Why do we love Pentax?

[laur1]

<p>Pentax is different from Canon and Nikon because they produce cameras with more advanced features that C/N usually reserve for their higher end models. More controls, weather sealing, multiple exposures, intervalometer, electronic horizon - such features don't show up in cameras priced similarly from C/N. This is because Pentax targets the enthusiast user, while C/N cripple their similarly priced products, to protect their more expensive ones.</p>

<p>But with a smaller market also comes a lack of accessories and options that you can find in the C/N world. I had put together a longer list of reasons to like Pentax <a href="http://laurphoto.blogspot.com/2010/05/why-pentax.html">here</a>, but the above is the gist of it.</p>

<p>However, these reasons are no longer good enough for me to recommend Pentax, because I think the market is changing and DSLRs will go away - and APS-C DSLRs is where Pentax's attraction is today. Ricoh, who owns the Pentax brand, does not seem yet clear on what their strategy is for the future. The products that have come forward in the past months seem to have been planned before the Ricoh acquisition and I think they are just released to keep things going while the execs are trying to figure out their story. Long story short, I would wait until this fall before investing in Pentax SLR equipment - I expect either Ricoh will have a good story for photokina or they will lack one - either of which will be telling.</p>

<p>That being said, if you like to take photographs of people and prefer to do it while not sitting right in front of them, a 50mm lens is what I would use. The FA 50 is nice, but you should look instead at the DA* 55/1.4, for two reasons: it is better optically and it is weather sealed, so it will complement your camera weather sealing very well.</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>David A has his facts a bit off- some years ago, Pentax made an agreement with Tokina to allow certain Pentax lenses' glass to be used in similar lenses rebadged as Tokina, but in a lens body of Tokina's own design. These lenses included the 50-135mm f/2.8, 12-24mm f/4, 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 fisheye zoom, and I believe a 100mm f/2.8 macro. Pentax was the only brand to offer a fisheye zoom for many years until this agreement made such a lens available for other brand cameras through Tokina.</p>

<p>Why your friend's Canon camera is providing better indoor results? Number of reasons. That model is first off a "full-frame" sensor model- a different format using a larger sensor surface. Very costly. This also changes the effective field of view of the lens focal length, being less telephoto or more wide angle. The larger sensor can operate at higher ISO settings with less visible noise as a byproduct. The more recent Pentax models, however, have improved the higher ISO performance considerably over previous models. Another factor, perhaps the most important one, is the lens. The type of Canon camera your friend is using would not be caught dead with the type of lens you are using on it. The Canon model your friend has was developed with only Canon's top lens category in mind. The lens you are using is fine for most general purpose use, but not good for indoor use without flash.</p>

<p>Numerous remarks involving the speed of a lens. A "fast" lens means it can provide a faster shutter speed with less lighting, and also extend the reach of a flash. It can do this because its aperture can open wider to let more light in. Thus the lens spec is given at wide open aperture to indicate its capability. A smaller "f' number means a wider aperture, and a "faster" lens. Most zoom lenses' maximum aperture will be reduced as the lens is zoomed longer, which is termed a variable-aperture zoom lens (as f/3.5-5.6). A constant-aperture zoom lens that maintains the same maximum aperture as the lens is zoomed is generally more expensive. A constant-aperture zoom lens of f/2.8 is as fast as a zoom lens gets, and is very expensive. A prime lens of f/2.8 is not especially fast. f/2 can provide double the shutter speed under the same lighting conditions, which means one "stop" faster than f/2.8 would be. f/1.4 is again one stop faster than f/2. A faster lens will allow shooting at ISO settings not as high, with still adequate shutter speed and less noise. This low light advantage comes at the expense of depth of field, as a wider aperture reduces how much in the frame will be sharp behind and in front of the focus point on your main subject.</p>

<p>The Pentax Hyper System is as has been stated. In terms of practical usage, I'll give some examples. Your K200D does not have a Hyper Program mode, just the usual Program Shift common in most brands. This means if you are shooting but suddenly want say a different shutter speed, you can use your single control dial to instantly override the program and make a change. But this is very unstable and the camera will pop right back to full program if it is moved or the lighting changes. With a Pentax model having two dials, you have dedicated controls for both aperture and shutter, and a Hyper Program design. Now lets say you are shooting photos of kids moving around outdoors, using Program mode. Background has been fine, but they have now moved and a cute thing is going on that you want to get. But now in front of a busy background, say a parking lot full of cars is near behind them. The aperture the camera is selecting- no good. You want to open up the aperture wider to deliberately reduce depth of field, blurring the background to make it less distracting and your subject stand out better from it. With the Hyper System, you don't have to waste valuable time selecting Av on the mode dial to control aperture. Just go ahead and select your aperture with your thumb, and it will stay put! The camera will change the shutter speed to compensate, and take care of changing position and lighting. Same with making a shutter speed change with the finger dial. Hit the green button to return to full Program operation.</p>

<p>Your K200D does have the Hyper Manual mode. You don't necessarily have to always twirl your dials constantly to adjust for lighting when using the metered Manual mode. Just hit the green button and you will instantly get a metered exposure setting. Any further preference for aperture or shutter speed can be touched up from there. In fact, upon selecting a different aperture after using the green button then hitting the AE-L button, locking exposure, the shutter speed will automatically change, preserving your exposure! Same with selecting a different shutter speed, the aperture will follow suit! This design is great when spot metering around a scene in manual mode. Very fast operation for this purpose. </p>

<p> </p>

[lauren_macintosh]

<p>Peter Zack: what did Nikon and Canon have it that way, When Pentax brought out The K-10d, and in that Price range : LOL</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>Lauren, I don't know what you are asking or what part of a post you might be referring to.</p>

<p>If you are asking about pro bodies at the time of the Pentax K10D, the Nikon system had the D1 and D2 (APS-c) and Canon was just launching the full frame 5D. Nikon then launched the full frame D700 in 2008. At this point, Canon and Nikon became even more the brand of choice for working photographers.</p>

[DWScott]

Rendering: refers to the fact that

decisions made in the design and

manufacture of a lens have a

(sometimes subtle) impact on the

pictures made with those lenses.

Different brands often each have a

different look, thanks to company

preferences, and the patented or

licensed designs and formulas that the

engineers have to work with. Pentax

lenses, in my opinion, often have these

family traits in "rendering" an image:

moderate overall contrast but stronger microcontrast, enhancing the impression of sharpness in the details; vivid colour transmission that is more warm (reddish) than cold (bluish.) Pleasant out-of-focus areas, not harsh or jaggy. Good rejection of flare from light sources inside the frame.

 

I heartily recommend the 35mm/2.5 DA. Image quality is superb, it demonstrates all of the characteristics I describe above. Yes it is plastic, but it is sturdy (unlike cheap Canon lenses) and it is cheap as chips. The focal length is a good all-arounder for urban landscape and people. It will definitely give you different images than your zoom, especially if you shoot it wide open at f/2.4 and get close to your subjects. The IQ and physical design are very much like the Pentax Limiteds, but by making it plastic it is very affordable.

[dogbert]

<p>As you are not too heavily invested in Pentax, I would give some serious thought to switching to Canon or Nikon. Any system can produce great results. Great photos are the result of the photographer's skills and knowledge and understanding the limitations of the equipment they are working with and all equipment has limitations.<br>

The advantage of Canon or Nikon is that they provide a much greater range of products and much greater availability. Even third party manufactures provide a much greater range for Canon and Nikon. <br>

While the standard advice is work out what you want to do and then buy equipment to fit those needs, in reality most photographers find out what they want to do by experimenting and by buying new gear and selling it when they decide they don't need it or their photography takes them in a different direction.<br>

Lenses or all major brands hold their value pretty well on the second hand market, so buying gear to experiment is not as costly as it may seem at first.<br>

A canon 650D twin lens kit with 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS, and an EF 50 f1.8, and a Canon 270 EX flash with bounce capability would be a versatile kit with which one could do just about anything and would be a great system to build on.<br>

I have some old Pentax glass and film bodies, which I use on my Canon dslrs just for fun, but I also have a bunch of canon lenses so I have no particular brand bias. My advice to anyone looking to invest in a system would to go to Canon or Nikon every time unless there is a very specifiic reason not to. As you don't know where your photography may go, then go with a system that has the most options.</p>

<p> </p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>I certainly do not agree with Geoff's assessment- that just automatically going to Nikon or Canon will always best meet all needs. There are specific advantages offered by different brands. If they were all the same, there'd be no reason for different brands to exist. If a certain advantage addresses your particular needs, or likely future particular needs, then the brand offering that advantage is the logical choice. </p>

<p>Some of us here shoot with more than one system because of these different advantages, and being in need of those advantages. </p>

<p>If there's an interest or goal for fast action sports shooting, for example, with an eye on possible professional work in that field, a Nikon system would be a good choice, since its better models are known for superior AF tracking of fast action, and their professional (expensive) lens lineup includes fast telephoto lenses especially suitable for that purpose. Likewise with Canon. That said, even though I myself have some interest in this area of photography, I've been able to get good enough results with my Pentax equipment that acquiring other gear from another system for this purpose has been unnecessary, even though I could afford to do so. I have succesfully used my K20D and a Sigma 24-60mm f/2.8 zoom lens for fast-action college competition in the sport of indoor roller hockey. The performance I have experienced has been plenty good enough to satisfy my requirements.</p>

<p>At the same time, my primary needs include having a very high-quality system that is also compact with maximum portability. But I also want the full set of features and direct viewing a good DSLR will afford. I like to be able to pack camera and lens into a small belt case for hiking or bicycle riding. Nothing else fills the bill as well as Pentax can with their Pentax Limited series of primes. Pentax bodies are especially well-designed with the fast, convenient Pentax Hyper System and are especially well-built. Shake reduction is designed into the camera body so any lens, new or old is provided with this advantage. Not so with Nikon or Canon. At times, I need to have a weather-sealed system. With Pentax this is available at far less cost, yet with very well-made equipment, than found in other brands. So these needs, which are important to me, are especially well-served with Pentax.</p>

<p>I have an old friend who has long used Nikon professional film gear. When he looked into going for a DSLR, I lent him my lowly 6mp Pentax K100D along with a couple of inexpensive but good lenses, including a Sigma 70-300mm. He likes bird shooting at a sacntuary in Canada. He was very impressed with the Pentax camera, and even I was amazed at the very fine images he captured! He wound up getting a Nikon body because he would still be using his film camera and his lenses could serve both. Good reasons for his sticking with Nikon. </p>

<p>One way to evaluate your needs is to look thoroughly into what types of lenses are best suited to your needs. If your primary interest is say fast-action shooting in the longer telephoto range, as stated above, Nikon or Canon will certainly present advantages, though expensive ones. All those professionals at the Olympic track and field events, or at auto races, seen with their cameras on monopods sporting huge, fast 300mm f/2.8 lenses (costing around $5,000 or so for the lens) are no doubt shooting with Canon or Nikon, and with good reason. It is with reasoning just as good to have what I have when I'm out on my bicycle. If Nikon or Canon have a lens or lenses specific to your needs that cannot be mirrored in the Pentax line, good reason to acquire Nikon or Canon equipment.</p>

<p>Getting back to your original concerns regarding your Canon-shooting friend getting better non-flash indoor results, the Canon outfit with the zoom lenses Geoff recommends would do no better than what you already have for this purpose. The fast prime lens of 50mm f/1.8 would serve well in dealing with those lighting comditions, but is restricted to shots in the telephoto range. A similar lens just as good or better can be had for your Pentax camera. For the kind of subjects and conditions you describe, it seems a fast wide angle to short-tele zoom lens would best serve those needs. if you want to go so far as a larger-sensor full-frame format system, and a top-notch faster lens to match, then reach deeply into your expense account and get a similar Canon outfit to that your friend has.</p>

<p>As I said, Pentax has improved its high ISO, lower noise performance in recent DSLR models. Even your K200D doesn't do too badly. Set your noise reduction control in custom functions to "weak" and instead of shooting with your image setting on "bright" switch to "natural" but bump your sharpness back up a notch as it already is in the standard "bright" mode. Same if using flash. This reduces excessive contrast for these conditions. Also keep your sharpness set to "fine". But you do need a fast zoom lens, or at least a faster prime lens of a more versatile focal length than 50mm. Both Sigma and Tamron offer lenses such as 18-50mm f/2.8 that are highly-rated yet at a lower cost than a Pentax lens of this type. A newer Pentax body also offers useful features such as the ability to fine tune the auto focus performance between the camera body and a given lens. Perhaps Nikon or Canon models do not feature such user adjustments in the same price range. <br>

<br>

<br>

</p>

 

[dogbert]

<blockquote>

<p>I certainly do not agree with Geoff's assessment- that just automatically going to Nikon or Canon will always best meet all needs.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is not what I said. I said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>My advice to anyone looking to invest in a system would to go to Canon or Nikon every time unless there is a very specifiic reason not to.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There are specific reasons to choose Pentax, including built in shake reduction and Pentax's range of limited primes. However, if the OP isn't sure what her needs are then she will be best served by investing in a system with the fewest constraints.</p>

<p> </p>

[dogbert]

<p>Jenifer<br>

A good flash is one of the easiest ways to get nice indoor photos of family and friends. I am guessing the flash look you hate is based on using the built in flash on your camera. This is about the worst way to light up a subject. It is like pointing a torch at someone's face.<br>

A flash with bounce capability that can be reflected of a ceilings or walls provides a much more natural look. Look for one that is integrated with the camera you are using. If it is powerful enough you could also invest is a cheap flash diffuser.<br>

I use an old Canon 420 EX with a stoffen omnibounce with my cameras. It is fully automatic and very simple, but can be manually overidden to reduce or increase flash output. I am sure Pentax make something simmilar. Look for a flash that is fully electoncially compatible with the camera body you are using.</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>I agree with Geoff, that for the needs and concerns you have stated it is not necessary to go to a different system. A good flash with bounce and swivel design for bounce flash capability can be had for your Pentax. Putting your money there could be the answer for your needs. I have found the K200D's auto metering to be particularly good for flash use. There are various accessories available to further disperse the flash output to soften the effect.<br /><br />Flash sometimes needs to be modified in its operation to compensate for conditions under which too much or too little will be the outcome from the camera's flash metering. That is why a flash exposure compensation control is provided. It can be found in the flash menu of your camera. Knowing when and how to use it is key to success.</p>

<p>One of the best flash units out there, and having a special capability, is the Metz 58 AF. Both Adorama and B&H should have it in stock, and manufactured for dedicated Pentax use. Not a cheapie to be sure, but far less expense than changing systems would entail. It has the unique capabilityof dual flash, one straight on fill in addition to the main bounce swivel head. This allows better coverage from bounce with a more natural look from the simultaneous fill. The old Pentax film body, the PZ-1p had this capability already there for simultaneous use with the built-in flash. It could deliver results with just a simple on-camera flash unit otherwise only possible with a complicated off-camera flash setup. It has worked wonders for many circumstances.</p>

<p>All that said, if you want the look closest to that your friend is getting with no flash, you'll still probably need to shoot with no flash after all. But very good results can indeed be had with judicious use of a good flash system.</p>

<p>A key factor in your case may be shutter speed, since you are dealing with active children and want to have indoor lighting appear natural, that is with a lot of ambient lighting and the flash as fill. The K200D can provide high enough shutter speed for this purpose with flash. Since much of the lighting comes from ambient sources, the fill flash cannot be relied upon to freeze action with slow shutter speeds. Using a fairly high ISO will allow more of the ambient lighting to be prominent for a more natural effect, and a higher shutter speed for the flash sync. If you decide to not use flash, as was the case with your friend using the expensive Canon full-frame system, you will need to go to at least 1600 ISO, with preferably a faster lens, in order to achieve fairly acceptable shutter speed in good room lighting.</p>

<p>Again, I think the K200D handles flash metering very well. The K-5 is a wonderful camera with excellent overall performance, and exceptional capability at higher ISO settings, with less noise than most others, while perserving greater detail, according to independent test results. If you should decide to get a K-5, which is now at bargain prices, I would recommend that you still keep your K200D as a backup and alternate. I will do a bit of digging to find some examples already scaled down for posting, taken with the K200D.</p>

<p> </p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>Here are a couple of indoor flash shots taken with the K200D, with just its lowly built-in flash, and lowly 18-55mm kit lens II. This first one was done at only ISO 200, since the distance was fairly close for the flash and I did not need much shutter speed for this subject- 1/80 sec or so was good enough.</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>Try this again-</p><div></div>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>The next one was shot at ISO 1600 so a higher shutter speed could be used, since the child was flailing about quite a bit- the 1/180 sec max.</p><div></div>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>Here are two shots to illustrate what the Metz flash unit is likely to be capable of. They were taken with the Pentax PZ-1p camera and Pentax AF 400 FTZ flash unit in the hotshoe. This camera is designed so the built-in flash can be used simultaneosly with a flash unit in the hotshoe, for bounce-and-fill capabiity.</p>

<p>Some years back, I was adopted by a local high school wrestling team as their team photographer. The coaches and athletes liked the photos I provided very much. This occasion was a team dinner to which I was invited. </p>

<p>This first shot was taken in the usual manner, with ONLY the accessory flash unit, without using the built-in flash in a bounce-and-fill configuration. The prominent shadows cast behind subjects, the direct flash look are present as could be expected.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>If I had used bounce flash off the ceiling in that shot with only the flash unit's tilt head, the result would have been downward-cast shadows under the chins and in eye sockets.</p>

<p>Here is the one by comparison using the dual-flash system by adding the built-in flash to the flash unit's tilt head now being bounced off the ceiling. Notice the greater coverage, reduced back shadows, and a much more natural look and better dimensionality instead of the former flat look.</p><div></div>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>Here's one of my fast action college roller hockey shots using the K200D, where flash was not an option. I set the ISO all the way up to1600, and employed a fast professional style f/2.8 zoom lens to get my shutter speed up to 1/500 sec. </p>

<p>Of course, shutter speed that high should not be necessary for the use you describe. Although the lighting at this rink was not as good as I would have liked, it is still brighter than usually found inside average homes. Therefore, shooting at f/2.8 will not get your shutter speed anywhere near 1/500 sec, but f/2.8 may still be required to get what you do need, even with lamps turned up and light coming in through windows. </p>

<p>Set your camera to ISO 1600 with NR on "weak", set you lens to its widest angle where you can turn the aperture to f/3.5, and see what you get for you shutter speed under the conditions you face. Walk forward to fill the frame with the lens set to wide angle, to include only what you want in the picture. The perspective may not be right with the wide angle, but you'd get an idea regarding exposure. This should give some clue in seeing how f/2.8 could help.</p>

<div></div>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>The same look MK is describing with the Metz 58 can also be achieved by using pretty much any P-TTL-compatible accessory flash off-camera. With either wired or wireless (if flash unit is capable of performing as a P-TTL wireless slave) P-TTL flash the built-in flash can be used simultaneously with an accessory flash.<br /><br />The K200D's built-in flash can serve as a P-TTL wireless commander, so you can use any slave-capable flash such as AF360FGZ (can be found used for $150 or maybe less). <em>Most</em> of the cheaper <a href="http://pttl.mattdm.org/features">3rd party P-TTL units are not wireless capable</a>, but even the cheap ones can be used wired with a P-TTL sync cable.</p>

[dogbert]

<p>The same bounce and direct flash mix can also be achieved with a simple and cheap flash diffuser such as the stoffen omnibounce. In fact I like the omnibounce better as is can bounce light in all directions achieving a fairly natural look. The best flash effect I have found is to tilt the flash mostly up to bounce, but also pointing a little bit forward.<br>

The disadvantage is that uses more flash power and thus increases the flash recycling time.</p>

[les_lammers]

<p>"I've gotten more and more interested in upgrading and buying new equipment and seeing just how expensive this hobby is....I've tried to buy things second hand. But I've noticed that there is so few options for Pentax - everything is Canon and Nikon."<br>

Be patient. Used equipment out there. Check KEH and the Pentax forum classifieds frequently.<br>

"But why, I'd like to know, are so many others loving Canons and Nikons." Advertising. :-)<br>

The photographer makes more of a difference than the gear. If you need fast long lenses and need to shoot like a machine gunner Canikon is the place to be and both companies cater to professionals more than Pentax.<br>

If the K200 and 18-250 has met your needs so far...why change brands? Pick up a prime lens or two and give them a go. Your camera will 'feel' different with primes. Older Pentax A lenses are not too expensive. If you find that you like primes you might migrate to DA Limiteds.<br>

P.S. You have a good eye. ;-)</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>Yes, using a prime lens of versatile focal length can help you become a better photographer. It helps teach you to work within a given focal length, with its particular framing and properties of perspective. It is also possible to find such a lens that is faster than even a fast f/2.8 zoom. It is difficult, however, without going to a full-frame body, to find such versatile lenses that are that fast, but there are a few. The Pentax Limited series prime lenses, renown for superb workmanship, excellent optical performance and combined with exceptionally compact design, comprise a uniquely Pentax experience. Your compact, but exceptionally well-built K200D lends itself handsomely to sporting such a lens, for packing a lot of quality in a relatively small package.<br>

I also would like to emphasize the importance of advancing your abilities as a photographer by learning to shoot in Manual mode, and doing so using the spot meter setting of your camera. This is basic photography. When I first got started, that is all there was. Cameras did not yet have any form of automated exposure. You had to set your own aperture and shutter speed, and could use the camera's built-in meter scale readout as a reference. In fact, in the case of tricky lighting situations, such as you are addressing as your main issue here, the M mode is often the best way to go. Anyone possessing an expensive Canon outfit such as owned by your friend, I would have to assume is quite experienced in metered manual operation. I suggest you get some practice in using this type of operation. Your owners' manual will have basic instructions for using both spot metering and the M mode, and for any further questions that come up as you gain experience, we would be glad to help.</p>

<p>Indoor lighting usually found in the home often poses a problem for the camera's metering in commonly-used automatic exposure modes. The camera "sees" a lot of dimness, and tends to over-brighten the scene (overexposure). If there's a bright window in the background, it may do the opposite. This can make a huge difference in the quality of your outcome. Some careful metering using the M mode can correct this situation.<br>

</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>BTW, just to clarify and avoid confusion from reading certain statements, the camera's metered automated flash exposure system operates independently from the camera's regular exposure modes set by the mode dial. Therefore, you can use the M mode and yet if you wish to then add flash you can do so and still get automated exposure of the flash output.</p>

<p>Also, in my second example using dual-flash bounce and fill, I was indeed using the tilt head at an angle bouncing off the ceiling instead of straight up, in addition to the fill flash from the camera's built-in unit.</p>

[revolver]

<p>Jennifer,<br /><br />I have way less photography knowledge than....everyone else who has posted a reply. <br /><br />why I love Pentax........<br /><br />the <em>Asahi Pentax K1000 </em>my Parents bought when I was about 13 years old.<br /><br />I was using Kodak 135's when they got that and as soon as I got my grubby little hands on it I was hooked. I still used it tll 2006 when I got my K100D.<br /><br />what I find with Pentax over all other brands is ease of use. it seems like I do not have to "Know" how to use a new model. <br /><br />I got a little I10 last year as a novelty. I use it often and it takes great pictures.<br /><br />I have been asked to take photo's of family events with my "fancy" camera. Thats my K100D and the people who most recently asked were the Photographers at my Wedding( they used film back then...lol) and it was for their daughters wedding, my flower girl.<br />I was very honored but fortunately was not the primary.<br /><br />what they wanted was my candid's and other "unique" shooting style....I didnt know I had that.<br /><br />I just got a K-01 yesterday and so far am loving it.<br /><br />I got a Lumix DMC at the same time and hate the Lumix. I cannot even figure out the settings.<br /><br />the K-01 out of the box I was shooting like I had the camera for 6 months<br /><br />point is to answer your question....it just feels right and works well for me...<br /><br />no fancy stats, no post processing,no 1000 dollar lenses....just a dude from Brooklyn with a nice camera that makes me better than I am<br /><br /><br /></p>

[don_myers1]

<p>Jennifer;<br>

I do not know if this response has been given, but have you tried KEH for used lenses? (keh.com). They have good lenses at resonable prices, although most of them are third party (Sigma, Tameron, etc.) and usually the ooms are variable aperatures. (I can almost garentee you will not find any DA* leses there.)<br>

None the less, the lenses that I have bought were in excellent condition at a very resonable price. In addition they also sell other equipment such as flashes, tripods, and most anything else you might need.<br>

Hope this helps,<br>

Don</p>