|
Forum: Sold Items
05-11-2014, 10:33 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Sold Items
12-29-2008, 01:23 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-10-2008, 03:51 PM
|
| |
It's not irrelevant because it influences what shows up on the LCD screen. When I'm shooting in the dark I want to know that detail has been captured and I've got the shot. I can't know that if I can't see what's lurking in the shadows. There might not be any difference in the camera data (I correct exposure in Aperture anyway), but there is a practical difference in how I shoot.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
12-10-2008, 02:31 PM
|
| |
A quick search on Google says $90 for Lightroom and $140 for Aperture. That's not that much cheaper.
I personally use Aperture because Apple generally looks after its apps fairly well (and often abuses their position as the maker of the OS, cf. Microsoft), while lately I've felt like Mac support from Adobe is an afterthought.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-10-2008, 02:17 PM
|
| |
I've been a very happy owner of a K100D for the past year and a half. I've shot around 20,000 pictures, mostly of small bands playing shows in poorly lit clubs. I was thinking of getting a K200D when they came out but decided against it. While I liked some of the features, the lack of live preview and top ISO rating of 1600 made me decide against it. The K20D sounds awful nice, but is sadly outside the price I can spend for an upgrade right now.
I didn't take much interest in the K2000 early on, but as I've read more about it, I keep thinking that it might make a good replacement for my K100D. Besides the basic stuff like a wider ISO range and higher pixel count, features like the full info back panel LCD (the top panel on the K100D is useless in the dark) and improved low-light autofocus really capture my attention. The smaller size doesn't hurt, either, as it means more room to stuff lenses in my bag.
I'd of course be happier if the K2000 had live preview and "red dot" focus confirmation. And I can't quite seem to figure out for sure if it has an orientation sensor. That feature alone might be worth the upgrade.
Anyone have any advice for me?
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
07-31-2008, 09:22 PM
|
| |
I have to find a voltmeter first. I've got 10,000 electronic doodads but of course nothing so useful. Having the flash not synced isn't the worst thing, really, it just forces my decisions into a narrower box. Nothing like having to shoot totally manual to learn how things work.
I wound up just setting the exposure between 2" and 4" at ISO 200 / 400 and f/22. Popping the flash at full power off the ceiling gave me decent results.
Didn't have much luck doing my pseudo-double exposures. The crowd is so rowdy for this band (they're called Japanther) it's hard enough to keep someone in frame at all, even with a 10mm fisheye. Did get this one between sets though.
 |
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
07-31-2008, 02:22 PM
|
| |
So I've been thinking of getting a modern flash unit for my K100D but in the meantime I just borrowed my Dad's Vivitar 283 and am going to try to play with it tonight. It's an early "Made in Japan" model so I'm quite confident that the voltage is too high to attach the flash into the hot shoe. It's really too bad because he's got this neat extension cable that allows the flash to be held off camera that's perfect for what I want to do.
But anyway, I'm shooting a show tonight and trying to figure out if there's any way I can sync the flash using something cheap and available at a place like Ritz Camera, since the pro photo stores are closed right now. Even if they were open, something like a Wein Peanut to make the Viv a slave wouldn't really work since other photogs will be popping flashes, too. I obviously don't want to spend large amounts of money on something like a wireless sync, and even the $50 for the Safe Shoe seems like a lot considering that I could just ebay this specimen and buy a voltage-safe one.
If I can't sync I'll probably wind up just shooting super long exposures and manually popping the flash off the test button. That'll be good times.
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
07-30-2008, 02:22 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-15-2008, 02:06 PM
|
| |
I use every lens that I bought recently. I inherited a few old lenses that I don't use, the standout among them being a M 50mm f/1.7 . Probably the one with the least use is the 18-55 kit lens, then the 50-200 standard telephoto. Otherwise I get good use out of:
FA50 f/1.4
Porst 55mm f/1.2
Sigma 24mm f/1.8
DA10-17 Fisheye
Tak 135mm f/2.5
Those are the lenses I carry with me when I shoot shows, and I usually will use all of them each show.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
05-26-2008, 10:23 PM
|
| |
I was at a basement music show a few weeks back that had almost no light available. Even with my fastest lens and ISO 3200 I was getting shutter speeds of over 1/3". I don't like to shoot with flash, though, so I was going to be content with the few blurry pics I got. But then another photog started shooting with flash, and I was inspired. I set the aperture small and the ISO to a moderate 800, and the shutter speed to 15 seconds. As the other photog shot off a few pics over the 15 secs, here's what I got:
Of course now I'm in love with the idea of using long exposures with multiple (directed?) bursts of flash to create this kind of in-camera effect.
So: Is there some particular flash that my fellow pentaxians would recommend for recreating this kind of scenario? I'd almost say that ideally the flash should be wholly removable from the camera so that I can really control the direction of fire. And of course the intensity should be able to be controlled manually as well. Having no experience shooting with flash beyond what's built-in doesn't help me. Other advice pertaining to this kind of shooting would also be much appreciated: I've already realized the value of both a tripod and the bulb setting on the shutter.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-26-2008, 10:08 PM
|
| |
This was the first lens I bought besides the kit lens and 50-200. It's really a no-brainer. With this lens, the (admittedly grainy) ISO 1600 setting of the K100D, and the in-camera SR, I can take low light no-flash concert pictures that I just shouldn't be able to, especially for a system this affordable.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-31-2008, 04:03 PM
|
| |
Wow. The announcement of this and the K20D have effectively killed my Canon-envy. Time to start saving my pennies.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-19-2007, 05:11 PM
|
| |
I'll second that. I got a 24mm f/1.8 used for $225.
|
|
Forum: Sold Items
12-13-2007, 02:31 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-04-2007, 04:15 PM
|
| |
Congratulations, you found the gaping hole in the present lens lineup on Pentax cameras!
The last two manual Tokina 70-200 f/2.8 lenses on ebay went for $250 (BIN) and $301. So you might be able to find one of those in your price range if you're going manual. Just don't outbid me on it!
Actually, you may want to see if you can add the standard Pentax 50-200 f/4-5.6 to your order. There's an additional $25 rebate on it when purchased with a camera kit and you can put it on ebay if you decide it doesn't fit your bill. It's where mine is going as soon as somebody releases an 80-200 f/2.8.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-03-2007, 06:29 PM
|
| |
I would buy it for sure, but at a price comparable to what it costs for C/N mount, which is about $900. I'm not spending an extra $300 for a Pentax mount on the exact same glass. I've practically given up trying to take telephoto shots at the concerts I go to, since with the Pentax 50-200 zoom I need 1/15 sec shots even at ISO 3200 and pushed digital post-processing. Maybe I just need to tell someone to turn on the lights.
And by the way, a manual Tokina KA mount with the same specs just ebay'ed for $301. I was out shooting when the auction ended, otherwise I might have fought for it.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-28-2007, 10:58 AM
|
| |
Man, who bid on this instead of taking the BIN for $900? That was a steal. Now it will definitely go for $1000+.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-13-2007, 01:01 PM
|
| |
I use a K100D to shoot indoor concerts in venues with horrible lighting. I've found that I miss a bunch of shots due to either my own failure to properly manual focus, or the auto-focus locking on to something not quite where I want. For example, the AF will lock on to a microphone stand in front of the performer rather than the performer, but the performer looks in focus on the viewfinder and I don't want to miss a shot, so I shoot. I've adjusted both the camera settings and my technique to try and account for this with some degree of success, but I'm wondering what more can be done.
So, does anyone have suggestions for improving my percentage of properly focused shots? I've heard tell of some accessories that might help, like the magnifying eyecup, but with that I'm worried about the vignetting. I've also seen people mention replacement focusing screens like the Katz Eye, but I can't really tell if these would help my particular situation.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-11-2007, 05:28 PM
|
| |
Sigma makes f/1.8 lenses at 20 and 24mm as well, although the 20 is not available anywhere as far as I can tell. I just picked up the 24mm version from another forum member here for a steal. Some day I think I'll actually want the 20mm f/1.8 and the 30mm f/1.4, but this seems like a good compromise in the meantime.
Of course, there's also the very highly regarded 31mm f/1.8 FA Limited. But it's twice the price of the 30mm Sigma, as well as being a little narrower and a little slower. And when shooting in clubs, my experience is that you want the aperture as wide as possible. That 2/3 stop difference can mean a decent looking shot at 1/30 of a second instead of 1/15 or 1/20, and that's huge for freezing motion.
Good luck!
|
|
Forum: General Talk
10-08-2007, 07:22 PM
|
| |
I wanted to clarify something because in your original post you talk about telephoto lenses (those with high focal lengths) from bringing distant objects close, and then contrasts them with Macro lenses for "closer" objects. While both of those statements are correct, it's a bit strange, because the traditional comparison is between telephoto lenses (generally with a focal length over 100mm) and wide-angle lenses (with a focal length less than 40mm).
What the focal length determines is the field of view of the camera, that is, how wide an angle is "seen" by the lens. A distant object covers a very small angle, so a telephoto lens, by only seeing a small angle, makes that distant object appear bigger. If you want to capture as great an angle as possible (say, you're in the front row of a theater and you want to capture the whole stage), you'd need a wide-angle lens to do that, even though you might not say the stage is "nearby".
What Macro lenses do is that they can be focused on an object that is physically very close to the lens. A typical lens will not be able to focus on an object within, say, .5m of the camera. A Macro lens can. This doesn't really have much to do with the focal length of the lens; it's a separate issue.
My apologies if you understood all that already, but I wouldn't want you spending a bunch of cash because you had the wrong idea about it.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
10-08-2007, 07:01 PM
|
| |
I wanted to shoot in low light without a flash for as cheap as I could get away with. Getting a K100D meant I could use some old manual K mount lenses I had, including a 50mm f/1.7, and the in-camera shake reduction would be a big benefit. The value represented by the K100D, 18-55, and 50-200 lenses (with combo rebates) was unbeatable. Of course, 2 weeks later I decided I wanted some more glass, so I wound up replacing the 50 f/1.7 anyway, but I think I've got a pretty nice setup for about $1150 total.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
10-08-2007, 06:50 PM
|
| |
Point number 7 is very true and really bugs me. I think Pentax is a bit cursed by its own success with the K10/K100 because they're apparently putting their efforts into mass-appeal lenses like the new 18-250 instead of releasing more top-end stuff.
And just as a note about number 6, try Sanyo Eneloops or a similar low self-discharge NiMH if you haven't.
Oh, and probably the feature I most wish for on the K100D is that the top LCD panel had a backlight. I shoot concerts and can't read it worth a damn in the dim lighting.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-08-2007, 06:26 PM
|
| |
You can forget about the Sigma 20mm f/1.8 if you want it anytime soon. It was OOS at every store I called. I called Sigma about it a week ago and they said it was hugely back-ordered with no ETA.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
10-06-2007, 02:34 PM
|
| |
I sympathize with your position but think you're overstating the case. Photosynth is really just a way of organizing photographs based on some of the data the image contains. This data is not copyrightable. (For example, while a picture of a sculpture you've taken is copyrightable, the location you've taken the picture from is not.) It's similar to an index, the end result of which is that you wind up looking at the original photograph. While the present version presents that original photo by itself, it would be trivial to, say, utilize a low-res, obscured version that links to the web page containing the original instead. Photosynth is thus just a very fancy version of Google Image Search. (For some reason, I suspect you don't much like that, either.)
This is very different from the "hole patching" technology you mentioned in the other thread. That use is more akin to "sampling" in music, for which explicit permission is (almost always) necessary.
Another point: allowing the usage of a photograph for such a project does not necessitate that the image be made public domain. Flickr is actually very good about making users aware of the copyright issues entailed by posting their photos online, and provides easy ways to "copyleft" your posts there to allow this sort of use while still retaining the copyright of the image.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
10-04-2007, 11:29 AM
|
| |
I shoot bands with my K100D. I don't use any flash. You can see some of my pics at my flickr account in my signature.
My experience is that in most venues, the lighting is very poor. Shooting at f/3.5 requires kicking the sensitivity up to at least ISO 1600, and usually ISO 3200, if you want your exposure times to be better than 1/10. I pick that time because it's the most you can get away with and still have any hope of avoiding motion blur. Sticking to the wide end of your lens will keep the f-stop low and help minimize the appearance of motion blur as your subjects will cover a smaller angle of view. You can select these ISO settings manually or adjust the auto ISO range to include them via the Custom Setting menu.
You're on the right track by switching to center spot auto focus. The AF tends to misbehave in low light. You may want to set the OK button function to "Enable AF" so that it only works when you tell it to.
You'll probably also want to use spot metering, especially if the lighting is uneven. This is a situation where recomposing is very useful.
Two other recommendations: First, this is a situation where a 50mm f/1.4 really shines. The FA version that's available new is absolutely worth the money. Old manual versions are readily available as well. Second, while flashes may be distracting, good lighting isn't. Since you're friends with the band, see if you can't convince them to use some extra lighting.
|
