Mark, How about having a 1 stop faster prime? That would mean half the shutter speed, which directly translates into the sharpness, when shot with a monopod. Also, I don't know what are restrictions on the shooting the graduation, but a slower, f/4 prime 200mm lens, together with a lightweight body would allow using a good table-top tripod, which in my view, beats monopod at speeds like 1/15. I have recently been using Bogen with M135/3.5 at speeds up to 10s, shooting at night, having camera on the outside of a window frame and pushing it down to stabilize agains the wind -- very good results, although that's a totally different situation; I am bringing it up just to make my point that table top tripods work wonders together with primes.
But, in the end, it's whatever works the best for any particular situation. Mishka > From: Mark Roberts > Subject: RE: Film for graduation (and a LONG note on zooms, > primes, 'n' st uff) > Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 06:48:17 -0700 > > Bill Peifer wrote: > > > Shel asks, "Why not use a faster, sharper prime? What is this > > penchant people have for zooms?" > > I can suggest a short answer: In these circumstances a prime won't be > sharper. > Using long focal lengths under conditions like these, technique > (camera steadiness) will totally overwhelm all but the grossest > diferences in lens sharpness. Michael Reichmann (the Luminous > Landscape guy) has commented on this with regards to many people's > fixation on sharpness. Except with wide angles, you're throwing away > that expensive sharpness of your primes whenever you don't use a good > tripod. > -- > Mark Roberts LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
