Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 23, 2009, 3:11 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
jack55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 949
Default

I had to respond... I thought the shot was just fine. And I though his "can't be Pentax" comment was more in jest, not being serious.

I respectfully disagree with John saying that Nikon & Canon will do a better job in the same situation. It is all in the person "behind" the camera and knowing "how" to use the camera. It doesn't matter what brand camera. The older sports photographers's had been shooting sports/movement long before digital ever came out and the principal of getting the correct shots is the same whether it is digital, auto or manual. Heck, the old K-1000 could have gotten that shot in the right hands.

There... now I feel better!
jack55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2009, 9:16 AM   #22
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jack55 View Post
I respectfully disagree with John saying that Nikon & Canon will do a better job in the same situation. It is all in the person "behind" the camera and knowing "how" to use the camera. It doesn't matter what brand camera.
Jack - without a doubt I agree that sports photography (as with any photography) requires skill. It's very important.

But if gear didn't matter, pro sports photographers would be using the K-1000. But they're not. Because gear DOES matter. 30 years ago, sports photographers manually focused. They don't any more. Why? Because the right camera/lens does the focusing much better than they could. So they recognized there time and energy could be better spent.

Ask any sports photographer who has used a slow narrow aperture lens and then used a fast focusing lens - since we're in a Pentax forum - ask those in this thread that have upgraded to a sigma 50-500 or 70-200 2.8 HSM if equipment hasn't improved their shots. Ask Wacky Roger if the focus performance of his mkIII hasn't improved his BIF shots.

The person behind the camera is the most important but suggesting the right gear doesn't matter doesn't bear fruit. In any aspect of photography beyond the snapshot. A bad photographer will take bad shots no matter what the gear. But a good photographer will take better shots with better gear.

Unfortunately as anyone on this site - regardless of mount - who shoots a lot of sports will attest to - having the right gear makes a huge difference for sports photography. Narrow apertures to blur the background. No mater how good you are you can't blur the background with a 200mm 5.6 lens like you can with a 200mm 2.8 lens. No matter how good you are, if it's dark enough for ISO 3200 sports work you need a camera that focuses well in that light and has good high ISO performance. Now, gear allows for ISO 6400. And yes, it's very useful. Ask a sports photog if they'd take a camera with only iso 1600 or one with usable 6400. Does gear matter then? Ask any of the forum members who have shot indoor basketball - does having something like an 85mm 1.8 lens improve their shots over a kit lens? Ask a member if shooting soccer with only 200mm is the same as shooting with 300 or 400mm.

And it's especially more the case when the photographer isn't a major sports photographer. The weaker the gear, the harder the photog has to work. The better/faster the camera and lens focus the less work the photog has to do to get their shots.

So in closing - a good photographer will almost always get good shots. But that same photographer will get many more good shots, much more consistently with a higher keeper rate in more situations than if he/she were using gear not well suited for sports.

But again, this is just one man's opinion and it's good to see others chiming in on this thread with their own perspective.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2009, 9:20 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,974
Default

jack55,

I don't think you are aware of the history of that remark since I had a deluge of remarks made like that after I had mentioned how I was disappointed with the sports shooting capabilty of my Pentax ist DS and K100D.

Oh, I still stand by the comment I made about the shot. It doesn't matter what camera was used. It looks odd to see someone else's legs between the subject.

Pentax does not cut it for sports shooting and the fact that people who do make a living at it and don't shoot Pentax supports my opinion.

True before the age of digital "All" shots were done with what was available then. Yes, sports shots were taken but no where near the level of what can be had with todays offerings. It has upped the ante so to speak and better shots can be taken with better cameras/lens.

A capable user can shoot any make as long as they know the tool they are using. Which bears in mind that the right tool for the right job with the right person makes for the best possible chance for a winning image.

To be on pace to take a good image after another can possibly be had by Pentax's next offering, but not what is current. The current keeper rate is quite low in comparison to other makes.
vIZnquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2009, 1:03 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,076
Default

post deleted by poster

Last edited by lesmore49; May 23, 2009 at 4:07 PM.
lesmore49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2009, 2:07 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
jack55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 949
Default

Ok, I got these action shots with my lowly Nikon P90 superzoom. The first pic shows where I was sitting. I then zoomed in and held real steady between my knees an fired away. Pretty darn sharp at that zoom range with the players! I did some mild cropping to get junk out, but that was it. This shows that it doesn't matter which camera your using, you can stop the action! And shot way up in the stands, not on the sidelines like the guys with the $5K lenses.
























Incredible zoom and clarity!
jack55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2009, 3:02 PM   #26
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jack55 View Post

Incredible zoom and clarity!
Nice fan shots - and I mean that sincerely. And yet it's not this:


See what makes a good football photo - FACES not the tops of heads. See that smooth background? Subject in focus, background not. That's the difference between a fan shot and a sports shot.

And, Jack, if you think the photos you posted are the same quality as the one above - there's no point in us debating.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2009, 3:57 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,974
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
Nice fan shots - and I mean that sincerely. And yet it's not this:


See what makes a good football photo - FACES not the tops of heads. See that smooth background? Subject in focus, background not. That's the difference between a fan shot and a sports shot.

And, Jack, if you think the photos you posted are the same quality as the one above - there's no point in us debating.
JohnG,

I agree wholeheartedly. I do believe though that there are some that don't see much difference in what you have just tried to illustrate. Thus, the differences will continue.

I am just happy that I found something that can deliver what you illustrated here rather than what is basically a "fan shot".
vIZnquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2009, 4:16 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
jack55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 949
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
Nice fan shots - and I mean that sincerely. And yet it's not this:

See what makes a good football photo - FACES not the tops of heads. See that smooth background? Subject in focus, background not. That's the difference between a fan shot and a sports shot.

And, Jack, if you think the photos you posted are the same quality as the one above - there's no point in us debating.
The point I was trying to make was stopping the action...
Big difference is yours is shot from the side-lines, mine from way up in the stands. Just as sharp as yours, no blur.

The better photo of course is yours showing the face... but I couldn't do that very well from way up in the stands. Imagine what I could have done had I been on the side-lines AND using my Pentax K10D instead of the Nikon superzoom.
jack55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2009, 4:23 PM   #29
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jack55 View Post
Imagine what I could have done had I been on the side-lines AND using my Pentax K10D instead of the Nikon superzoom.
Actually Jack, I've never seen a shot from the K10d like the one I posted. But that's the great thing about your position in this debate - you don't have any actual photographic evidence to back up your position. Go down to the sidelines of a game and take a few shots with your camera and see what you get. The challenge goes up exponentially when you don't have 10 feet of dof. I look forward to you showing us what the k10d can do in an actual sports shooting situation.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2009, 4:28 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
jack55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 949
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
Actually Jack, I've never seen a shot from the K10d like the one I posted. But that's the great thing about your position in this debate - you don't have any actual photographic evidence to back up your position. Go down to the sidelines of a game and take a few shots with your camera and see what you get. The challenge goes up exponentially when you don't have 10 feet of dof. I look forward to you showing us what the k10d can do in an actual sports shooting situation.
Well, no, I don't do sport photography... but there is no doubt in my mind that in the right hands of a Pro, with the right lens, YES! the Pentax K10D or K20D can get just as good a shots. It is knowing how to "use" a given camera, (Nikon, Canon, Pentax, whatever) not the camera itself. No if or buts about it.

From ready through these posts/threads I can tell you like to argue.
So, I'm done here.
jack55 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:28 AM.