
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-08-2009, 12:59 PM
|
| |
I have a K20 and am not happy with it at the highest ISO. I recently shot some test images with a K7 using the same settings.
I was not impressed with the results. It was about the same as my K20. And that is also the feel here from the other threads I have read.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-08-2009, 12:35 PM
|
| |
"would be to look into the K-x, if high ISO is really important to your work."
I could get the colored version!! That would make me stick out even more on the sidelines!!
"it also has a respectable 4.7fps, "
That might be good. But actually I use that less than I thought I would.
"I thiknk I'd be quite content with a D700,"
There is a guy (amateur) that shoots the D700, at some of the same games. He shoots at a much lower ISO than I can, with much better results.
"Those other cameras have other features and benefits that the K-x may lack,"
Actually I set my shutter and aperture and leave it there. The ISO is about the only change I make. So features are not really that important.
When I shoot a day game I will let the camera control the shutter speed and it wanders all over at times.
But for the most of the inside or night games I need a good AF and a button to push... either of my Pentax bodies do well for that. I do find that I change the settings on my K20 more often by accident. And I fired off more accidental shots with the K100DS...
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-08-2009, 11:32 AM
|
| |
I own and still use a K100DS.
I currently (mostly) shoot my K20.
I unexpectedly was launched into sports photography a few years ago. This means shooting fairly fast and high ISO, because of the poor lighting in most sports venues. (and by sports I am speaking of high school and smaller college)
I have been fairly unhappy with the K20's higher ISO performance, especially when compared to the upper end Canikons I compete with on the sideline.
I recently handled a K7 and took some shots for comparison to my K20. (I read part of the thread on this from July)
I was in a camera store and used the same shutter and ISO speeds for a series of shots, on the K7 that I typically use on the K20.
At this point I am tempted to spring for a new camera, and want to stay with Pentax (because I have way more money in lenses than I do in bodies). But I have to seriously look at the Canikons and what they have to offer.
I have the NR set to high. Is there anything else in the camera that I can use to lower the noise. I admit that I am not really that familiar with the settings in this area.
I followed some suggestions that I read in a forum (perhaps here) when I first got my K20. But I have since changed those to higher NR.
I typically shoot higher than 800, depending on the lighting. I am very happy with the results at 800 (or lower... obviously).
I shoot for the local paper, so most of my shots are quite suitable for print. But to make salable prints I would like a better quality.
Other than that I really like the K20!
|
