Pentax general discussion

[MinnieForMe]

I hate being so photography ignorant. If I go snap a picture with my kit lens set at 28 mm will I see what you mean by "too wide" at 28 MM? I , honestly, don't think I've ever used my kit lens at 18 mm!

Anyone ever think there are just too many options in photography?

Santa "I want it all!" Actually, I want a lens that I'll keep on 90% of the time!

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

The lower the number the wider or how much will see side to side in the shot.

 

[MinnieForMe]

The lower the number the wider or how much will see side to side in the shot.

Thank you!

I'm 90% sure I'm going to get the 28-75 f2.8. It should work great for Tae Kwon Do pictures if nothing else! Should I be fine at Animal Kingdom or even a trip to the zoo with my current kit lens (50-200) or do you think I should get the slightly longer kit lens (I believe there is a 55-300 out there)? I can't afford another f2.8 longer zoom!

Michelle

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I hope your Tae Kwon Dojo or whatever you call it is lit better than ours. I went for my son's belt test (I think it was for tips for his white belt or something) and ended up shooting at ISO 3200 and f/2. It was like being in a cave.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

Thank you!

I'm 90% sure I'm going to get the 28-75 f2.8. It should work great for Tae Kwon Do pictures if nothing else! Should I be fine at Animal Kingdom or even a trip to the zoo with my current kit lens (50-200) or do you think I should get the slightly longer kit lens (I believe there is a 55-300 out there)? I can't afford another f2.8 longer zoom!

Michelle

I prefer the 50-200 for the Safari ride because it is lightweight and the ride can be rough. It is easier to hold. I haven't needed anything longer than 200 at the AK. Saying that, there has been a great deal of discussion comparing the two lenses with the nod going to the 55-300 having better optics. I own a very good copy of the 50-200 and am very pleased with it. I haven't been to my local zoo lately so I really can't comment on whether the extra 100 would be needed. If it was me, I would stick with what I have for now and if later I needed the extra 100, I would sell the 50-200 to finance the 55-300.

 

[MinnieForMe]

I hope your Tae Kwon Dojo or whatever you call it is lit better than ours. I went for my son's belt test (I think it was for tips for his white belt or something) and ended up shooting at ISO 3200 and f/2. It was like being in a cave.

Same thing here. I should have cranked the ISO up to 3200 but I was afraid of too much noise. I ended up shooting 1600 with flash. I'm not sure if using the flash was a good idea but the pictures came out fine. However, if I get a better lens, I bet I'll be able to drop the flash!

 

[MinnieForMe]

I prefer the 50-200 for the Safari ride because it is lightweight and the ride can be rough. It is easier to hold. I haven't needed anything longer than 200 at the AK. Saying that, there has been a great deal of discussion comparing the two lenses with the nod going to the 55-300 having better optics. I own a very good copy of the 50-200 and am very pleased with it. I haven't been to my local zoo lately so I really can't comment on whether the extra 100 would be needed. If it was me, I would stick with what I have for now and if later I needed the extra 100, I would sell the 50-200 to finance the 55-300.

I think I'm just zoom obsessed! I'm still angry at myself for getting the kit with the 50-200 instead of the 55-300. Do you think the kit 55-300 would be superior to the Tamron 28-300? Somedays, like on field trips, I just don't want to change lenses! I'm no longer worried about the weight because 80% of the time I'm in a wheelchair or scooter when I'm photographing. The other 20% I'm on the ground or in a chair photographing. I've been thinking of finding a way to customize a tripod to the steering wheel of my scooter. Wouldn't that be neat?

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

I think I'm just zoom obsessed! I'm still angry at myself for getting the kit with the 50-200 instead of the 55-300. Do you think the kit 55-300 would be superior to the Tamron 28-300? Somedays, like on field trips, I just don't want to change lenses! I'm no longer worried about the weight because 80% of the time I'm in a wheelchair or scooter when I'm photographing. The other 20% I'm on the ground or in a chair photographing. I've been thinking of finding a way to customize a tripod to the steering wheel of my scooter. Wouldn't that be neat?

I don't own either lens and the only opinion I could give is based on the reviews I have read. The 55-300 has much better reviews. To get out to 300 I have a Sigma 100-300 f4. It is a large, heavy lens at over three lbs, but it is the sharpest lens in my inventory. I have this affinity for constant aperture lenses.

Is there a way to attach a GorillaPod to the steering wheel?

 

[MinnieForMe]

I don't know what a GorillaPod is but I soon will! Off to look!

Edited: The Gorilla Pod is cool. They have a magnetic one. I wonder if it would attach easily to my scooter. One more thing to add to my every growing list of photography "needs". LOL.

 

[Groucho]

What do you think? Is it a good enough lens to jump up from the kit lens? I seriously was ready to get the 50 mm but I need my lens to do the adjusting not my handicap legs! LOL.

I really thought the 28-300mm would be nice for Disney but I'm too nervous about the speed and low light ability.

Help me spend money! I'm taking this lens stuff too seriously!

Michelle

I had the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 for a while. It was a very nice lens, although it had a bit of "zoom creep" (hold the camera facing down and it would zoom in slightly, hence the inclusion of a zoom lock on it)... it was very nice optically. Most of the time, the focal length was nice, too - but there were times where I had to take it off and put on the kit 18-55mm lens at Disney, especially at character breakfasts or if shooting Wishes too close to the castle. I ended up selling it and buying the Pentax 16-50mm, which is terrific but may be overkill - I chose it partly for its weatherseling, which wouldn't matter on the K-x. The SDM focusing is fine but not really faster than the screw-drive AF on the kit lens, just quieter. (They've just released what is essentially SDM2 on the new 18-135mm lens, apparently it's faster and will hopefully cure the SDM failure issues that some people have had.) If I was buying one for a K-x, I'd probably consider the Tamron 17-50mm strongly. The Sigma is worth consideration but when I bought, they were generally heavier than the Tamrons and with slightly worse IQ, plus their quality control is notoriously inconsistent.

I think I'm just zoom obsessed! I'm still angry at myself for getting the kit with the 50-200 instead of the 55-300. Do you think the kit 55-300 would be superior to the Tamron 28-300? Somedays, like on field trips, I just don't want to change lenses! I'm no longer worried about the weight because 80% of the time I'm in a wheelchair or scooter when I'm photographing. The other 20% I'm on the ground or in a chair photographing. I've been thinking of finding a way to customize a tripod to the steering wheel of my scooter. Wouldn't that be neat?

I've heard a lot of nice things about the 55-300mm, in fact I'd love to pick one up for basic high-zoom outdoor shooting. I do like my really old Takumar 300mm F4 but it's quite big and heavy for everyday shooting! Realistically, the IQ of the 55-300mm probably beats in in many areas, too, but it's slower.

For mounting a camera on a steering wheel - have you looked at a ClamperPod2? I have the normal ClamperPod and am quite happy with it in the few times that I actually use it; the CP2 is built to clamp on to tubular objects, whereas the normal one goes onto flat objects. It's surprisingly sturdy - certainly not up to the task of a big SLR with heavy lens, but you can get decent results with an entry-level DSLR and kit lens. It's small and light enough that I always keep it in my camera bag just in case.

 

[MinnieForMe]

For mounting a camera on a steering wheel - have you looked at a ClamperPod2? I have the normal ClamperPod and am quite happy with it in the few times that I actually use it; the CP2 is built to clamp on to tubular objects, whereas the normal one goes onto flat objects. It's surprisingly sturdy - certainly not up to the task of a big SLR with heavy lens, but you can get decent results with an entry-level DSLR and kit lens. It's small and light enough that I always keep it in my camera bag just in case.[/QUOTE]

That might work perfectly! I need to go out to the garage and take a look at the handles on my scooter. Thanks for the idea!

 

[MinnieForMe]

Question of the day:

What's the best way to take a nighttime picture? My neighbor has a beautiful old barn and put a lighted wreath on it with a spotlight. It's absolutely beautiful at night. I've NEVER taken an outdoor, nighttime picture.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

Stabilize the camera (tripod, etc.), remote control or camera timer for long shutter speed, low ISO, choose aperture depending on what you want your depth of field (DOF) to be. Then play with shutter speed until you get the effect you're looking for.

 

[MinnieForMe]

Wow! I must be starting to "get" photography as that was what I thought had to be done. I don't have a remote yet so I guess that's one more thing to pick up. Any deals on remotes right now that anyone knows of?

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

For my remotes, I stayed with the Pentax F wireless. If you google search, you will find all types of cheaper remotes labeled as F, but they are not the Pentax brand. I don't know how they work. For this item, I stayed with camera manufacturers remote. I have seen them go anywhere from $19 to $33 with or without free shippping.

 

[Groucho]

You can get wired or wireless remotes. For wired ones (which I prefer), you can even make your own - mine is built inside a Tic-Tac container. You can buy extremely cheap Chinese ones. You can also use Canon ones if you like; they work the same way. I wouldn't worry too much about the quality - all it is is a standard cell-phone-size headphone plug; shorting one wire focuses (like a half-press of the shutter) and shorting the other fires the shutter. There's not much to it.

For wireless, I have a cheapie Chinese one that works with lots of different brands. It seems OK but I've only used it a couple times. I was going to use it for the wedding that I shot a couple weekends ago but the battery had died and I thought I had spares but I didn't. (It takes CR2025, I had CR2032.)

The 2-second delay should work pretty well for you though, even without a remote. I sometimes use that at Disney if I don't want the wired remote dangling around. It also does mirror lock-up to further reduce vibration.

To repeat what the others have had:
Tripod
Low ISO (100 or 200 or whatever your lowest option is)
Put the camera in Av (aperture priority) mode
Choose a small aperture (F8, F11, in that area) if you want maximum sharpness and lots of depth of field (ie, lots in focus)
Choose a larger aperture (F2.8 or so) if you want only part of the image in focus (most people doing night shots will not do this)

You may want to play with exposure compensation (the little +/- button) to force it to take a brighter photo to bring out the details.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

Below is one of my favorite night shots. This was a 15 second exposure with a Sigma 100-300 f4 at 300mm. It was shot from the steps area of the Lincoln Memorial. If you are familar with DC, that is quite a distance from the Lincoln to the Capitol. In the photo there are three DC icons, foreground-WW II Memorial, mid-ground-Washington Monument and background-Capitol Building. Because I wanted all in focus, I went with the smallest aperture setting for the lens to get the maximum depth of field, f32 and an ISO setting of 400. Like Groucho, I normally shoot my night shots at f8-11, but because of the distances involved I went with the smallest aperture and was pleased with the results.


Wash Cap WWII 30 by Gianna'sPapa, on Flickr

 

[Groucho]

Wow! That's a great shot.

I know some digital shooters are nervous (frightened even, maybe) of shooting at the very smallest apertures - the dreaded "diffraction" and such - but the times when I've done it, I have not encountered any serious issues.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

Thanks. Its what keeps me going. For me, when I envision a shot and it actually works I am surprised! Many times you have thoughts of this great shot and it just doesn't work. Other times you take an on-the-fly shot and it shocks you what comes out. An example was at our IndyCar race this past August, when I took a photo of pit crew member wearing his shiny bronze/gold helmet. I thought it would look good with the grandstand bokeh. When I looked on the computer the curved helmet acted like a reverse fisheye lens and showed the pit area with the tires laying on the ground and all. Total surprise!! Of course, I told everybody I planned that!!

 

[Zoesmama03]

I was testing out a K7 at a large electronics store here(Fry's Electronics) and it was quite cool. It seemed to have a good picture from what I could tell quickly in the LCD. Not sure how accurate it was it had no memory card in it so it disappeared quickly and I didn't hunt down the histogram function. It seemed to have a super sharp focus but again from the LCD so not always that accurate.

I'm not planning to give my D80 up anytime soon it would either be a D700(a new one with HD video would be great) or jump ship to Canon 5D. I don't have a whole lot of $$$ invested in Nikon glass so it wouldn't be too far off to change but I was quite impressed with the Pentax K7 I played with. Just not sure they would have the glass I prefer.