Digital Image Studio pisze: > On 11/05/07, Pawel Bartuzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> For me the difference between FF and APS-C is at shooting time. When I >> shoot film then SMC K 18/3.5, K 28/2 and 35/2 all behave as they are >> supposed to. When using my DSLR I suddenly loose all my low light wide >> angle capability. That's because I don't see a reasonable DSLR >> alternative for FF 28/2 lens - is there any 20/2 lens available? And if >> (a Sigma maybe) - what is quality and the price? Even if I weren't after >> (relatively) fast glass, there are plenty of A 28/2.8 and M 35/2.8 >> around here - on DSLR they have to be substituted with not so cheap 18 >> and 24 mm lenses. >> > > The Pentax God of SR is supposed to make you feel much better about > not having access to wide lenses with fast apertures. > The Pentax God of SR didn't step down to my camera bag yet - I still have an *ist DS. :-)
But, as to SR: I was using MX recently with M 50/1.4 and K 28/2 in a dimly lit pub with 800 film and at 1/15 s I didn't had that much of a problem with my shaking as with people moving. I wish I had pushed the film at least one stop because to get colors right I had to push blue channel a lot and post process heavily in NeatImage. Now I have images that still have some noise and grainy look on a computer screen but I am pretty sure that prints would be fine. My next task will be to try push processing and maybe shooting with 80A or 80B filter or try shooting fill flash "David Alan Harvey style" and then compare to digital. As to digital - I tried 3200 ISO with *ist DS and wasn't impressed. I use it when neccessary but 3200 is pretty unusable when only slightly underexposed and it is very easy to clip highlights (although RAW helps). I suppose Canon 5D would be an option, but now it costs 4 times as much as an *ist DS. Pawel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
