Bruce, I share your point of view.
I found a similar situation with photographing swing dances.
For a dance shot, f/4 is about as shallow DOF as you want to go.
I find 17-70/4 is very suitable for this. (It also gives a little bit
of the longer end, - which is occasionally handy, but you loose
Faster lenses are good and the 77/1.8 limited is still for sale.
Either Pentax 85/1.4 is rare to find.
And the A*135/1.8 is made of 'unobtanium'.
Regards, Bob S.
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Sandy Harris sandyinch...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/1/10, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote:
and Cotty is responsible for making an 85mm A* f1.4 into an M...
On 2/1/2010 10:54 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote:
Faster lenses are good and the 77/1.8 limited is still for sale.
Either Pentax 85/1.4 is rare to find.
And the A*135/1.8 is made of 'unobtanium'.
Regards, Bob S.
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at
A50/1.2 Crop as needed.
stan
On Feb 1, 2010, at 12:15 AM, Sandy Harris wrote:
On 2/1/10, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote:
Very much appreciated. If there is enough difference I may spring
for a K-x.
Could you get a faster lens instead? The 77/1.8 limited and
the 85/1.4
I'm guessing that Stan is being facetious. You really need a zoom to shoot most
sporting events. You don't want to crop a 50mm shot to 200mm FOV.
I thought the shots Bruce posted with the K20D were relatively noise free. I'd
worry about a Kx in terms of write speed and autofocus control. You
I'm guessing that Stan is being facetious. You really need a zoom to shoot most
sporting events. You don't want to crop a 50mm shot to 200mm FOV.
I thought the shots Bruce posted with the K20D were relatively noise free. I'd
worry about a Kx in terms of write speed and autofocus control. You
I have shot this venue the last two years so I know what I am up
against. The only way to shoot it is with a wide to short tele zoom
- basically the DA* 16-50 works extremely well. Since I have it and
used it last year, that is the lens of choice. For this particular
use, AF will probably not
I was at least half serious, but I did not consider the DOF issue.
However, just in terms of quality of image, I wonder if an image shot at 1.2
and then cropped to, say, 25% of the original, might not be better than one
shot at a higher ISO, uncropped. Am thinking 1.2 at 400 or 800ISO vs. 4.0 at
At my daughter's game yesterday, I took shots in the gym feeling the
lighting will be somewhat representative of what I will face for the
gymnastic meet (I have shot this meet the last two years).
Here is one shot:
Pentax K20D, DA* 50-135/2.8 @ 108mm
ISO 3200, 1/200 @ f/2.8
On 01/02/2010, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote:
At my daughter's game yesterday, I took shots in the gym feeling the
lighting will be somewhat representative of what I will face for the
gymnastic meet (I have shot this meet the last two years).
Here is one shot:
Pentax K20D, DA*
Very much appreciated. If there is enough difference I may spring
for a K-x.
--
Bruce
Sunday, January 31, 2010, 9:36:20 PM, you wrote:
RS On 01/02/2010, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote:
At my daughter's game yesterday, I took shots in the gym feeling the
lighting will be
On 2/1/10, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote:
Very much appreciated. If there is enough difference I may spring
for a K-x.
Could you get a faster lens instead? The 77/1.8 limited and
the 85/1.4 are both reportedly excellent. Would they be long
enough? If manual focus is OK, perhaps
On Jan 31, 2010, at 9:38 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Very much appreciated. If there is enough difference I may spring
for a K-x.
I was curious about this and started to do some research. It seems
that buy.com has a K-X through beach for $549:
I need the zoom capability. As well, I don't want that shallow of
DOF - I'd like to be shooting around f4 if possible. I have shot
this two years now and it will be critical to have the wide zoom DA*
16-50. So I have the lens I want, just this year they are now going
with no flash scenario.
14 matches
Mail list logo
