I'm working on a gallery of my shoot of "The Music Man" at my son's high school. He was the bass in the barbershop group. It has long been one of my two favorite musicals, and they did a splendid job with it.
A few thoughts arise: I used mostly my FA 80-320 on my PZ-1p, and this had me shooting wide-open (f/4.5-5.6) at 1/90-1/125 on Superia 1600. 1. A faster lens would have been really nice, both for the speed and for the shallower DOF in some of the shots. 2. There was a disadvantage to having a Pentax in that regard: For $50, I could have rented a N**** or C**** f/2.8 lens of similar range with VR/IS--even less for the fast long zooms without VR/IS. I'm not in a position to buy the Pentax FA 70-200/2.8, though, and they're not for rent anywhere. 3. The flare resistance of the 80-320 and the 24-90 (which got some use) is wonderful, especially with spotlights all around. 4. I shot 9 rolls, got double prints, and had them burned onto 2 PhotoCDs. Total cost for film and processing: $270. However, the bulk of the processing cost was the printing, and if I had been shooting digitally I would have gotten double prints anyway. So, I figure that digital shooting would have saved me about $110. It would take a lot of these shoots to pay for an istD! 5. I was the "official" photog, so I got a "stage crew" Tshirt and was able to roam all over. Another parent was shooting from his seat with a C**** D20. Geez, those things are big. 6. It was fun. Rick __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
