On Sep 19, 2012, at 3:31 PM, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote: > > On Sep 19, 2012, at 11:17 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > >> But improved autofocus will be even nicer. If it's truly a step up, the K5 >> IIs will take the lead spot ahead of my K5, and the current backup, a K7, >> will go on ebay. > > > I recognize that I tend to take photos in conditions that are a bit more > challenging than most people face. I've spent the past couple of days going > through my photos from last weekend. I'd say that I lost the most shots > through mis-focus. Unfortunately I can't easily tell in lightroom which were > manual and which were auto focus. The biggest camera change to improve my > keeper ratio would probably be more focus points, each one restricted to a > narrower range. I lost several photos because the camera focused on someone > closer to the camera that was just barely in the frame. Then, of course, > there is the ongoing problem with focusing on the microphone.
Use single point autofocus. For singers with microphones use the top spot and place it right on the eyeball when you squeeze the trigger halfway down. For dancers, you probably want to use the second one down on verticals and put it on the head. When shooting horizontals, you can use the upper left of upper right and put it on the head of one of the two dancers. Once you get used to using single spots, you can switch back and forth rapidly with your thumb. That being said, a narrower range and more points would be nice, even when using single point. > > Beyond that, faster accurate focus in stupid low light would really help. > Dancers just are not considerate enough to only move perpendicular to the > line of focus. > > One feature that would really help me would be different exposure metering > modes, one where I could say to not meter on the bright back lighting, > another, where it would ignore dark backgrounds (though that is more a > lightroom issue). You already have that. It's called exposure com. If you don't want it to meter on the bright background, give it a plus one stop or more. If you don't want it to meter on the dark background, minus the exposure. > I mostly just shoot manual exposure anyways, but sometimes when people are > moving around from light to dark areas, I don't have that luxury and have to > go to TAv. > > There were also a bunch of pictures that weren't "lost" per se, but were > rougher than I'd like because in order to have a fast enough shutter speed > for lindy hop, I was shooting in the ISO 12,800-25,600 range. An 8MP sensor > with the latest technology would do me more good than a 24MP sensor. > > Well done mirrorless technology could alleviate a lot of my problems. > Without the mirrorbox and needing retrofocus lenses, I could get faster wide > lenses. When focus is an issue, a sharp 30/1.4 on APS would do me more good > than a FF 50/1.4. Likewise, for manually focusing in the dark, liveview, and > I imagine focus peaking , would be an immense aid. > > However, most of these things would make no difference to a landscape > photographer. Sure, fast wide glass would be nice, but it's not as big of an > issue if you have a tripod. Ralf's probably the only one crazy enough to > shoot landscapes at night. > > > -- > Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est > > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
