Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 1, 2009, 10:44 PM   #51
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 20
Default

I ended up keeping the Pentax.

I reasoned that:

It was my initial pick.

I liked many things about it - the main thing I had reservations about was the autofocus which I had not even used.

Right now I am not planning on investing a lot in lenses - yes, this could change, but if it doesn't I might not be getting an edge from the XSi anyway.

If it's absolutely horrible, I figure I can recoup 50 to 75 percent of the cost of the camera.

Below are a few pics from the wrestling event the other night. Note the crappy composition. I had probably partaken of a few too many beers prior to taking these shots. So I was sitting down, drinking, cheering, and trying to hold on a conversation at the same time.

All shots were taken at 1600 ISO - I had left high noise reduction on, which I won't do in the future as I ended up sharpening them a bit. I had also left the white balance on tungsten by accident, so that probably resulted in some issues.

I have my own thoughts on the camera after using it, but I'd welcome any comments first.








Edward B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2009, 8:40 AM   #52
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Definately not 'The Garden'. Am I right?

These don't have any EXIF data so I'm guseeing as to the settings.

You used the flash, so the tungsten white balance setting worked. Only objects in the background have acolor cast. The flash froze the subjects, so the shutter speed wasn't an issue.

But the main point of this entire thread is the autofocus performance of the K200D, and it seems, from what we can see here,that it did ok.

And, btw, for indoor sports, the Pentax 50mm f/1.4 is only $200, and for outdoor sports, the Tamron 70-300 Di LD is only $160. They should be more than adequate, and together plus the K200D, they cost less than the Canon 40D that you were considering.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2009, 8:52 AM   #53
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 20
Default

Definitely not The Garden – more like the bingo hall.



I'm guessing with the flash, there's no real way to counter the yellow lighting past its reach?



But, yeah, I was pretty satisfied with the autofocus. And it wasn't exactly bright in there. I had it on ISO 1600 and still had to use flash.



One thing I didn't realize, but I think that happened on a few shots was that the autofocus was grabbing the ropes instead of the wrestlers, but I'd expect that to happen on occassion. But overall, it worked out pretty good for me. I never had a missed shot because I was waiting on the AF. I can also definitely say that I'm going to be the limiting factor on picture quality far more than the equipment for the foreseable future .



As for settings... is there something special you have to do to retain EXIF data? And is there a way to view EXIF data on other people's photos? Well, I know you can, but I don't know how.



For most of the shots, settings were:



ISO – 1600

Aperture – As wide open as it would go. I believe this was around 3.6 or something.

Shutter – 1/180

AF – Continuous, Center-weighted

Metering – Center-weighted and Spot

White Balance – Tungsten

Format – JPG, highest quality
Edward B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2009, 9:45 AM   #54
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Edward B. wrote:
Quote:
... I can also definitely say that I'm going to be the limiting factor on picture quality far more than the equipment for the foreseable future .
Welcome to the club. Your membership card and jacket are in the mail.

Edward B. wrote:
Quote:
As for settings... is there something special you have to do to retain EXIF data? And is there a way to view EXIF data on other people's photos? Well, I know you can, but I don't know how.
You posted your photos on Flickr.com, and included them here. Flickr does that. If you post them here, the EXIF data is preserved.

For viewing theEXIFData of images on the web, I use Opanda's IExif Viewer. It's a web browser plugin.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2009, 11:00 AM   #55
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 20
Default

Thanks for the help on the EXILF!



One last question I had... if you'll take a look at the photo of the wrestler doing a swanton bomb (guy leaping over ropes), you'll notice one of the wrestler's hands seems to be transparent – kinda ghostly with the lights in the background showing throw it.



Is this a result of the shutter speed not being fast enough or something else?
Edward B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2009, 11:22 AM   #56
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Edward B. wrote:
Quote:
One last question I had... if you'll take a look at the photo of the wrestler doing a swanton bomb (guy leaping over ropes), you'll notice one of the wrestler's hands seems to be transparent – kinda ghostly with the lights in the background showing throw it.

Is this a result of the shutter speed not being fast enough or something else?
It's a result of using flash to stop the action. Without the flash, most of the image isn't bright enough to register on the sensor - so even though 1/180 is too slow to freeze motion you don't end up seeing the motion. However, that light IS bright enough to register on the sensor without the flash. That's why you end up with the shot you have. When the shutter opened, the hand wasn't blocking the light but it was when the flash went off. So both the hand and the light were exposed on the sensor.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2009, 3:25 PM   #57
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 54
Default

Edward B. wrote:
I'm guessing with the flash, there's no real way to counter the yellow lighting past its reach?
[/quote]

The only way to counter that effect is to put gel on the flash that will match with the ambient light temperature. If you use the flash, I'd suggest to put your camera in manual mode. Take a frame without the flash and if you have a completely dark frame it's great. It means that only the flash will illuminate the scene and you won't get the ghosting. In M mode, set the camera to 1/180s (highest speed with the internal flash) and ISO to about 400 (400 doubles flash reach vs ISO 100). Set the aperture as wide as possible.

For that kind of sport I'm sure the K200D is up to the task. It's not a D3 but it's good enough. Try to get a FA50 f/1.4 they run for about 200$ and it's quite a bargain considering the competition.

I won't add too much to what has been said about AF performance. The camera is just one part of the equation, the other which can be very significant is the lens.

Enjoy your K200D as I enjoy mine.

ManuH.
Delius 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 3:27 AM.