I currently have a Pentax K20 - and the only lens I currently have (2nd hand) is a Tamron 18-200mm. I haven't been all that impressed with it's focus (or often lack of focus). Because it's the only digital I've used, I don't really have much to compare to aside from other photographers works.
I'd like to focus on more close range work - portraits mostly, but also birds and wildlife so I will likely need a variety of lenses including a decent telephoto.
What recommendations do you have to help me get started on the right path? Not looking to make the switch to Canon or Nikon. There must be lenses available for Pentax that will give me the results I'm hoping to achieve!
Let's see. You have different needs - most wildlife will not let you get very close for the "close range work" unless you have a remote system that triggers when its motion sensor is tripped. That said...
The 50-135mm f2.8 is nice and fast. The focus can be a little soft at the extreme end, but not to the point where it bugs me. Con? AF motor is a titch slower than I'd like for action shots, but that might be PEBKAC - I don't do a lot of action photography in general. Paid about $1000 USD, but the price has gone up since.
Sigma 18-55mm f2.8: it's a very nice wide lens - definitely a big step up from the kit lens. Fast, AF is pretty good. I like this for landscapes and some portraits. I don't remember what I paid...around $600 or so? It's my go-to lens when I want to capture that vast, sweeping landscape.
The plastic 50mm f1.4 lens: I really like it. Fast as hell and it's a good, solid portrait lens. $400-ish?
I also have the 43mm f1.9, and I use this when I shoot portraits in small spaces. Definitely a good portrait lens.
The 35mm f2.4 is also recommended, but I've not tried it myself, but it might be a good starter portrait lens - about $200. Don't let the low price deter you; it's due to its plastic body and lack of manual aperture control (you set it via camera dials).
On my wish list is the 300mm f4 ($1400) or new 560mm f5.6 ($7000) AND the new 2x teleconverter ($600-$700) for wildlife photography. I have a crappy 30yo Solignor that works out to be about 460mm on my K5, and I just adore having that big of a zoom. But the IQ is horrible; I'm keeping my eye out for inexpensive alternatives while I save up.
If you'd like thorough, in-depth reviews of these lens or any other pentax lens, hit Pentaxforums.com. Great resource for when you're shopping, and the community is growing.
Is the DSLR fad over?
Of course camera manufacturers appreciate that convenience matters to consumers. Convenience has driven the consumer market for decades and everyone knew it. All of the periods of boom in the industry coincided with advancements in convenience.
The digital revolution is all about expedience. It's the people who are just seeing it now who are behind the curve. An old friend who is a Canon sales rep predicted the decline of the point-and-shoot digital market caused by phones about a decade ago. I doubt he was the first. Roughly 70 million interchangeable lens cameras were sold globally over the last 5 years. I'm sure I'm not making any unwarranted assumptions in stating that working professionals are only a small proportion of those buyers - the BLS estimates 136,000 professional photographers in the US. Worldwide, maybe it's a million or two?
I'm sure all of us know quite a few amateur SLR owners. Most of them bought the camera because they wanted better quality and were told what equipment could provide it and was within their budget, but were never willing to learn how to use the camera to get that quality. Instead, they quickly tired of carrying around a larger camera that when used on auto-mode produces photos that are only slightly better than what the better mobile phones are producing these days.
A very large proportion of the SLR owners I know almost never use them any more. Since after an initial period of enthusiasm with the new device, they now mostly sit shelves, these buyers probably won't be returning to push those sales numbers back up in the future. These are the people I'm referring to as following a fad.
Obviously, not the professionals. They buy what they need for their job, and will continue to do so. Nor for a fairly sizable number of hobbyists like myself, willing to make at least some extra effort and investment in pursuit of quality rather than settling for convenience.
The digital revolution is all about expedience. It's the people who are just seeing it now who are behind the curve. An old friend who is a Canon sales rep predicted the decline of the point-and-shoot digital market caused by phones about a decade ago. I doubt he was the first. Roughly 70 million interchangeable lens cameras were sold globally over the last 5 years. I'm sure I'm not making any unwarranted assumptions in stating that working professionals are only a small proportion of those buyers - the BLS estimates 136,000 professional photographers in the US. Worldwide, maybe it's a million or two?
I'm sure all of us know quite a few amateur SLR owners. Most of them bought the camera because they wanted better quality and were told what equipment could provide it and was within their budget, but were never willing to learn how to use the camera to get that quality. Instead, they quickly tired of carrying around a larger camera that when used on auto-mode produces photos that are only slightly better than what the better mobile phones are producing these days.
A very large proportion of the SLR owners I know almost never use them any more. Since after an initial period of enthusiasm with the new device, they now mostly sit shelves, these buyers probably won't be returning to push those sales numbers back up in the future. These are the people I'm referring to as following a fad.
Obviously, not the professionals. They buy what they need for their job, and will continue to do so. Nor for a fairly sizable number of hobbyists like myself, willing to make at least some extra effort and investment in pursuit of quality rather than settling for convenience.
Event Photography Tips for Newbies
Before shooting Manila events with an SLR, there's more to than just bringing your camera there and clicking away. I'm assuming you know how to change the ISO on the camera, but you are having difficulty deciding what ISO to choose?
There are three factors that determine exposure; shutter speed, aperture and ISO. These are referred to as the exposure triangle. Each one has a different effect on your final image and you need to visualize what you are trying to accomplish and then make your exposure choices based on those decisions. Here is an excellent book that will teach you almost everything you need to know about the exposure triangle, I recommend it highly.
http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Exposure-Photographs-Digital-Updated/dp/0817463003/
Basically this is the deal with ISO. The ISO is essentially the sensitivity of your camera's sensor to light. At the lowest setting (usually 100) there will generally be the least amount of noise. The higher the setting, the worse the noise. The reasons you want to use a high ISO is when the light is low, and you need to keep the shutter speed fast to avoid blurring images. Since noisy is preferable to blurry, this is a trade-off you will sometimes accept. Reasons to use a low ISO, when you want the cleanest image possible and shutter speed is not necessarily an issue...like bright sunny days in Philippines or when shooting on a tripod. As you use your camera during the event, you will learn at what point ISO noise becomes an issue. As technology has progressed, we can push cameras much farther now than in the past. There are just too many scenarios to list here, but this gives you an idea what kind of things to take in consideration. Trust me, get the book and read it.
Next, the 75-300 is heavy? Hardly, it's actually quite a lightweight to carry around during the event. As far as stabilization, none of the Canon bodies have it. Stabilization is built into the lenses on Canon equipment, not the body...so I'm not sure what you're referring to there.
As far as editing, I don't think flickr has that capability...picasa does, you may want to try that one...it's tied in with Google+ nowadays.
There are three factors that determine exposure; shutter speed, aperture and ISO. These are referred to as the exposure triangle. Each one has a different effect on your final image and you need to visualize what you are trying to accomplish and then make your exposure choices based on those decisions. Here is an excellent book that will teach you almost everything you need to know about the exposure triangle, I recommend it highly.
http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Exposure-Photographs-Digital-Updated/dp/0817463003/
Basically this is the deal with ISO. The ISO is essentially the sensitivity of your camera's sensor to light. At the lowest setting (usually 100) there will generally be the least amount of noise. The higher the setting, the worse the noise. The reasons you want to use a high ISO is when the light is low, and you need to keep the shutter speed fast to avoid blurring images. Since noisy is preferable to blurry, this is a trade-off you will sometimes accept. Reasons to use a low ISO, when you want the cleanest image possible and shutter speed is not necessarily an issue...like bright sunny days in Philippines or when shooting on a tripod. As you use your camera during the event, you will learn at what point ISO noise becomes an issue. As technology has progressed, we can push cameras much farther now than in the past. There are just too many scenarios to list here, but this gives you an idea what kind of things to take in consideration. Trust me, get the book and read it.
Next, the 75-300 is heavy? Hardly, it's actually quite a lightweight to carry around during the event. As far as stabilization, none of the Canon bodies have it. Stabilization is built into the lenses on Canon equipment, not the body...so I'm not sure what you're referring to there.
As far as editing, I don't think flickr has that capability...picasa does, you may want to try that one...it's tied in with Google+ nowadays.
Mac Pro intro of new models coming?
I understand Apple has about a 3 year cycle for introducing "new & improved" for proven good products. As I see it, a three year cycle is a little too long; probably more like six months. But the thing is, you should not expect that what you buy now will be obsolete or dead or unsupported in three years. That's not what will happen.
Apple has typically upgraded the tech about every six months in their current models; the processors get a little faster (not really much of an issue, any more); they have more cores and more pipelines and more ram and they're moving from mechanical drives with moving parts that eventually wear out and break down and are heavy to solid state drives with no moving parts and don't get so hot and graphics processors with more memory and better heat dissipation and different and faster connectors and brighter and higher resolute displays and it's never going to stop. These things will always be in evolutionary mode.
You get something now or whenever and know that it will be surpassed in six months in some way. Also know that, with prudent care and maintenance, it will have a lifespan of at least five years and probably much longer and will still be working as it did when new with little degradation. And yes, there will also be a new and improved model coming right around the corner. But that's what you want, isn't it?
You say, you're 'tired of Windows'. That's the OS that was the primary motivator that made me buy a Mac; a 17" MacBook Pro in 2006 with Intel Core Duo processor and Apple Mac OS X 10.4.x, the first OS X version. It now runs OS X 10.6.8, the last OS X version the Core Duo can handle. But the Core Duo was replaced after about six months with Core2 Duo, along with all new, upgraded hardware to match the processor and to optimize its speed and performance. And it's been that way at every step. I hope it never changes.
All the other PCs offer about the same kinds of upgraded hardware but what they can't offer is the proprietary OS belonging to Apple. You either accept it or you stay with the same old Windows OS and all the problems that accompany it. That's all I have to say about that.
Apple has typically upgraded the tech about every six months in their current models; the processors get a little faster (not really much of an issue, any more); they have more cores and more pipelines and more ram and they're moving from mechanical drives with moving parts that eventually wear out and break down and are heavy to solid state drives with no moving parts and don't get so hot and graphics processors with more memory and better heat dissipation and different and faster connectors and brighter and higher resolute displays and it's never going to stop. These things will always be in evolutionary mode.
You get something now or whenever and know that it will be surpassed in six months in some way. Also know that, with prudent care and maintenance, it will have a lifespan of at least five years and probably much longer and will still be working as it did when new with little degradation. And yes, there will also be a new and improved model coming right around the corner. But that's what you want, isn't it?
You say, you're 'tired of Windows'. That's the OS that was the primary motivator that made me buy a Mac; a 17" MacBook Pro in 2006 with Intel Core Duo processor and Apple Mac OS X 10.4.x, the first OS X version. It now runs OS X 10.6.8, the last OS X version the Core Duo can handle. But the Core Duo was replaced after about six months with Core2 Duo, along with all new, upgraded hardware to match the processor and to optimize its speed and performance. And it's been that way at every step. I hope it never changes.
All the other PCs offer about the same kinds of upgraded hardware but what they can't offer is the proprietary OS belonging to Apple. You either accept it or you stay with the same old Windows OS and all the problems that accompany it. That's all I have to say about that.
What's up with Photobucket?
Wow, Photobucket sent me an email saying my free 10GB was almost used up and I need to upgrade to the paid version.
So I went into my library and deleted over half my old images. Was 613, now 357 images. Two days later they say I've exceeded my 10GB and stopped displaying images I've posted. All is says is this:
It's like pay us for free advertising. You advertize for them for free by linking to your photos, in return you get a free account, but you provide too much advertizing so you need to pay them so they can account for all the traffic you bring in. Makes complete sense to me....
I wonder if I can set up a new photobucket account using a different email address or will I need to learn to use flickr or another service.
It's like pay us for free advertising. You advertize for them for free by linking to your photos, in return you get a free account, but you provide too much advertizing so you need to pay them so they can account for all the traffic you bring in. Makes complete sense to me....
I wonder if I can set up a new photobucket account using a different email address or will I need to learn to use flickr or another service.
Advice on Carribean themed social hour?
For next month's wedding, the client is requesting to make the social hour Caribbean themed. Would that be weird switching themes and then going back to the original theme for the reception? Even if we emphasized the honeymoon being in the Caribbean? Other ideas we thought about is making a Caribbean themed bridal shower or rehearsal dinner, etc. if the social hour did not work.
Maybe switching back and forth will just undermine both themes, and they are so different--elegant roses theme, playful caribbean theme--too jarring. I am not a fan of brides planning their showers since it is a party for them, thrown by other people, not their event. However, the caribbean theme would be fine for the shower and/or rehearsal dinner.
It's easy to sink into a mixed-up muddle -- a formal ceremony, a casual Caribbean social hour, and then back to a formal reception? Unless there was an overriding style that could be incorporated into all three segments, I think the Caribbean jaunt in the middle of two formal settings would be a little too jarring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
