Sun Dec 9 21:18:43 EST 2012 Larry Colen wrote: > On Dec 9, 2012, at 1:22 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote: > > > Here are some 9 photos that were taken at ISO-6400: > > http://42graphy.org/misc/ISO-6400-tango/ > > There are some fun ones there. I particularly liked the bug eyed kid.
You mean my daughter who was very tired by past-midnight time when she was being taken to sleep? ;-) Well, here we are when we are in our evening dress: http://42graphy.org/misc/tango_IR00276.jpg > > > Most of them are not perfect: a few are slightly out of focus and/or > > are suffering from the camera shake (the camera was hand-held > > for all these photos). > > I have found a monopod invaluable. The data at the bottom is listing > lens, but not focal length, but if you're using a 50-135, 1/25 is likely > to be a bit slow for free hand holding. Yep. 2-3 shots from these 9 were at 1/25 - I don't remember what mode they were taken in. I am surprised that LR doesn't show that to me from the EXIF (at least not easily). The focal lengths were 50 and 55mm. However, notice the 6th shot (*038), - that was at 1/13 with the 77mm lens). That one has much less effect from the camera shake. So, I am not 100% that a considerable portion of the blur on the photos taken at 1/25th is not from their motion. This can be seen e.g. in the 8th photo (*111), where the pattern on the woman's dress in the middle of the chest (right above her hand) is much more in focus than the rest. Yes, I agree that a monopod might be helpful. However, that's yet another piece to carry. > > I was still playing with the settings (various AF modes) and modes > > (S/TA/T priority). > > I pretty much only use manual and TAv. There are good reasons for various modes. > > > But, I think these photos show the quality of the ISO-6400. > > It's pretty freaking amazing isn't it. It's also amazing how hard you > can push it. When using a long lens, you may find it even worth pushing > to 8,000, or even up to 16,000 to get the shutter speed you need. Next > time you are out, try varying the ISO up to ridiculously high levels. > For future reference it'll be handy to know just how hard you can push > it. I've lost more photos to too low a shutter speed, and even too > little depth of field than to too much noise. I tried 12800 a bit. It is not stellar but usable, even somewhat better than 6400 with K-7. > > > (Some NR, in the range 35-70 for luminance, was applied in LR, except > > for the 2nd shot, _IR00019, where no NR was done. For that shot, NO > > image manipulation, except cropping and resizing was done, - hence > > some > > noise can be seen). > > Color temp seems a bit off to me. Have you tried pointing the white > balance dropper at some point like the white collar or black jacket of > the guy in image _IR00019? It would go to a slightly lower temperatures, but I don't want to get a neutral color as if they were in the white light. They were under colored lights. And that's the ambience. Sometimes, I just like leaving the colors the way they were, e.g. http://42graphy.org/swing/swingtet/ or http://42graphy.org/swing/abp-2010/a-thursday/ > > > > > And some of these photos are fun by themselves (IMHO). > > Comments are (as always) welcome, including constructive critique and > > recommendations. > > I have been finding that my biggest challenge lately has been autofocus. > As you mentioned in another post, one issue is with size of each focus > point being too big, so you think that you're focusing on someone's > face, and you are focusing on the striped shirt of the person three feet > behind them. It's also difficult to see to manually focus in the dark. > If the dancers are staying fairly stationary, you can try live view and > manual focus, hit info a couple times to zoom in. Meh.. In that case, if you are using a zoom lens that is not varifocal, than it might be faster to zoom the lens in, focus and then zoom it out. > > I ran into a friend at a West Coast Swing dance last night (not my > normal thing, but they were local and had a live band). He had just > gotten a G5, and commented how difficult WCS is to photograph. I took > that as a challenge. I also played a bit with his G5 and 20/1.7 lens. > There are certainly things to like about a good EVF, and the G5 is > nearly there. I haven't seen the images from his camera yet, but the > sensor seems to still lag quite a bit behind the K5. On DxO mark, it > comes in comparable to the K20. WCS is not more difficult to photograph than Lindy Hop or Balboa. But, as most dances - it has its own specifics. As we discussed with your previously, reasonable knowledge of the dance and the particular music by both the photographer and the dancer(s) plays substantial role. I am looking forward to seeing how different people will take my special class at the Fusion Exchange in January, - as they may have all different dance backgrounds. (Apparently, that class is sold out.) > > I was checking out a K30 review and it seems to have quite a few > features that I really hope make it into the next generation of the high > end APS (or FF) body. > What does it have that the new K5s don't have? Focus peaking? Igor -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
