Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
>> Trying not to be pedantic, but standing up to blanket statements! >> > >Taking (and being) the exception and trying to disprove something. > >Most people buy features and don't turn them off, ever. > >William Robb Well, I'd at least agree with that last one. Most people probably do. I think that you and I and perhaps quite a few on this list are not most people, and halleluja to that! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
- Original Message - From: "Cotty" Subject: Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > > Trying not to be pedantic, but standing up to blanket statements! > Taking (and being) the exception and trying to disprove something. Most people buy features and don't turn them off, ever. William Robb
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
- Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" Subject: Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > It's way slower than film. > This would be something that I really hope they improve upon in furure models. I expect that any low end models coming out will be istD's with a plastic chassis. If they do make a higher spec'ed camera, a larger, faster buffer is a must. William Robb
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
On 12 May 2004 at 23:32, Cotty wrote: > Just cuz Leica doesn't do IS If it were just that simple :-) > (sprinting, diving...) I'll bet IS would do me no good trying to shoot that! Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
no amount of fancy technology is able to give "it" to those who don't have "it". those who have "it" have the potential of being that much better by having the fancy technology. Herb - Original Message - From: "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 12:15 PM Subject: RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > Peersonally, I find it funny because it's ridiculous. >
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
Cotty wrote: (sprinting, diving...) Pop-Pop-Pop Pop Pop Damn he's fast for a tall guy in a skirt, Have to use the morter Foomp BLAM. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
OMG, that is freakin' hilarious! tan. who is recovering her breath now after LHAO... -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 13 May 2004 4:43 AM To: pentax list Subject: Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test >> Further to that point: I was a little irritated to find just how often I was >> waiting for the *ist-D to empty the buffer during the race at Long >Beach. Most >> of the time the buffer was large enough, but there were enough times >when the >> camera wasn't ready to shoot for it to be a noticeable problem. > >There is nothing worse than when a stage artist comes right up to you and >poses >for the camera and you have to "pretend you are shooting" whilst the buffer >empties :-( When I was a student, I went down to a boating lake and shot a few rolls of a sailing regatta on a Spotmatic, from the shore. Later, the marshalling crew in a RIB asked me if I wanted to go out with them and get some shots from the water. I jumped at the chance. After we left the dock, I realised I had about 2 frames left on my last roll. I rewound the film and fired off blanks as we buzzed the sailing dinghies, not wishing to let down my chauffers. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
>> Further to that point: I was a little irritated to find just how often I was >> waiting for the *ist-D to empty the buffer during the race at Long >Beach. Most >> of the time the buffer was large enough, but there were enough times >when the >> camera wasn't ready to shoot for it to be a noticeable problem. > >There is nothing worse than when a stage artist comes right up to you and >poses >for the camera and you have to "pretend you are shooting" whilst the buffer >empties :-( When I was a student, I went down to a boating lake and shot a few rolls of a sailing regatta on a Spotmatic, from the shore. Later, the marshalling crew in a RIB asked me if I wanted to go out with them and get some shots from the water. I jumped at the chance. After we left the dock, I realised I had about 2 frames left on my last roll. I rewound the film and fired off blanks as we buzzed the sailing dinghies, not wishing to let down my chauffers. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
I understood that at the time I wrote it Tom, thats why I said what I said (again). I hope you get it now. -Shawn -Original Message- From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 12:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > -Original Message- > From: Shawn K. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Tom (tv), > > I realize it's funny, thats why I said it!! You know the old > saying, "It's funny because it's true." Peersonally, I find it funny because it's ridiculous. tv
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
On 12/5/04, BILL ROBB, discombobulated, offered: >> >It's a replacement for a particular skill. >> >All that features do, is allow the photographer to get by with >less >> >developed skills. > >> >> That is an opinion and not fact. >> > >Really? >Ok, lets look at a few skills. >Looking at a scene and knowing what the aperture and shutter speed >needs to be set at. >It can be done without a light meter, if you have developed that >skill. >Setting aperture and shutter speed efficiently can be done, if you >have practiced it enough. >Most don't, they have built in light meters, and use some form of >exposure automation. >Most haven't bothered to develop the skill set required to operate a >camera quckly, manually. >If speed is thought to be of the essence, they shoot on auto. >Focusing can be done manually, and very quickly, provided you know >your equipment, and have worked at developing the skill.. >Perhaps not fast enough to follow focus a race care going 350km/hr, >but certainly fast enough for most requirements, such as following a >bride down the aisle. >Few people have refined that skill anymore, they use autofocus. > >These are skills which, once aquired, will get lost if not used. I >can no longer operate a camera manually as fast as I would like to. I >have fallen into the auto exposure trap myself, and am finding now >that I am losing the ability to focus as quickly as well, now that I >have aquired and am using more AF technology. >I haven't been able to acurately determine exposure without a light >meter for a very, very long time, though I was able to estimate >within a half stop at one point in my life. >I do know of what I speak, and from my own experience, I have found >what I said to be fact, not opinion. I don't disagree with any of the above. What I would point out is that in your original assertion that 'All that features do, is allow the photographer to get by with less developed skills' is an opinion and not a fact. It can't be fact - because it doesn't apply to me! I have a camera with features, and I choose not to use those features most of the time. Like AF - I very seldom use it, but if I do, it's not because I have less developed skills. My manual focussing skills are satisfactory. I know which way to turn the lens barrel, even on different makes of lens where they operate in differing directions. Image Stabilisation is a 'feature', and one that I would dearly love to have, and in fact will, shortly. It will help me achieve something that is rarely possible without. Take the barn owl, for instance - at the moment he (or she) pops around at dusk, when light levels are low. using an effective max aperture of f4, in order to avoid camera shake at 450mm, it is pretty dire unless shooting at 800 or even 1600. The problem here is the digital noise. I want to shoot at 400, or even 200 to get the pics looking as clean as possible. A tripod is completely out of the question. The bird moves too fast for that. It has to be handheld. Short of setting up a few dozen flash heads around the field (hmmm, could be fun...), I see no way of doing it the way I would like to without IS. So - I buy an IS lens and use that. Does this mean that I am now getting by with less developed skills? I think that it is entirely possible for IS or AF or even AE to allow a photographer to get by with less developed skills, and I think it happens a lot. But your assertion that 'All that features do, is allow the photographer to get by with less developed skills' is an opinion because there are many instances of photographers with totally developed skills using 'features'. Trying not to be pedantic, but standing up to blanket statements! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
"Emptying the buffer" on a film camera is achieved by either by thumbing the film advance lever or automatically by the film advance motor. For a photo transfer to be faster by mechanics than by electronics in our multi GHz era is inexcusable. - My opinion... Perhaps the time it takes to "empty the buffer" is actually shorter than mechanics, but we have different expectations for electronics than mechanics? If this is true, then perhaps a fake "film winding noise" (type and timber programmable of course) would be useful to give us a false sense that elapsed time is acceptable. Regards, Bob... From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On 11 May 2004 at 21:56, John Francis wrote: > > > Further to that point: I was a little irritated to find just how often I was > > waiting for the *ist-D to empty the buffer during the race at Long Beach. Most > > of the time the buffer was large enough, but there were enough times when the > > camera wasn't ready to shoot for it to be a noticeable problem. > > There is nothing worse than when a stage artist comes right up to you and poses > for the camera and you have to "pretend you are shooting" whilst the buffer > empties :-(
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
I just noticed today that my Lexar "write accelerated" WA card really is. I was using a plain old SanDisk 256 MB card and I kept getting the hourglass. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/12/04 11:11AM >>> On 11 May 2004 at 21:56, John Francis wrote: > Further to that point: I was a little irritated to find just how often I was > waiting for the *ist-D to empty the buffer during the race at Long Beach. Most > of the time the buffer was large enough, but there were enough times when the > camera wasn't ready to shoot for it to be a noticeable problem. There is nothing worse than when a stage artist comes right up to you and poses for the camera and you have to "pretend you are shooting" whilst the buffer empties :-( Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
> -Original Message- > From: Shawn K. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Tom (tv), > > I realize it's funny, thats why I said it!! You know the old > saying, "It's funny because it's true." Peersonally, I find it funny because it's ridiculous. tv
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
> -Original Message- > From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > - Original Message - > From: "tom" < > Subject: RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > > > > > I guess that's true. I don't have the skill to handold a 300mm lens > at 1/15. > > Never did, never will. > > > > Can you? > > Best I have done is hand hold a 400mm at 1/30th. Once? Twice? > > > > > IS works. If you can shoot, it can only help. If you can't, it > can't. Duh. > > > > I wasn't making a moral judgement, just an observation. As am I. > Don't get so twitchy. You're right, I shouldn't take the bait. tv
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
> -Original Message- > From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On 11 May 2004 at 22:06, William Robb wrote: > > > From: "tom" < > > Subject: RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > > > > I guess that's true. I don't have the skill to handold a > 300mm lens > > at 1/15. > > > Never did, never will. > > > > > > Can you? > > > > Best I have done is hand hold a 400mm at 1/30th. > > I'm often shooting at 1/80 with a 300/2.8 + 1.7AF TC on *ist > D with good sharp results. No matter what your skill level is, IS adds a few stops. tv
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
>> There is nothing worse than when a stage artist comes right up to WR> you and poses >> for the camera and you have to "pretend you are shooting" whilst WR> the buffer >> empties :-( WR> One thing is: Same situation, and your film camera goes into auto WR> rewind... Fortunately, this "feature" can be turned off on good film cameras. Still, for pretending that one is shooting (I use this when shooting young children) is very good to use the electronic DOF preview. It does make a nice "shooting" sound on some cameras. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
On 12 May 2004 at 8:37, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Don't you use your film cameras any more? Can't recall when I've last seen a > film foto from you. Not so much now, I've pretty much phased out my use of film in 35mm SLRs. The LXs are laying idle and the MZ-S will soon be heading for a new home. Likely the only 35mm gear that will see film from now on are my Leicas. I'm still shooting plenty of film with my Mamiya 7 but not rapid fire stuff. I've nearly got my computer system under control and will start scanning some 67 images soon :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
Don't you use your film cameras any more? Can't recall when I've last seen a film foto from you. Shel Belinkoff > [Original Message] > From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I sort of forgot about that nightmare now I have 6GB of CF cards on me :-)
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
On 12 May 2004 at 8:17, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Sure there is ... when using a film camera and you've run out of film I sort of forgot about that nightmare now I have 6GB of CF cards on me :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
Sure there is ... when using a film camera and you've run out of film Shel Belinkoff > [Original Message] > From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > There is nothing worse than when a stage artist comes right up to you and poses > for the camera and you have to "pretend you are shooting" whilst the buffer > empties :-(
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
- Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" Subject: Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > On 11 May 2004 at 21:56, John Francis wrote: > > > Further to that point: I was a little irritated to find just how often I was > > waiting for the *ist-D to empty the buffer during the race at Long Beach. Most > > of the time the buffer was large enough, but there were enough times when the > > camera wasn't ready to shoot for it to be a noticeable problem. > > There is nothing worse than when a stage artist comes right up to you and poses > for the camera and you have to "pretend you are shooting" whilst the buffer > empties :-( One thing is: Same situation, and your film camera goes into auto rewind... William Robb
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
On 11 May 2004 at 21:56, John Francis wrote: > Further to that point: I was a little irritated to find just how often I was > waiting for the *ist-D to empty the buffer during the race at Long Beach. Most > of the time the buffer was large enough, but there were enough times when the > camera wasn't ready to shoot for it to be a noticeable problem. There is nothing worse than when a stage artist comes right up to you and poses for the camera and you have to "pretend you are shooting" whilst the buffer empties :-( Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
- Original Message - From: "Frantisek Vlcek" Subject: Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > I do use my cameras (the ones with motors) on continuous all the time, > but rarely just "rattling off" shots. It just lets me do quick succession of > _timed_ by myself shots without having to let the finger off the > shutter button as in single mode. And the faster the motor the better, > because it lets me do a second shot right immediately (at exactly > chosen moment) the first when I see the first one didn't quite make > it. I think that is the best way to use a motor drive. William Robb
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
- Original Message - From: "Cotty" Subject: Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > > >It's a replacement for a particular skill. > >All that features do, is allow the photographer to get by with less > >developed skills. > > That is an opinion and not fact. > Really? Ok, lets look at a few skills. Looking at a scene and knowing what the aperture and shutter speed needs to be set at. It can be done without a light meter, if you have developed that skill. Setting aperture and shutter speed efficiently can be done, if you have practiced it enough. Most don't, they have built in light meters, and use some form of exposure automation. Most haven't bothered to develop the skill set required to operate a camera quckly, manually. If speed is thought to be of the essence, they shoot on auto. Focusing can be done manually, and very quickly, provided you know your equipment, and have worked at developing the skill.. Perhaps not fast enough to follow focus a race care going 350km/hr, but certainly fast enough for most requirements, such as following a bride down the aisle. Few people have refined that skill anymore, they use autofocus. These are skills which, once aquired, will get lost if not used. I can no longer operate a camera manually as fast as I would like to. I have fallen into the auto exposure trap myself, and am finding now that I am losing the ability to focus as quickly as well, now that I have aquired and am using more AF technology. I haven't been able to acurately determine exposure without a light meter for a very, very long time, though I was able to estimate within a half stop at one point in my life. I do know of what I speak, and from my own experience, I have found what I said to be fact, not opinion. William Robb
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
WR> My own experience in this is limited. I have tried using a motor WR> drive to shoot agility (a dog sport), and failed miserably. WR> The one and only time I used a drive in continuous shooting for WR> action, I was able to get some wonderful shots of dogs not quite off WR> the ground, not quite in the tire, not quite in the jump, etc. WR> Eight rolls of 36 exposure film, perhaps 3 usable shots, and no good I do use my cameras (the ones with motors) on continuous all the time, but rarely just "rattling off" shots. It just lets me do quick succession of _timed_ by myself shots without having to let the finger off the shutter button as in single mode. And the faster the motor the better, because it lets me do a second shot right immediately (at exactly chosen moment) the first when I see the first one didn't quite make it. But sometimes, the technology really deters (?) from making pictures. Or making great pictures. But it does depend on the photographer, I think. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
>> > The latest IS versions have a panning option which works well for >some types of >> > action shots... >> >> Maybe so but I just hate seeing it being touted as a panacea. > >It's a replacement for a particular skill. >All that features do, is allow the photographer to get by with less >developed skills. > >William Robb That is an opinion and not fact. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
>> The latest IS versions have a panning option which works well for some >types of >> action shots... > >Maybe so but I just hate seeing it being touted as a panacea. Which begs the question, Rob, have you ever tried it? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
No flame wars, please. I own (too) many cameras. Some have the focus ring turning this way, some the other way. It can be difficult to remember fast, which way to turn the focus ring. And first you must know at which focus distances the lens currently is set. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 12. maj 2004 07:47 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test Some of us would say that is lack of skill, not knowing which way to turn the focus ring. But why learn to use your camera when for a few hundred bucks you can get one that will do it for you? A weekend of practice is so just too much work. Welcome to the 21st century where you can always blame your tools for being too dumb. Yes, Shawn, I know you were not complaining, but your post made a great lead in for my tirade (grin). -- Shawn K. wrote: > ... but then I realized I was turning the focus ring the wrong > direction, ... -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
- Original Message - From: "tom" < Subject: RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > I guess that's true. I don't have the skill to handold a 300mm lens at 1/15. > Never did, never will. > > Can you? Best I have done is hand hold a 400mm at 1/30th. > > IS works. If you can shoot, it can only help. If you can't, it can't. Duh. > I wasn't making a moral judgement, just an observation. Don't get so twitchy. William Robb
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
On Tue, 11 May 2004 21:43:01 -0400, Christian Skofteland wrote: > I find continuous shooting great for an action sequence (car spinning > off at the track) but crappy for capturing that "one" decisive moment > (rally car with all four wheels off the ground at the apex of a jump). You've quite accurately described my view, also. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
Tom (tv), I realize it's funny, thats why I said it!! You know the old saying, "It's funny because it's true." -Shawn -Original Message- From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 11:37 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > -Original Message- > From: Shawn K. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > So yeah, all those features are neat and all, > but in the end they just took being a photographer away from > the photographers and gave it to the hacks who will do > anything for a buck. This is pretty funny. tv
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
> -Original Message- > From: Shawn K. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > So yeah, all those features are neat and all, > but in the end they just took being a photographer away from > the photographers and gave it to the hacks who will do > anything for a buck. This is pretty funny. tv
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
> -Original Message- > From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > - Original Message - > From: "Rob Studdert" > Subject: RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > > > > On 11 May 2004 at 19:07, tom wrote: > > > > > The latest IS versions have a panning option which works well for > some types of > > > action shots... > > > > Maybe so but I just hate seeing it being touted as a panacea. > > It's a replacement for a particular skill. > All that features do, is allow the photographer to get by with less > developed skills. I guess that's true. I don't have the skill to handold a 300mm lens at 1/15. Never did, never will. Can you? IS works. If you can shoot, it can only help. If you can't, it can't. Duh. tv
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
"I see no merit in being able to do, by hand, something that a simple mechanism can do as well or better." That statement makes me think you are a hack... seriously. What merit is there in being able to do math by hand, or in your head instead of using software or a calculator?? What merit is there in driving a standard shift car faster than an auto shift car?? And the ultimate, what merit is there in a painted portrait if one can just take a picture??? And, do you know that painters are still alive and well today? My aunt is one and she charges upwards of 5,000 for larger sized portraits. And that's nothing, there are artists out there now who can charge 10, 15 even 20,000 for portraits. What merit is there in spending that money when you can go to Olan Mills and get an exact replica of yourself?? I think I've made my point, now you just have to accept it, you hack. ;) -Shawn
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
> > I find continuous shooting great for an action sequence (car spinning off at > the track) but crappy for capturing that "one" decisive moment (rally car > with all four wheels off the ground at the apex of a jump). I rarely use continuous shooting mode, either - the one big exception would be at the start of a race if I'm in position to get a good start shot. But I still look for a high frame rate for my cameras - the 4+ fps PZ-1p is ready to shoot again in half the time of the relatively sluggish MZ-S or *ist-D. I've quite often taken back-to-back exposures in single-frame mode, and it's extremely annoying not to get a shot because you're waiting for the camera. Further to that point: I was a little irritated to find just how often I was waiting for the *ist-D to empty the buffer during the race at Long Beach. Most of the time the buffer was large enough, but there were enough times when the camera wasn't ready to shoot for it to be a noticeable problem.
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
One of my favorite pieces of advice from John Shaw: "[at 1/500 and 5fps] ...in one second you've captured 5/500 of the action, but missed 495/500 of it You must be selective!" I find continuous shooting great for an action sequence (car spinning off at the track) but crappy for capturing that "one" decisive moment (rally car with all four wheels off the ground at the apex of a jump). Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > My own experience in this is limited. I have tried using a motor > drive to shoot agility (a dog sport), and failed miserably. > The one and only time I used a drive in continuous shooting for > action, I was able to get some wonderful shots of dogs not quite off > the ground, not quite in the tire, not quite in the jump, etc. > Eight rolls of 36 exposure film, perhaps 3 usable shots, and no good > ones. > This was done by using bursts of 3 to five frames at a time with a > motor drive A on a Program Plus. > Perhaps a faster drive would have helped, but I suspect that I would > have just wasted more film. > > OTOH, a friend of mine uses a PZ10 in single shot for the same thing > and, by timing his shutter release carefully, is getting virtually a > 100% hit rate. > > So yes, like using a motor drive instead of skill. > Skill wins out every time. > > William Robb > >
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
If the technology is a true replacement, I'm happy to make use of it. I see no merit in being able to do, by hand, something that a simple mechanism can do as well or better. Personally, for what I do, auto-focus has been a great benefit. It's not perfect, but it's useful. It gets things wrong sometimes, but not as often as I was missing shots (especially with the greater control on AF point selection that I have with the *ist-D). But that's mostly because of the sort of photography I do - in other situations, manual focus would produce a better image (in the hands of a sufficiently skilled photographer). Unfortunately a consequence of the trend to auto-focus has been to make manual focus a great deal harder. > It's true. I agree with that very much. Taking action shots with a manual > focus lens is very difficult at first. Man I was photographic this duck > when suddenly it took off and I thought I was going to get a great in flight > shot... but then I realized I was turning the focus ring the wrong > direction, then I turned it back the other direction, but due to the > direction the duck was flying the focal area passed quicker than I expected > and by that time it was pretty much too far away to be worth taking a > picture of... Better luck next time I guess. So yeah, all those features > are neat and all, but in the end they just took being a photographer away > from the photographers and gave it to the hacks who will do anything for a > buck. Seems that lots of jobs are going this direction thanks to > technology. > > -Shawn > > -Original Message- > From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 8:20 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Rob Studdert" > Subject: RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > > > > On 11 May 2004 at 19:07, tom wrote: > > > > > The latest IS versions have a panning option which works well for > some types of > > > action shots... > > > > Maybe so but I just hate seeing it being touted as a panacea. > > It's a replacement for a particular skill. > All that features do, is allow the photographer to get by with less > developed skills. > > William Robb > >
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
- Original Message - From: "Bill Owens" Subject: Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test. > > > > It's a replacement for a particular skill. > > All that features do, is allow the photographer to get by with less > > developed skills. > > > > William Robb > > Like depending on a motor drive instead of skill for action photos? > > My own experience in this is limited. I have tried using a motor drive to shoot agility (a dog sport), and failed miserably. The one and only time I used a drive in continuous shooting for action, I was able to get some wonderful shots of dogs not quite off the ground, not quite in the tire, not quite in the jump, etc. Eight rolls of 36 exposure film, perhaps 3 usable shots, and no good ones. This was done by using bursts of 3 to five frames at a time with a motor drive A on a Program Plus. Perhaps a faster drive would have helped, but I suspect that I would have just wasted more film. OTOH, a friend of mine uses a PZ10 in single shot for the same thing and, by timing his shutter release carefully, is getting virtually a 100% hit rate. So yes, like using a motor drive instead of skill. Skill wins out every time. William Robb
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
It's true. I agree with that very much. Taking action shots with a manual focus lens is very difficult at first. Man I was photographic this duck when suddenly it took off and I thought I was going to get a great in flight shot... but then I realized I was turning the focus ring the wrong direction, then I turned it back the other direction, but due to the direction the duck was flying the focal area passed quicker than I expected and by that time it was pretty much too far away to be worth taking a picture of... Better luck next time I guess. So yeah, all those features are neat and all, but in the end they just took being a photographer away from the photographers and gave it to the hacks who will do anything for a buck. Seems that lots of jobs are going this direction thanks to technology. -Shawn -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 8:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test - Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" Subject: RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test > On 11 May 2004 at 19:07, tom wrote: > > > The latest IS versions have a panning option which works well for some types of > > action shots... > > Maybe so but I just hate seeing it being touted as a panacea. It's a replacement for a particular skill. All that features do, is allow the photographer to get by with less developed skills. William Robb
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
> -Original Message- > From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On 11 May 2004 at 14:22, Shawn K. wrote: > > > I guess you're right to an extent. I could argue it by > pointing out > > some specific products, in actuality I think Nikon and > Canon do have > > an edge over the rest for some types of action photography > because of IS and USM type features. > > Maybe USM but IS usually promotes far slower shutter speeds, > not great for action. The latest IS versions have a panning option which works well for some types of action shots... tv
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
On 11 May 2004 at 14:22, Shawn K. wrote: > I guess you're right to an extent. I could argue it by pointing out some > specific products, in actuality I think Nikon and Canon do have an edge over the > rest for some types of action photography because of IS and USM type features. Maybe USM but IS usually promotes far slower shutter speeds, not great for action. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
Really? I had not heard of this. My local store sells Nikon and Canon too. Cesar Panama City, Florida -Original Message- From: jtainter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 12:30 PM There seems to be a high defect rate in *ist D production. I wonder if that influenced this test. Joe
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
There seems to be a high defect rate in *ist D production. I wonder if that influenced this test. Joe
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
Hi Arnold, on 11 May 04 you wrote in pentax.list: >The original Fotomagazin "test" of the *ist D was published in the issue >12/2003. If I remember correctly from reading in the shop (I never >bought that issue) the score on resolution was so low that it could have >been only cause either by misfocusing or some other manipulation. Those "testers" are simply mad: in the actual Colorfoto they've tested the Nikon D70 using a superb 60mm macro lens. All other DSLR tests before were made with simple zoom lenses (e.g. the 18-35 with the *istD). And now guess - the D70 has the best picture quality of all! There is a simple formula to calculate the test results - just multiplicate a certain factor with the number of adds that a producer buys ;-) Have you ever heard of a bad test of a Sigma or Tamron 28-300 superzoom? Gues why... ;-) Cheers, Heiko
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
Well, I guess that you are kidding. Quality never was a problem with German lenses. What really caused the death of Germany's camera industry was cheaper and more innovative (with respect to camera technology) competition from Japan. The Pentax Spotmatic was a major nail to the coffin of Zeiss Ikon and others. Interestingly, last year there was a large story in "Fotomagazin" titled "Durchbruch der Spiegelreflexen" (Breakthrough of the SLRs). This article reviewed the SLR history and the contributions from Leica, Zeiss, Nikon, Canon, Olympus and some others. However, the author managed to fully ignore Pentax. Not a single word about the Spotmatic! Unbelievable but true. I wrote a letter to the Magazine which was never answered. However, the Magazine printed one or two letters of other irritated readers. The original Fotomagazin "test" of the *ist D was published in the issue 12/2003. If I remember correctly from reading in the shop (I never bought that issue) the score on resolution was so low that it could have been only cause either by misfocusing or some other manipulation. Arnold Shawn K. schrieb: They're just mad because Pentax lenses are superior to all the high priced,high falutin german made stuff...
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
They're just mad because Pentax lenses are superior to all the high priced, high falutin german made stuff... -Shawn -Original Message- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 1:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test I just got the the lates issue of Fotomagasin. There is a test comparing all DSLR's. Ist D isn't doing too well: 145 points (max 200 possible). In fact, no other DSLR did worse. Best was Olympus E-1, Nikom D2H and Canon Eos 1Ds (175-176 points. This is odd because according to www.preview.com the Olympus (as an example) isn't doing quite as well. In fact not really better than the SONY DSC F717 as far as sharpness is concerned - in spite of the much larger sensor. Nikon D100 got only 159 points, Canon 10D; 162 points. I guess Fotomagasin doesn't like the SONY sensor, because D100 and Pentax *ist D got the lowest grades for reslution. Total Points: Olympus E-1 176 Nikon D2H176 Canon 1Ds175 Canon EOS 10D162 Nikon D100 159 Nikon D1X157 Fuji Finepix S2 Pro155 Sigma SD 10 152 Pentax *ist D145 Well, this German magasine never liked Pentax much! Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
Are the ratings by any chance based upon how many pages of ad space the company buys per year? I can not believe they come from actually using the cameras. -- Jens Bladt wrote: I just got the the lates issue of Fotomagasin. There is a test comparing all DSLR's. Ist D isn't doing too well: 145 points (max 200 possible). In fact, no other DSLR did worse. Best was Olympus E-1, Nikom D2H and Canon Eos 1Ds (175-176 points. This is odd because according to www.preview.com the Olympus (as an example) isn't doing quite as well. In fact not really better than the SONY DSC F717 as far as sharpness is concerned - in spite of the much larger sensor. Nikon D100 got only 159 points, Canon 10D; 162 points. I guess Fotomagasin doesn't like the SONY sensor, because D100 and Pentax *ist D got the lowest grades for reslution. Total Points: Olympus E-1 176 Nikon D2H176 Canon 1Ds175 Canon EOS 10D162 Nikon D100 159 Nikon D1X157 Fuji Finepix S2 Pro155 Sigma SD 10 152 Pentax *ist D145 Well, this German magasine never liked Pentax much! Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
RE: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test
Sylwek Actually, The Olympus does quite well compared to Canon D10. Not quite as sharp though. And much more noice. dpreview tested it agains Sony DSC F717 too, which actually does very well in spite of the smaller sensor in this pro-sumer 5 MP SONY (which I BTW own and enjoy using. I am expecting the *ist D to be significantly better - should I ever get one :-). Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Sylwester Pietrzyk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 10. maj 2004 09:47 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Pentax * ist D doing badly in Fotomagazin test on 10.05.04 7:33, Jens Bladt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I just got the the lates issue of Fotomagasin. There is a test comparing all > DSLR's. Ist D isn't doing too well: 145 points (max 200 possible). In fact, > no other DSLR did worse. Best was Olympus E-1, Nikom D2H and Canon Eos 1Ds > (175-176 points. > This is odd because according to www.preview.com the Olympus (as an example) > isn't doing quite as well. In fact not really better than the SONY DSC F717 > as far as sharpness is concerned - in spite of the much larger sensor. Nikon > D100 got only 159 points, Canon 10D; 162 points. I guess Fotomagasin doesn't > like the SONY sensor, because D100 and Pentax *ist D got the lowest grades > for reslution. It seems that according to FotoMagazin E-1 is better than Canon 1Ds :-))) Well, their tests were often controversial. For instance when they tested low cost SLRs two years ago, they gave Nikon F65 more points for features than MZ-6 (ZX-L).It is enough to look at smome specificatios of both cameras to know that N65 s much less capable than MZ-6 - no spot metering, no Custom Functions, no HSS flash, shutter speed 1/2000 (vs 1/4000)... I'll leave such a "tests" without comments. Otherwise I haven't seen a single test, where E-1 would have better picture quality than *istD. -- Best Regards Sylwek
