| 
| 
| | | | | Posted by Byberrian Fanman I can only assume you've been using the |
| | | Posted by budda the shit lens, and a Nikon 10-24 at my previous job. Both took about 1-2 full seconds to focus in broad daylight hooked up to the super shitty D5000. |
| | | Posted by budda the shit lens, and a Nikon 10-24 at my previous job. Both took about 1-2 full seconds to focus in broad daylight hooked up to the super shitty D5000. |
| | | | | Posted by budda I honestly don't have that much experience with nikon besides the 3 lenses just discussed. I ended up with a used D40x a few years ago and hated it until picking up a Pentax K-r. |
not enough people use pentax. If you want a wonderful camera experience and great image quality. Plus. Amazing backwards kens compatibility. Buy. Pentax. | | | | | Posted by budda I agree! Although the A/F system is more problematic in low light than I expected, and I had a defective E-dial that had to be fixed (btw, they're customer service is legendary good. Had my camera back to me in 14 days) I love my camera so much. I regularly shoot bands with it at 3600+ iso and get great results. |
| | | | | | | Posted by budda yeah I use a 1.4, but my autofocus system just flat out doesn't work in low light. All it does is search, and miss, and I find myself shooting manual more often than not. So shooting faster than F2.8-4 isn't gonna happen. I usually go as low as I can Iso-wise, but the K-r's powerful enough that I can crank the iso a bit and still get high quality images. I'll take some grain over 500 hopelessly out of focus images. |
| | 
| | | | | | | Posted by budda No it's not motion blur. It just straight up does not like to focus in low light situations. Anything really besides direct sunlight sends it hunting. The photos usually have at least something sharp, but never what I want. Never a face, or a guitar or anything like that. Usually just the microphone stand, background lights, and other random bodyparts. At 3000 iso, I'm shooting around 1/60 at F3.5. A comfortable range for both dof and shutter speed. The grain just isn't a problem. Especially not shooting bands who 99% of the time just throw the images on Reverbnation or facebook and call it done. Until I can make money for the next level up Pentax with an updated AF system, it's just gonna be a bit of a balancing act. Also I think my system's working out fairly well. If I tried to manual focus this at F1.4 instead of 4.5, I'd have probably missed. http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8123/8630061649_aea83a50ae_c.jpg _IGP5868 by itsbudda, on Flickr |
| | | Posted by jovialhavoc Damn dude! Thats at 3600? Amazing quality at that high of an ISO... I am really impressed with that performance. Do you take that camera with you into abandonments, I feel like it would shine well there? |
| | | | | Posted by jovialhavoc Damn dude! Thats at 3600? Amazing quality at that high of an ISO... I am really impressed with that performance. Do you take that camera with you into abandonments, I feel like it would shine well there? |
| | | Posted by budda I swear I responded to this and even hit post reply, but it didn't post lol. Anyway, yeah it's my primary exploring camera. Despite being entry level and one of the cheapest DSLRs on the market in 2010, it's a monster. The usability of high iso comes in handy the rare time I don't have a tripod. Otherwise it's almost always set at 100iso. I have gotten some neat shots that otherwise would have been impossible, and it really shines for journalism type stuff where you can give a little grain for a clear shot. As far as entry level-prosumer cameras go, you're gonna have a hard time beating Pentax. The new K30 ($6-700) is every bit as badass as the K-r and then some, and also with a super tough magnesium alloy body and weather sealing, which for UE is AWESOME. Even my plastic K-r has proven pretty indestructible so far. I'm sure If pentax goes full frame, it could probably compete with the D4 as a serious professional camera for thousands less. This was at 8000iso. http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i41/itsbudda/urban%20exploration/Place%202011/_IGP8677_1.jpg And this one I took at 4000 accidentally at the top (forgot to reset iso. That tunnel was a grueling climb in 100° weather.) Not amazingly detailed, but at the same time, not terrible. It's only really grainy in dark spots. http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i41/itsbudda/urban%20exploration/Place%202011/_IGP8665_1_1.jpg Here's what it can REALLY do. Iso 250. You can clearly read even the fairly small signs. It's nuts. I love this camera. http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8326/8111554241_89df804a7a_c.jpg Signals by itsbudda, on Flickr |
| This thread is in a public category, and can't be made private. |