Some pics for December...

[joe_jackson4]

<p>...well, what's left of it...<br>

<br /> I'm a couple of weeks late updating my site this month - hey, I have a proper job ;) - for the simple reason that (until this weekend) I hadn't touched a camera at all since my Munich trip... My photographic laziness has left me in something of a desperate "chuck something up before the end of the month" situation...<br>

<br /> Anyway, here's some stuff just to fill in the blanks:<br>

<br /> <a href="http://koti.welho.com/pwilkins/title.html">http://koti.welho.com/pwilkins/title.html</a><br>

<br /> I used the Sigma 30/1.4 for these...</p>

[jgredline]

<p>Paul, love the image with silenced gun...<br>

<img src="http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/pp128/jgredline/fantastico.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[shaloot]

<p>Paul, what is going on with the 4th pic from the bottom? The gun, the lady in heels in the chair with what seems to be cuffs on her wrists and dudes just chillin' on the wall?? You is a gangsta you are...<br>

Neat shots, esp the light throught the windows...</p>

[joe_jackson4]

<p>Somanna, nah, no gangsta stuff there... A friend of mine was helping out with the sound on a location shoot for a short espionage-themed movie - hence all the mic/light/camera stands and stuff - and she thought I might find the disused buildings and whatnot interesting from some kind of "CCD noir" snapping pespective...</p>

<p>She was almost right, but it was so annoying to have to be totally silent during the takes that I soon lost my enthusiasm to be there and went for a pint instead... ;) And the K100D has one of the least set-friendly shutter sounds out there of course, so I couldn't take any shots during the actual shooting.</p>

<p>It's interesting that the particular shot you mention does have a rather unsettling feel to it (even to me, I mean...) despite the fact that I know nothing untoward whatosever was going on... I quite like it, for that reason alone... I don't really view it as a "staged" shot, because the people involved were just chilling out between takes, you know? So I just snapped what I saw, and was happy to leave the rest to the viewer's media-mangled imagination... :)</p>

<p>Anyway, worry not, I can assure you that the young lady there was quite happy to be in those cuffs...</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Paul, I think the hurried nature of these shots shows, but that's not necessarilly a bad thing. The <em>Wilkins Factor</em> is still there with strong composition and great use of B&W.</p>

<p>As a side note, whenever I read in forums about how crappy the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is, I always think about your splendid captures with it :-)</p>

[joe_jackson4]

<p>Hmm, that's either top-quality sarcasm or a kind compliment, Mis... Either way, cheers mate... :)</p>

<p>And yeah, most of those wouldn't work well as individual pics, for obvious reasons... But OK, I'm quite used to that, so it can be a kinda fun challenge sometimes to see what I can do with what limited material I have... :)</p>

<p>The thing is, I like presenting my pics in little sets, and they're intended to be viewed in sequence (initially, at least) so it can be interesting to play with the format a bit. The idea behind that set was that it would start off as "Pfft, just a light streaming through the window shot...", then (if people aren't really paying too much attention) it's like "Hmm, OK, more light-through-a-window stuff and some B&W feet shots...". Nothing new there...</p>

<p>Then it's "Hang on, is that a gun...?" and "Is she handcuffed there...? What the...?", and then I wanted people to look at the window shot at the end there - and some of the other pics in the set - in quite a different light... :) And I got precisely that reaction from a few people today, so OK, I felt my little "make the most of some average shots" mission had been accomplished... :)</p>

<p>As for the Sigma, it's a very good lens... Looking back, it has let me down a bit in the AF department a few more times than I would have liked, but OK, I can live with that. Well, apart from when I lose a decent shot because of it, anyway... :( Still, the way I look at it, it's given me a lot more shots than it's lost in some pretty poor lighting conditions, so no major complaints overall. Optically, it's quite an impressive beast, and that f/1.4 setting is certainly pretty handy sometimes, as you know yourself... :)</p>

[joe_jackson4]

<p>Oh yeah, one thing about the Sigma 30/1.4 is that you have to turn it the "wrong" way when manually focussing... (Compared to my M50/1.7, anyway). I thought I'd get used to this after a while but it seems my MF instincts sometimes have other ideas...</p>

<p>I'm struggling to think of anything else negative to say about it, but OK, I'll feel like I'll have betrayed my fellow consumer if I don't try... :) So, let's see... Well, it's pretty big. It's pretty heavy, at least compared to my Pentax primes. It's not all that cheap, here in Finland. The filter size is bigger than my other lenses (it's 62mm), so I can't use my old CP filter on it. It has some naff gold trim, but I guess that could be easily fixed with a black marker pen. I'm not particularly keen on Sigma's kinky "micro-furry" paint job either, although it hasn't started flaking off or anything. Erm, what else...? Oh yeah, the rear lens cap is annoying, because it really needs aligning properly to get it on. It's easily replaced with a normal one though... No manual aperture ring on this lens, unfortunately, but hey, that's progress for you...</p>

<p>Good points? It comes with a handy little protective case. OK, said case could be a little sturdier on the sides, but I don't worry too much about chucking it around in my bag... And well, it has a big hole to let the light in, which is the main thing for me.</p>

<p> </p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Paul, it was a compliment, I think :-)</p>

<p>Your explanation makes sense, and yes, it does work well as a series, which is an interesting idea, and one which I have not persued. My shots are all singles (and not looking for a serious relationship that I know of).</p>

<p>I have a question about the Sigma: When in manual focus, does the ring turn at a different rate to the inside barrel? When I tested my friend's Canon version the barrel turned 1/2 as fast as the ring, which is a great solution to make AF lenses with short throws easy to focus manually.</p>

[joe_jackson4]

<p>Mis, I think it's perfectly safe to assume I'm being a bit thick 'ere but I'm really not sure what you mean... :( If I turn the MF ring, then the "inner bits" just kinda slide in and out, along the axis of the lens. I looked for some kind of rotating "inner barrel" thingy but couldn't see one... It is quite dark here though... :)</p>

<p>I know my mate's Canon version has HSM - my Pentax-flavoured one doesn't - so I'm wondering if they're, well, you know, different on the inside or something...? I suppose I could get him to check his out and tell me what he sees, but it seems kinda rude to ask...</p>

<p>Anyone else out there willing to take a quick peek at theirs...?</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>When I said the inner barrel, I was referring to the distance marks inside the little window :-) In most every lens they turn synchronous with the focus ring, while on the Canon lens I used there was clearly a gear inside such that it took twice the amount of focus ring travel for a given distance marker travel, if that makes sense...</p>

<p>If you don't want to ask your mate to look at his, maybe you can ask his girlfriend about it. I'm sure she's seen it.</p>

[joe_jackson4]

<p>Ah, I see... My particular 30mm doesn't have any such window, so that's another minor mystery solved... Not sure if I should be relieved or envious here, but as long it works I'm OK with that... :)</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>OK Paul, we have to solve this conundrum. Is <a href="http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3300&navigator=6">this</a> your lens?</p>

<p> </p>

<p align="center"><img src="http://www.sigmaphoto.com/images/LensesImage/113_big.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="276" /></p>

<p> </p>

[joe_jackson4]

<p>Well, Mis, mine's pretty similar, but that "HSM" version looks a bit different to my particular (windowless) example... It's easier/quicker to show than explain, so here's a quick snap of it:</p>

<p><img src="http://koti.welho.com/pwilkins/sigma30mm.jpg" alt="" width="667" height="500" /></p>

<p>The ribbed part with the distance scale rotates, obviously... :)</p>

<p>Have Sigma released a K-mount version with HSM...? I was under the impression they hadn't, but it's been a while since I bought mine...</p>

[joe_jackson4]

<p>Looking at those pics, I'm wondering if the "real" focus throw is pretty much the same in both cases, but they just changed the gearing to compress the (windowed) distance scale on the HSM version...</p>

<p> </p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>I don't know if the new Sigma 30mm is HSM for Pentax, but I agree that the focus throw in both cases seems to be the same (and is quite generous by modern standards) but the HSM version will autofocus quicker because it needs to travel 1/2 the distance.</p>

<p>I don't know why gearing isn't incorporated into every modern lens. You could gear at a 1:3 or 1:4 ratio and make a <em>really</em> short AF focus throw for lightning-fast autofocusing, while retaining nice manual focus capability.</p>

<p>Does the ring move while your lens autofocuses?</p>

[joe_jackson4]

<p>"...the HSM version will autofocus quicker because it needs to travel 1/2 the distance"</p>

<p>Well, I guess that depends how quickly the HSM rotates... :) But yeah, I see what you mean, and yep, I guess that's why they did it... The screw-drive version is actually plenty fast enough for my needs though, in practice.</p>

<p>"Does the ring move while your lens autofocuses?"</p>

<p>It certainly does... And that reminds me of another gripe I (used to...) have with it. The focus ring is so wide that it didn't really leave enough clearance room for my fingers when it was whizzing around on its own in AF mode, so I had to come up with another way to hold the camera... This involves me kinda wedging the tip of the little finger of my left hand under the "beak" of the K100D's pop-up flash, with the rest of my fingers across the top of the flash/viewfinder, and my left thumb on the base of the camera, lurking somewhere over the tripod socket.</p>

<p>The good thing is that I found this turned out to be a very stable way to hold the camera (at least for me), so it's no problem at all now...</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Paul, when people complain about the thin focus ring of the FA primes, we have to assume they've never had to use their pinky to hold their camera :-) I think Pentax were really smart when they designed those focus rings.</p>

<p>On the HSM version of your Sigma, the ring doesn't rotate during focusing, making AF and quick-shift manual focusing a lot easier. Maybe it's time for you to jump ship and buy a Canon XSi ;-)</p>

[joe_jackson4]

<p>Well, I already own a rarely-used-these-days 350D, so the HSM version was certainly an option... But OK, fast primes and in-body anti-shake technology go together like beer and blowj... sorry, bags of crisps... so it was an easy decision to settle for the K-mount offering.</p>

<p>TBH, if Canon had got their act together and brought out a small, lightweight digital EOS which would've let me use my trusty old featherweight 50/1.8 with an in-body IS system, I'd have snapped one up like a shot. But it was their apparent unwillingness to do this (or bring out any fast primes with IS...) that made me jump over to the Pentax ship in the first place...</p>

 

[miserere_mei]

<blockquote>

<p>...that made me jump over to the Pentax ship in the first place...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And we're glad you did. The Pentax Shoe Department will never be the same again if you decide to leave :-)</p>

<p>Neither will the Bog-Roll Dept., for that matter.</p>