t._masp

May 25, 2010

If you definitely cannot use one of the above, try to use sniper techniques of respiration and pushing the shooter

</blockquote>

Thanks, I will definitely give this a try. I could at most use a monopod, but I really prefer not to draw attention to myself by carrying a lot of gear around when possible.

Pop Photo's test came in at 1-1/2 stops. That doesn't mean you can't get 2 stops or better.

</blockquote>

Hmm, that makes the third review claiming around 1-1/2 to 2 stops. It's not surprising that the K-7's SR is more effective. I really prefer the K-x for the lighter weight and lower cost, but I'll have to think about the choice some more after I try it out at the camera shop tomorrow. Not sure if I can test such low shutter speeds indoors, but we'll see how it goes.

I happened to read this post that suggested it might help to wait for the SR icon to show up before shooting: http://digitalphotographer.com.ph/forum/showthread.php?t=9475&page=2

sometimes when we're too quick on the shutter finger, we take the shot right after the AF confirms even BEFORE the SR/hand icon appears on the viewfinder.

</blockquote>

Does either Pentax model have a way of notifying you how much SR is being applied? I checked http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/KX/KXA3.HTM but there does not seem to be any display icon for showing this information. Having tried the Sony Alpha models, I did notice this feature, but the comparable Sonys are unappealing for a number of other reasons (low framerate, poor noise performance, no mirror lockup, etc.)

Javier, I'm noticing the same thing. Shake reduction when I have the Sigma 10-20 mounted seems to be working against me, especially if I am shooting on the fly. I was leaving shake reduction on all the time just out of habit but I see I need to rethink that. The K20d with a grip and a substantial lens on it doesn't shake much to begin with in my experience.

</blockquote>

Okay, this is quite interesting. I'd be interested to see if the K-x also has this problem with the Sigma 10-20. <a href="http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2010/01/my-k-x-review-is-here-with.html">Rice High mentions</a> that the SR system on the K-x may have been optimized for video, so this might be a contributing factor.

Is that the SR system of the K-x and K-7 has been customised for use in movie mode so that to minimise the noise and unwanted sound? I don't know, but that's my own suspect on why the SR is now worse than before (which is actually still nothing that can be compared to those in-lens IS solution offered by Canon anyway).

</blockquote>

May 24, 2010

@ Matt Laur: Thanks. The rates at borrowlenses.com look much more reasonable, so I will put them on my list.

@ Clive Woolls: Thanks for trying to keep this forum a reasonably civil place.

@ Leslie Cheung: Frankly, your tone and rudeness are appalling. As far as this post is concerned, I don't see what the problem with asking a question is after I have searched for the answer without being able to find anything. As far as my other posts are concerned, they're not really any of your business. If you don't like them, don't read them and don't reply to them.

May 24, 2010

I'm thinking about getting a ultra wide zoom and thought it would be a good idea to rent one before buying. I checked several NYC rental places for these lenses, but could only find the 12-24. Also, the rentals are rather expensive if you are not using the lens to make money. The only place I found these lenses for rent is lensrentals.com. The prices there are not quite as bad, but the added shipping makes it still rather expensive. It seems like it might be cheaper to simply buy the lens and sell it if it it turns out to be a bad fit. Any thoughts on where else I may try renting? Thanks.

May 23, 2010

Were these fake Sandisk cards an anomoly, or are counterfeits still finding their way to reputable dealers today? I noticed a flurry of internet posts about this around this timeframe, but not much recently.

May 23, 2010

Bob Atkins did several tests of UV filters that may be worth checking out: http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/filters.html

Also he mentions that UV generally isn't a big deal at sea level. "There is some (that's what gives you a suntan or a sunburn) but most of it is scattered by the atmosphere. However as you gain altitude, for example by going up a mountain, the amount of UV increases. Under these conditions a UV filter can prevent a blue cast in photographs."

Also, DSLRs generally already have a filter built in to block UV and IR light, so I would guess that an additional UV filter on the lens is probably not needed in most situations.

May 23, 2010

Just idle theorizing I guess. I suppose if you used a third party APS lens on a 1.6 crop body, you may be slightly less likely to see vignetting.

May 23, 2010

I'm thinking about pairing the K-x with a Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 for mostly handheld shots in low light. I'd like to try shooting at shutter speeds of 1/8 sec, 1/4 sec or lower to blur my subjects while keeping the background sharp, but I'm curious what experiences people have had with such a combination.

Various review sites including Dpreview have mentioned that the shake reduction is not as effective as that of other systems. But then again, some people say Dpreview tends to be rather pro-Canon, so I'm not sure how much to trust their assessments anymore. I think Ricehigh's review mentioned that is good for about a stop and a half, and <a href="http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Pentax-K-x-Digital-Camera-Review-21345/Resolution.htm">Digital Camera Review</a> mentions that it is mainly effective against vertical camera shake.

Obviously this kind of test is pretty subjective, but I am hoping that I can pull off shutter speeds of 1/4 or 1/2 in low light with a bit of bracing and trying to avoid horizontal movement. What's been your experience with such a setup? Is it workable, and what have your results been like in the past? Thanks!

May 23, 2010

Here's what I found on page 149 of the D5000 user manual:

ISO Sensitivity Auto Control If Off is chosen for ISO sensitivity auto control in P, S, A, and M modes, ISO sensitivity will remain fixed at the value selected by the user (0 74). When On is chosen, ISO sensitivity will automatically be adjusted if optimal exposure can not be achieved at the value selected by the user (flash level is adjusted appropriately). The maximum value for auto ISO sensitivity can be selected using the Maximum sensitivity option in the ISO sensitivity auto control menu (choose lower values to prevent noise; the minimum value for auto ISO sensitivity is automatically set to ISO 200). In modes P and A, sensitivity will only be adjusted if underexposure would result at the shutter speed selected for Minimum shutter speed. Slower shutter speeds will be used only if optimum exposure can not be achieved at the ISO sensitivity value selected for Maximum sensitivity. If the ISO sensitivity selected by the user is higher than the value selected for Maximum sensitivity, the value selected for Maximum sensitivity will be used instead. When On is selected, the viewfinder shows ISO-AUTO and the information display ISO-A. These indictors blink when sensitivity is altered from the value selected by the user. Auto ISO Sensitivity Control Noise is more likely at higher sensitivities. Use the High ISO NR option in the shooting menu to reduce noise (0 151). Note that ISO sensitivity may be raised automatically when auto ISO sensitivity control is used in combination with slow sync flash modes (available with the built-in flash and SB-900, SB-800, SB-600, and SB-400 flash units), possibly preventing the camera from selecting slow shutter speeds.

</blockquote>

<a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d5000/users-guide/menus-shooting.htm">According to KR</a>, "Auto ISO keeps increasing the ISO as the light dims until it hits the Maximum Sensitivity you've set, after which the shutter speed will be allowed to get longer than what you've set."

Personally, it would be nice to have the option of letting the camera deliberately underexpose a shot a stop or so before it starts to lower shutter speeds, because an underexposed image can be usable if fixed in post, while there's not much you can do with a blurred photo. But still, this seems like a handy feature because you can tell the camera to try to main a shutter speed of X or higher, rather than only use the shutter speed you specify. And it does not seem like anyone else has this feature yet for some strange reason.

I'm not as sure whether it's a deal clincher or not yet, but it does seem like a very handy feature for quickly moving situations like street photography when you are moving between quickly changing lighting situations and don't want to look down at your camera to fiddle with the controls.

May 23, 2010

Yeah, the thing is shutter priority locks you into a specific shutter speed, and opens or closes the aperture to mange the exposure. It seems like there are some fast moving situations like street scenes where you would rather have a pre-determined aperture for DoF control and then have the camera try to balance ISO and shutter speed for you as conditions change. But maybe this doesn't matter all that much so long as you can access the controls quickly.

Anyway I checked the manuals, and it doesn't seem like the K-X or T1i has this feature. It's too bad, because it seems like a very small feature to add. Not something that reviews normally mention, but potentially quite handy.

May 23, 2010

This Cameralabs review may give you a better idea of the size differences. http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D5000/design.shtml

As you can see, even the four thirds E620 isn't that much smaller, though you will save a bit on weight, especially if you consider using the 25mm pancake lens. You may also wish to consider Pentax's line of DA Limited compact lenses, or smaller Panasonic and Olympus cameras as other posters have mentioned. Here's a picture of the Pentax pancake lenses:

And the Olympus 25mm:

Hope this helps you find the right kit. Cheers.

May 23, 2010

I was reading on KR's website that some Nikon cameras allow you to set the minimum shutter speed used in aperture-priority and/or program modes. You can also customize the auto-ISO range the camera will use. I really the minimum shutter speed option on the LX3, but have not seen it on many other DSLR systems I've checked out so far.

Is Nikon the only manufacturer that is putting a customizable minimum shutter speed on their consumer bodies? I'm comparing the D5000 with the Canon T1i, Pentax K-x, and Sony 380 for features and this looks like it might be the tie-breaker. I think Pentax will let you set the maximum ISO used in auto-ISO, but not the minimum shutter. Otherwise, how high up the prosumer line do you need to go to get this feature? Thanks.

May 22, 2010

Interesting. Canon is an industrial giant, so it's interesting how they and Sony have the capacity to make their own sensors. Seems like that does give Sony an advantage of Nikon and Pentax in some situations, though it's interesting how the sensor they are selling them for the D90, D5000 and K-x seem to get better reviews than the ones Sony uses in it's own cameras in that price range.

Also, you'd think Canon's EF-S lenses could be slighty smaller due to the greater crop factor, but Ihaven't really noticed significant weight savings. Perhaps it helps their lenses avoid vignetting in some situations slightly better than 1.5 crop sensors though.

May 22, 2010

This is really photography trivia, but I thought someone might want to talk about it. I've been wondering why Canon's APS-C 1.6x crop sensors are smaller than the 1.5x ones used by Sony, Nikon and Pentax. This is a pretty minor issue, but it reduce your wide angle coverage ever so slightly. It's just strange that Canon is the lone company that uses this odd format.

I think it has something to do with Canon's early DSLRs when they had both 1.3x crop and 1.6x crop sensors, but I haven't been able to get much information on the history of the formats by searching the net. Perhaps the smaller sensors save Canon some money compared to full frame and 1.5x crop sensors?

May 22, 2010

when I want to do super wide angle I use a .42 wide angle adapter attached to the front of a 24mm or 28mm lens. Similar effects can be achieved with .50 and .60 adapters. This creates a fisheye effect and works well for me and is very cost effective! You can even crop the final image to minimize the fisheye effect. I am not advocating that optically this is the way to achieve superb resolution but is a fun way to try super wide image making!

</blockquote>

Hmm, which wide angle adapter do you use? Are these the wide angle adapters for compact cameras screwed into the len's filter thread. Seems like an interesting idea...

May 22, 2010

Hmm. Well I'm the clumsy sort, so it sounds like these lenses are probably not the best choice for me and street photography. Thanks for the feedback though.

I have read about how it may be possible to unscrew the front element from certain lenses to get special effects. Any idea when unscrewing the front element would be called for?

Wishful thinking: it's too bad that you couldn't just buy a replaceable front element from a manufacturer and swap it out as it gets worn out instead of using UV filters. I suppose it might be more costly for the lens makers, unless they deal in heavy volume though.

May 21, 2010

After having looked at examples of amazing wide angle photography, I think I'm about to get a DSLR for ultra wide angle photography. However I'm wondering what can be done to protect the front element of a ultra wide lens that does not allow filters such as the Panasonic 7-14 or Sigma 8-16. I know a lens hood may help, but beyond that, what else can be done? Can the front element be replaced seperately if it becomes severely scratched or damaged, and how much would this generally cost?

May 21, 2010

Let's put it this way, how much of a choice do you really need?

</blockquote>

So is it only Pentax's set of compact DA Limiteds that is unique about it's system in terms of lens selection? Granted those lenses are no small feat, but I wonder what else Pentax has in it's system that is unique.

It is interesting that Pentax was able to produce such small lenses that rival mirrorless systems in terms of weight and compactness.

May 21, 2010

panasonic: better auto focus (the firmware improved olympus but it is still not as good), lighter anti-alias filter (the ep-1 is close in this area), tend to be better build.

</blockquote>

Did you see any published tests for this? I believe DPR's tests claim that Olympus's AF is as good as Panasonic's with the latest firmware update.

Also I think the P2 adds art fiilters (meh), manual controls in movie mode (meh) and AF tracking, which is useful in some situations, but I find single AF enough for more situations, so it wouldn't be enough to justify the price difference.

There are a few other differences based on specific models some support external evf; the ep-1 does not support rotation and so forth.

</blockquote>

Yup, I can probably live w/ the EVF by using a LCD shade instead. What do you mean by rotation? Rotation of the image with an orientation sensor? That can certainly be skipped.

IBIS on the Olympus certainly makes it the more attractive camera, especially if it's AF is now up to par or at least close enough for most situations.

May 21, 2010

I guess I've made mistakes in the past by firing off a series of loud bursts with a Rebel T1i in the past that draw a bit more attention than I wanted. There's a video comparison of the D5000's quiet mode here, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh2sw9WxqRU I think it basically works by delaying the mirror dropping back down, according to Thom Hogan. I suppose this blacks out your viewfinder while it's in effect, but I will go to the camera store tomorrow to see how it works.

If you want to snap a candid shot like this one:

A quiet shutter might be preferable. Granted the guy from http://ricoh-gr-diary.blogspot.com did it with a GF1 which does have a mechanical shutter so it made some noise and it didn't bother them.

So, what does a street photographer do to remain not heard or seen? I bought a Ricoh GRD. But there are many others that are small, quiet, host of manual features and provide excellent pictures. Plus, being basically a P&S digital.....you look like you're just some tourist. There are thousands of P&S digitals being used in every place in the world.....no way can you be singled out.

</blockquote>

Yeah, I've seen a lot of GRD work, and some of it is quite impressive. It's black and white mode is more appealing than my G11's B&W. Mainly I'm looking to upgrade for a wide angle and quicker performance. The thing with a DSLR seems to be that you can fire off a burst of images so that you have several to chose from later in case some are blurred, but it will make a lot of noise. WIth a compact, you can try to fire a burst, but generally the camera is a bit slow to respond afterwards. Or in the case of the LX3 the camera locks up while dumping it's buffer, and you risk missing shots.

Being unobtrusive is not the same thing as being covert, as trying to hide a camera. I usually like a smaller, lighter camera for this work simply because it's easier to carry, but you can be unobtrusive with almost anything if you know what you're doing.

A quiet camera is most useful when working in situations like theater performances, where quietly capturing a photograph in a live performance is an important quality. For almost anything else, it's irrelevant.

The E-1 remains the quietest DSLR I've experienced. :-)

</blockquote>

It seems to me, that some photographers are just better at avoiding notice than others for any number of reasons. And it depends on whether you're on a busy main street or a quiet side street. I'm not trying to hide the camera, but I prefer not to attract too much attention when possible.

So was the E-1 quieter than micro four thirds cameras? It's too bad that Olympus created such an interesting feature and then abandoned it.

May 21, 2010

If I you read the article, you see that firmware 1.1 and using some lens other than the 14-42mm makes the issue much less of an issue.

</blockquote>

The article seemed to say that it was less of an issue with the 17mm lens. This thread pointed out that the reviewers didn't try testing the camera a different lens at a longer focal length that might reveal the problem better. http://www.photo.net/olympus-camera-forum/00V7lU Also, Olympus's firmware update from last month may have further tweaked things in case they have been working on further fixes without mentioning it. But it's hard to tell unless you many people sharing test results. 1/125-1/250 seconds are a common shutter speed when the daylight starts to fade and you still need to freeze a subject, especially with slower lenses, so this seems like it could be a problem.

In terms of street, it depends on what you mean by that. Usually people mean where you are taking pictures without calling attention yourself. I tend to think the 7-14mm will get you noticed more because it is bigger and has the bulbious front end (if you really want to be noticed, shoot with the 50-200mm or 35-100mm, as people will notice when you point that at them). I tend to think using the camera's LCD instead of the viewfinder means you will blend in more (if you put the camera up to your eye, you tend to signal that you are taking pictures).

</blockquote>

I'd prefer to start by choosing gear that is less conspicuous. That seems to be the primary advantage of compact and light m4/3 gear after all. If I want to draw attention to myself, that should be pretty easy to do by changing any number of things.

The 7-14mm's bulbous front could be a problem. It's exotic appearance might draw a lot of attention now that you mention it. Perhaps a Sigma 10-20 on an APS-C camera would be less conspicuous while offering about the same angle of view. On the other hand, the 9-18 is more compact, looking almost like a kit lens, and even lighter. I could always buy both the Sigma and 9-18, but I thought the 7-14 might be able to do everything for me, since I could use it on the street zoomed in a bit or at 7mm for ultrawide landscapes. But II guess everything's a compromise.

I'm not too interested in architecture, though I suppose I would take the occasional architectural shot to experiment. I think it would be interesting to capture broad street scenes, with a subject in the foreground. Not sure if I would mind the distortion, but I'll look into this. Right now, I shoot with a G11 which has a 28mm EFL. It's wide, but not wide enough for my tastes I guess. I haven't noticed too much distortion at this focal length, but again, it's only 28mm. Sometimes I can get the shot I want, but sometimes there's no room to step back. And having to step back takes you away from your subject. Perhaps I'd experiment with stitching a bit, but this seems like more work than I'd want to do regularly.

Most of my favorite street work is done with 20-25mm on FourThirds cameras.

</blockquote>

Nice photo. :) It's more of an exception from the rule when someone volunteers to pose for me, but fun when it happens. I'm more orienteded towards taking a few casual shots during a lunch break or things like that. How did this photo happen by the way?

May 21, 2010

Well, I was wondering if there were any obscure legacy lenses out there that are extremely wide. Most fisheyes seem to max out at 8mm, though there is a 4.5mm Sigma for APS sensors.

May 21, 2010

Hello, I've been considering getting either the 9-18 or 7-14 for street photography. I'd pair it with either a Pen P1, or maybe a Panasonic G1 or G2 (or GH1 if I decide to splurge). I'm considering the P1 first because it had IBIS which might be useful for handheld shots at very slow shutter speeds for special effects, like blurred people and cars with the background sharp. I'm a little concerned about the IBIS bug mentioned at http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/EP1/EP1A.HTM but this may not be an issue at the focal lengths I'd be using, and it may have been further fixed in the latest firmware.

I understand that the Panasonics have better ergonomics and a flip out LCD, but the P1 has a less conspicious design. Also the 7-14 seems to be better lens, but is there any way to protect the front element since I cannot mount a filter on it? It's not weather sealed either, so I suppose I would have try to take extra care of such an expensive lens. I'd also be using the combination for occasional landscape shot and other things, but mostly I think it would take it with me most of the time to take street shots on my to and from places.

Also, are there any extremely wide, wider than 8mm fisheye or rectilinear lenses I might try mounting on this combination? I imagine they would be much larger and heavier and expensive if available, and wider on an APS-C camera, but thought it would be interesting to compare them to the 9-18 and 7-14 for fun.

May 21, 2010

Hmm, I thought we might want to revive this old thread. Now that Olympus has finally fixed it's autofocus with a firmware update, it seems that the only differences between the Panasonic and Olympus models come down to handling. And the Panasonic also corrects for CA + distortion in camera, while the Olympus only corrects distortion iirc. But beyond this, are the Panasonic and Olympus models basically about the same now?

May 20, 2010

Hmm, it depends on how you want the picture to look. The aperture setting controls depth of field, but will not affect color. You may want to use a wider aperture (lower f number) to blur the background, or a higher one if you want the background sharper.

The white balance and color settings of the camera are what will determine how warm the colors are, so you may want to play around with those a bit, depending how on how much post-processing you plan to do on the computer later.

Flash lighting can look harsh, so you may want to use a diffuser or bounce the flash off something.

May 20, 2010

I've been reading about this quiet mode on the D5000 which seems very interesting, though I'm not sure how it compares with the shutters of other cameras. I've heard that the K-x also have a fairly quiet shutter, but this is not the type of thing that review sites usually write about. Also micro 4/3rds cameras seem to be somewhat quieter since they lack a mirror, though they still seem fairly noisy. It's difficult to gauge sound levels in the camera shops I go to (too many people) unfortunately.

Also, do any other manufacturers have a quiet mode on their cameras besides Nikon? I'm mainly interested in a quieter camera for street photography (yes I know sometimes the street is so noisy that it won't make much of a difference), but sometimes it can be fairly quiet. It might be useful for taking pictures in museums, events or other such places I would normally bring a compact camera instead.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by t._masp