If IRC the guy was taking about shooting skaters. They hardly follow many predictable patterns. I was envisioning photographing at very close range -. not at a distance, using AF and Wide Angle Zooms. Shooting the skaters as they jump and turn in the air, "running" and jumping over different obstacles etc. This requires three things IMO: Speed, speed and speed! Features that were never very impressively supported by Pentax. Regards
Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 25. februar 2006 09:37 Til: [email protected] Emne: Re: *IST-D / DS & High speed action! I mostly shoot action (cycling, Cyclocross in particular), here's my humble thoughts. 1) If you know the sport well enough you prefocus to where you expect action then you track your subject. This doesn't seem to be a Pentax only thing, I've watched plenty of professional photographers from Seattle area newspapers out there with Canons and Nikons with 70-200mm f/2.8 glass doing the exact same thing that I do with my lowly Pentax ist D with my slow lenses. They find a spot, prefocus, track, take a burst of shots and review (I'll get to that part later). And get this, I saw some guy who works for the Seattle Times manually pre-focusing his Nikon D2X...BLASPHEMY! Anyway, I had more misfocused shots with my D100 than I've ever had with the D. Enough said. 2) Higher FPS would be nice...but it's not a requirement for good action shots. I never really noticed the .5 FPS hit that I took by switching to the D from the D100 On the subject of knowing where things will occur: Cyclists/cars/runners/etc follow courses and football/soccer/basketball/hockey/etc players follow something around the playing field don't they? Try following that...unless you want to be taking photos of the goalie scratching his behind. 3) Find me one action photographer that wastes his space with raw files. They require lots of extra time to process. Most action photographers I know shoot action with jpg. I agree, write time is slow, I hope they made it better in the new D. 4).... 5) Noise processing is a pretty easy thing to automate, I bet most photographers do it no matter what camera they use. 6) I don't have a single AF lens with a faster f stop than 3.2. Guess I can't shoot action anymore :-( 7) Damn, I wonder if there was ever a time when Nikon and Canon users had to use less than 10 mega pixels...oh wait One of the more prolific cycling photographers (www.grahamwatson.com) uses a D2X and a D2H, I wonder how ever he survives with 4.1 megapixels? I use the medium setting on the D all the time for extra space and faster write speed seeing how the biggest size I offer to my customers is a 8x10. 8) I agree it is annoying to not be able to review images after they've been shot at a respectable speed. I shoot with a big card and review shots between laps which seems to work well for what I do. But still I still think it's an improvement over my SP 500 although not as good as the D100 9) Here's the technique that was taught to me by a professional (w/Canon equipment): Find a spot Find the right angle Take a shot before the action arrives to check histogram etc... Correct and lock exposure Wait for action Problem solved 10) Yeah, I was annoyed by that too, I liked it on the D100 but I don't think I've missed it enough to not suggest the camera. I don't shoot professionally (although I tell the IRS I'm a business, which means I claim to be somewhat professional). I got it because I was dissatisfied with my D100 (metering sucked, battery life sucked, controls sucked, AF was horrible, etc) and I wanted to be able to use my Pentax lenses. I think knowledge of the sport and how to photograph it is far more important than the camera. Today, the D acts like it is, 3 year old technology. It's time for a replacement, but I won't get rid of the D anytime soon. It's just too nice of a camera to sell. I'll agree the D is not the best camera for action, but it's features don't preclude it from being good at it. David Jens Bladt wrote: > Ten reasons for recommending the *ist D for action photography: > > 1: AF is slow, compared to the competition. Focusing in low light will > require 2-4 secs (according to dpreview tests). > You may use MF, and save time experimenting with AF. Enjoy using old, > lovely, smooth MF lenses. > 2: Frames pr. second is just 2.5 (competition features 4-8.3 FPS). You may > use single shot mode. Make sure to plan each shot carefully and try not to > think too much about the athletes moving in a surprising way - you know the > sports and can foresee everything that will occur. > 3: Write speed is 8 secs for 1 RAW file (36-37 secs for a 5 shot RAW burst, > 14 secs for a JPEG burst). This gives you plenty of time for talking to you > colleagues and for drinking coffee or smoking cigarettes. > 5: Relatively high noise at ISO 1600-3200. This will give you many > entertaing hours, using Neat Image and other nice computer applications in > the comfort of you home. > 6: Availability of new, fast (F:1.4-2.8) lenses is very limited. Use every > Monday, checking ebay for discontinued FA F.2.8 lenses. This is really > entertaining - much more enjoyable than the actal photographing. > 7: Only 6MP leaves very little "space" for after-cropping. Enjoy the art of > cropping the images while shooting. > 8: Reviewing pix is relatively slow - and must await the rather long writing > times. It's more fun taking chances. It's more exiting to check the images > at home, later on. > 9: No immediate histogram available. Enjoy your ability to judge the > exposure in advance, using the +/- settings. > 10:No flashing overexposure warning available for fast checking exposure. > (Same comment as above). > > More advantages: > The Pentax *ist D is a very nice, well built, high qaulity DSLR camera. > Perfect for traveling (small size) and photographing when ever time is NOT > an issue - for landscapes and studio portraits. This makes is a good choise > for me. That's what I do. > > For sports photography I don't believe this camera is the first choise of > many photographers. I would like to talk to some of the (noumorous) sports > photographers, who are successfully using a Pentax *ist D and will actually > prefere this to the rather fast working cameras from the otherwise prefered > cameras by pro's - Nikons and Canons. Until I do, I can recommend this > camera for action photography to anyone who enjoy the exitement of > constantly testing you own skills as well as the exitment concerning the art > of selling the the images to newspapers and magazines. With a Pentax *ist D > at the stadium, there's never really a dull moment. > > Regards > Jens Bladt > > http://www.jensbladt.dk > > -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > Fra: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 25. februar 2006 00:30 > Til: [email protected] > Emne: Re: *IST-D / DS & High speed action! > > > Har! Actually that focalplane shutter took a 10th of a second to move > the 5 inchs. That is where the idea of those carton cars leaning > forwards to indicate speed came from, those old photos. > > graywolf > http://www.graywolfphoto.com > http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf > "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" > ----------------------------------- > > > John Francis wrote: > >> Sure was. And 1/30 of a second froze the action much better. >> Mind you, you also had to lug that heavy camera equipment >> around - uphill both ways, of course. >> >> Tell that to the kids of today, and they won't believe you. >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 03:44:54PM -0500, graywolf wrote: >> >> >>> I always wonder how those oldtime racing shots were taken with a Graflex >>> 5x7 SLR back around 1910 or so. Maybe 100mph was slower back in those >>> > days? > >>> graywolf >>> http://www.graywolfphoto.com >>> http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf >>> "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" >>> ----------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> John Francis wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 08:18:24PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> A 5 FPS camera from Pentax (Autumn 2006) is a little late, isn't it? >>>>> >>>>> I am speaking from experience, you know. I have shot almost 30.000 >>>>> > frames > >>>>> with a *ist D. I believe I know very well, what I'm talking about. >>>>> >>>>> I don't really do action shots. >>>>> >>>> Well, make up your mind. >>>> >>>> If experience matters, then I think my thousands of action shots, >>>> taken with the *ist-D, suggest that perhaps *I* know what I'm >>>> talking about when I say that the D is adequate for all but the >>>> most demanding situations. Not ideal, by any means, but adequate. >>>> And some of the limitations were fixed, some time ago, in the DS; >>>> I've yet to encounter a situation where a D with the write speed >>>> and buffer size of the DS, (plus, on a few occasions, the 4fps >>>> frame rate of the PZ-1p), would have prevented me getting just >>>> the shot I was trying for. >>>> >>>> As, by your admission, you don't do action photography, then your >>>> experience isn't really relevant, no matter how many frames you >>>> have shot. >>>> >>>> As others have pointed out, it's the photographer, far more than >>>> the equipment, that determines how good a shot you can bring home. >>>> I've even managed to get first-class results from a simple Canon >>>> Powershot G1 (an 8x10, from a 3.3MP camera, of a Porsche 911 at >>>> racing speeds) - when I mix it in with my best DSLR and scanned >>>> shots nobody has yet been able to pick it out as the P&S sample. >>>> >>>> If you expect the camera to do everything for you, then of course >>>> you're going to be disappointed. It's best to pre-focus at about >>>> the right distance, so that even if you're using focus tracking >>>> the camera is starting from roughly the right setting. That's >>>> where the *ist-D and siblings are much better than the MZ-S - the >>>> AF logic predicts which way to correct far more often, so you lose >>>> less shots while the AF hunts to the end-stop and back again. >>>> It's also best to select the AF point, rather than letting the >>>> camera choose (this becomes more important at long focal lengths). >>>> This isn't rocket science. In fact if you look carefully at how >>>> most of those full-time professionals with a truckload of Canon >>>> gear work, you'll find that they use their equipment in just >>>> that way - letting their experience guide the camera's automation. >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/268 - Release Date: 02/23/2006 > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/268 - Release Date: 02/23/2006 > > > > > -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/268 - Release Date: 02/23/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.1.0/269 - Release Date: 02/24/2006
