One case for camera Image stabilizing

Discussion in 'Australia Photography' started by Cryptopixel, Mar 23, 2008.

  1. Cryptopixel

    Cryptopixel Guest

    http://www.clocksnprints.com/bugsat200mm.htm

    Sigma and other after market lens makers have some exceptional lenses
    in their ranges. The patented nature of lens based image stabilization
    means that these smaller makers are at a substancial disadvantage...
    Until the likes of Pentax and Sony (to name just two) catch up with
    camera body technology.

    The latest Pentax K20D is one example of where serious photographers
    can save thousands of dollars and not sacrifice anything, compared to
    buying Canon and Nikon kits. In-camera image stabilization saves
    photographers serious money when buying excellent quality lenses.

    The Sigma 70 -200 F/2.8 (macro) that took this picture costs less than
    half of what a VR Nikon equivalent costs. Almost enough price
    difference to pay for a Pentax K20D body!

    It's hard to justify the weight and cost of in-lens gyros when cameras
    with sensor based IS are now every bit as good as their Canon and
    Nikon rivals.
     
    Cryptopixel, Mar 23, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Cryptopixel

    Doug Jewell Guest

    Doug Jewell, Mar 24, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Cryptopixel

    Jeff R. Guest

    <snip>

    Huh?

    Isn't this the same poster who roundly criticised macro shots of insects
    just recently in this very forum?

    "Has anyone ever made money out of any of these insect macros...?"

    Make up your mind. Yer either fer it, or ag'in it.
    If you actually don't like insect macros, then surely you have *something*
    really tiny at hand which you could photograph. Let's see....
     
    Jeff R., Mar 24, 2008
    #3
  4. Cryptopixel

    Doug Jewell Guest

    Clicked send on my other reply before I was ready. oops.
    Anyway, as I said before, nice pic doug.
    Was this shot with a K20D? - I thought you were using S5's
    and D300s.
    Most tests tend to show that lens based IS is better than
    body based, and that's probably right. But we survived so
    long without any IS at all, that surely there are more
    important things to rate a system on than the performance of
    IS with one or two particular lenses. Canon & Nikon
    definitely have a better range of fast telephoto lenses than
    Pentax do - this makes In-Body or In-Lens IS irrelevant if
    it is hard to even find a suitable lens for the body. But
    certainly for someone who mostly needs wide through to
    moderate-telephoto the Pentax system represents exceptional
    value.
     
    Doug Jewell, Mar 24, 2008
    #4
  5. Cryptopixel

    Pete D Guest

    Not sure what lenses you need in Pentax mount but their 200mm F2.8 looks
    pretty good and their soon to be released 300mm F4 will probably be good as
    well. If you really need big glass though I would suggest that Pentax is not
    for you.

    If you are shooting with a K20D it would seem that faster long lenses while
    normally desirable may not be quite as needed as they once were because the
    high ISO performance is getting to be so good.

    Cheers.

    Pete
     
    Pete D, Mar 24, 2008
    #5
  6. Cryptopixel

    Pete D Guest

    Now Jeff you should really be a bit more understanding here, he can't be
    expected to remember every stupid brainless rant he has ever had now can he?
     
    Pete D, Mar 24, 2008
    #6
  7. Cryptopixel

    Jeff R. Guest


    True.
    I just don't want him to forget *this* one.
     
    Jeff R., Mar 24, 2008
    #7
  8. Cryptopixel

    Pete D Guest

    Sorry, which one, the one about the pano or the one about the macro shots?
    ;-)
     
    Pete D, Mar 24, 2008
    #8
  9. Cryptopixel

    Jeff R. Guest


    I must learn to be specific.

    Oh heck!

    Both!
     
    Jeff R., Mar 24, 2008
    #9
  10. Oh look, a new identity.

    I would have commented on the picture (- has no-one noticed anything
    odd?)
    But of course Doug told us all that:
    (http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/msg/40350317a2f8f3d6)

    So I will take his advice and refuse to comment on what must be a
    troll post. (O: (And I would have commented on the content, but I
    can't understand wtf point he is trying to make.)

    But when will he show us that he wasn't lying on the stepped out
    panorama thread?
     
    mark.thomas.7, Mar 24, 2008
    #10
  11. Cryptopixel

    Doug Jewell Guest

    Pentax certainly offers all that I need, and then some! But
    for some of the sports and wildlife nuts, the lack of fast
    300+ glass is a compelling reason not to go pentax.
    True, but regardless of how high you can go in ISO, if you
    have fast glass you will always have an advantage over slow
    glass. Yes, the high ISO performance of the K20 will mean a
    K20 & 5.6 lens will do what would need a 2.8 lens on the
    K10, but a K20 & 2.8 lens will be better again. Whether that
    translates into faster shutters for better frozen motion, or
    whether it translates into lower light shooting is up to the
    owner, but regardless, they are still better off with the
    fast glass.
     
    Doug Jewell, Mar 24, 2008
    #11
  12. Cryptopixel

    Cryptopixel Guest

    Life size shot Doug.
     
    Cryptopixel, Mar 24, 2008
    #12
  13. Cryptopixel

    Cryptopixel Guest

    There seems to be a presumption here that having a F2.8 lens you will
    use the wide aperture for taking photographs. That goes to show me,
    none of you have a long, fast lens. A telephoto lens with F2.8 gives
    you brighter images in the viewfinder and more precise auto focus. At
    200 mm FL the depth of field is minuscule and unless you have a reason
    for wanting a face out of focus either side of the point of focus, it
    has little practical use.

    The edge of one of the insect's shells is the point of focus. There
    is more DOF past the focus point than there is in front of it. About 5
    mm range before the OOF starts to be obvious. Certainly not enough to
    photograph a person's face side on and have usable images. The Sigma,
    120 - 300 F2.8 I sold before Christmas never took a shot in
    seriousness at F/2.8 for that very reason.

    The camera used was a Canon 10D belonging to the buyer of the lens and
    some other Canon stuff I had left over from the change to Nikon. She
    wanted to satisfy herself that the lens was indeed a viable rival for
    Canon's own 70 - 200, F2.8. She used her partner's Canon lens to
    compare shots with on my computer. My comments were aimed at those
    people seeking decent glass and not having the means to shell out a
    few grand to get it.
     
    Cryptopixel, Mar 24, 2008
    #13
  14. Cryptopixel

    Pete D Guest

    Yeah, fair enough!
     
    Pete D, Mar 24, 2008
    #14
  15. Cryptopixel

    Pete D Guest


    Correct for the "Pro" shooters but for the "average" shooter they will do
    just fine.
     
    Pete D, Mar 24, 2008
    #15
  16. Cryptopixel

    Doug Jewell Guest

    I don't own anthing longer than 80mm at 2.8, but I do have
    ready access to long fast glass, and wide open is most
    definately used for taking photographs.
    The DOF is also dependent upon the distance to the subject.
    With a 200mm lens on a crop sensor body, the subject
    distance for a portrait is such that at 2.8 you have
    adequate DOF.
    For typical sporting shot distances, 2.8 gives more than
    enough DOF.
    I've never done side-on face portraits at macro
    magnifications. I guess if you want a shot of just the nose,
    then 2.8 won't be enough DOF.
    The Sigma,
    But what were you using it for? Take it to the footy at
    night, and I can guarantee you'd use it wide open more often
    than not.
     
    Doug Jewell, Mar 24, 2008
    #16
  17. Cryptopixel

    Doug Jewell Guest

    yup, which is why the Pro's tend to mainly use Nikon &
    Canon, but for the "average" shooter, Pentax will do just
    fine. Long fast glass is about the only hole in the Pentax
    line up though. They cover wide-angle through to moderate
    telephoto better than pretty much any other system. All
    depends on what you want to do with it.
     
    Doug Jewell, Mar 24, 2008
    #17
  18. Cryptopixel

    Pete D Guest

    And I guess for that reason most Pentax users are not users of long glass
    although there are quite a number using Bigma and the like to good effect, I
    do know of a few that have the 600mm F4 though.
     
    Pete D, Mar 24, 2008
    #18
  19. Cryptopixel

    Cryptopixel Guest

    Well... Unlike you Jeff, I have a life that doesn't let me be a slave
    to sheep who think because they can't do it it can't be done.

    When I get around to it you'll get your views. In the mean time have a
    little patience. March and April are busy times for me. I'd put making
    money ahead of stimulating the bleating sheep any day. Take a pew mate
    and show some patience. All you've shown so far is a disgrace to the
    human race.
     
    Cryptopixel, Mar 26, 2008
    #19
  20. So why doesn't Douglas MacDonald/Cryptopixel *put the page back up* -
    the one where he lied about taking images from different locations?

    And why doesn't he explain, and apologise for, his wrongful defamation
    of AC on that page, and in the original thread?
    http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/browse_frm/thread/a6d1c0259d43619f


    I'm sure he has very good reasons...
     
    mark.thomas.7, Mar 26, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.