Or go the more pragmatic, less technical approach: just twist and turn dials and knobs until all the red lights on the camera turn green.

quote:

Originally posted by BlueEchoes:
Fish my friend, quit using the custom settings. Go into manual mode, and set it to AE or AV (whatever that camera dial is labeled).

Hold please, I am looking up your model...

Okay, you have an highest ISO setting of 3200 on that baby, there may be too much noise on at 3200, so try it first at 1600 and see how they turn out. Set it for AE or AV (Aperture priority in the manual modes) and get that F-Stop low, On that lens, you have a 3.5-5.6. So the more you zoom in, the f-stop will go from 3.5 at its lowest, up to 5.6 at it's lowest. At AV/AE, your shutter speed will automatically set in this mode.

this should give you better results. Keep that baby still as you can as well and you should be fine.

This is a really nice camera, trust me, you should be able to get the results you want with it without shelling out the big bucks for a lens:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0605/06052205pentaxk100d.asp

Bummer, the K100d has the built in image stabilizing, but still, yours is a really REALLY nice camera. Unfortunately, I cannot find an IS lens that has the Pentax mount.

I went back and looked. Mine is the 100d with image stabilization. I do remember screwing around with the manual settings and ISO. IIRC the pictures were either too dark (ISO of 800) or too noisy at 1600. I'll try again to see if I was doing what you suggested.

Fish, I got the lens for you:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/ni...omsMF/12001700mm.htm



For both Canon and Nikon!

http://blogs.reuters.com/blog/2007/07/18/unleashing-the-beast

quote:

Originally posted by BlueEchoes:
Fish, I got the lens for you:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/ni...omsMF/12001700mm.htm



For both Canon and Nikon!

http://blogs.reuters.com/blog/2007/07/18/unleashing-the-beast

You know what people will say - Big lens, small...

fins???


Hey Flora...happy New Year.

Right back at ya, M2C.

speaking of photography, I upgraded my galleries on my site to a more streamlined version that also shows larger images for your viewing pleasure.

http://www.blue-echoes.com/portfolio/portfolio.html

Thank you Ted for allowing me to promote local GE artists!

Per passwird.com , B&H is having a Canon lens sale

quote:

B&H Photo is having a sale on select Canon SLR Lenses. Photogs rejoice. They have the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS at $1469. All prices are lowest on PriceGrabber. B&H is an authorized Canon dealer. Add $6-$8 per lens for shipping depending on location. BH PHOTO

Review: The Digital Picture

Zooms
- EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Lens - $609
- EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM Lens - $854
- EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Lens - $984
- EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Lens - $944.95
- EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Lens - $1469

Primes and Flash
- EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Lens - $1184
- EF 85mm f/1.2L USM Lens - $1589
- Canon 580EX II Speedlite Flash - $329.95

I use the 24-105 F/4 IS L glass, an absolutely wonderful piece of glass. The 70-200 F/2.8 is kickin as well, but I went with the 100-400mm for the longer reach. I hand hold this baby and do not use a monopod and it is the bomb diggity. You can see the difference between a non image stabilized lens ((Sigma 50-500mm) on a monopod and a 100-400 hand held in the first three rugby shots in my sports gallery. The first 2 rugby shots were with the non IS lens and are a little soft, the rest of the rugby shots are with the 100-400 IS lens and are tack sharp. If you can spend the extra cash to get the image stabilizing lens, then do it, it is so worth it.

_{time for me to chime in?}

B&H is a good one. Trust B&H. Ordered from them at least a half dozen times now. I've got the 10-22 (for cropped cameras like the D-Rebel's and 20/30/40D's). Some cool shots available in a micro wide zoom. Almost L-quality glass. I've been wanting a 24-105 for a while now, but will wait until the Canon 5DmkII is available to pair it up with.

Bought a 580exII flash last year when the price was loads higher. Nice unit. Overkill for me, but as full featured as you can want for a mid-sized flash. MUCH nicer than the older 580.

50mm f/1.2 is a waste of money unless all you're looking for is bragging rights and more weight on the front of your camera. 50mm f/1.4 is the better choice.

One of the most useful white mid-length zooms is the 70-200 IS f/2.8, which also comes in a f/4 version - lighter and less expensive but for outdoor sunny conditions only.

If anyone is looking to not buy a kit lens on a dSLR, consider the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Tack sharp and contrasty / decent build. Around $369 street price / rebates almost always available too on this one.

BTW, I am shooting with a 2-yr. old Canon 20D. Looking to upgrade soon to a 40D for nature & basic use and then adding a 5DmkII (or whatever they'll call it) for primary shooting, then converting the 20D to a full-time IR unit.

I bought my Rebel XTi from B&H as well. Good place.

I have the cheapie 50mm and it doesn't work so well on the 1.6x crop cameras. Well I mean it works fine but it's not equal to the old 50mm that were standard on film SLRs... it's more equivalent to like 80mm or so.

If you are ever in New York and are a photographer, you need to go to B & H's store. It is like going to Disneyland. You can literally spend an entire day there looking at all the stuff they have.

Newest intro level Canon dSLR, the 450D aka XSi. Nice little cam.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012415canoneos450dchanges.asp

OK..Blue and 58...I've decided I need some fast glass for my little Pentax. I've found a 70-200 f/2.8 lens from Sigma and Tamron reviewed in about a million places, but can't find the F*%^&ing lenses anywhere for sale. WTF? I also had one guy say to me "Why would you put that kind of glass on that body?" (Pentax K100D). I thought it was more important to spend the money on the lens as opposed to the body. Thoughts?

quote:

Originally posted by Fish:
OK..Blue and 58...I've decided I need some fast glass for my little Pentax. I've found a 70-200 f/2.8 lens from Sigma and Tamron reviewed in about a million places, but can't find the F*%^&ing lenses anywhere for sale. WTF? I also had one guy say to me "Why would you put that kind of glass on that body?" (Pentax K100D). I thought it was more important to spend the money on the lens as opposed to the body. Thoughts?

Good glass is where everything starts. A photog's budget is always $pent in quality len$e$. My camera bodies will come and go, but my investment in glass should stay current for a decade or more and will see many camera body iterations behind them. Blue will no doubt echo (pun) the same.

Hmmmm. 70-200 for Pentax digitals? I don't think so. Here's what I dug up in a minute of searching. If these boys don't carry it, then forget that focal range and concentrate on what they do have. As for which of the three brands (Pentax, Sigma or Tamron) made for your mount are best, YMMV, but Tammy's have a six-year warranty. You can't do better than that. Pentax glass still ain't no slouch in quality though.

I'm not liking the results from reviews of these super spreads (e.g.: Tamron 18-250mm), which only yield decent results in the middle apertures at middle focals. Yet I long for a 10-500mm quality zoom if one was ever produced! Sometimes the best lens is several lenses; or maybe two.

Kit lenses generally suck when critical shots matter, but you probably already know that since you're shopping. If you're committed to a body and/or mount type and will live with it for several generations, then go big or go home. And if so, get something good. Only the better quality lenses will yield a decent price in the used market while kit lenses and cheap stuff become give-aways.

B&H is a high-class brick and mortar and on-line seller. Biggest there ever was. I've used them a half dozen times in the recent past. And don't spend more $ on the faster deliveries. The UPS normal ground has always been at my door within 2-3 days, same as Amazon. But... I don't like winter deliveries on this type of thing. Due to temperature variations in and out of trucks and warehouses and the consequences of condensation ruining glass/electronics, I limit my on-line purchases to April - October.

After I did a little more digging, I found that Tamron (and probably Sigma too) have released the 70-200 f/2.8 in canon and nikon mounts but have not released the Pentax mount version. It looks like you can order the Pentax mount on Amazon, but will have to wait until at least April for delivery.

quote:

_{Originally posted by Fish:
After I did a little more digging, I found that Tamron (and probably Sigma too) have released the 70-200 f/2.8 in canon and nikon mounts but have not released the Pentax mount version. It looks like you can order the Pentax mount on Amazon, but will have to wait until at least April for delivery.}

April isn't that far away. So this will act as a 107-300mm lens with your camera body's sensor crop. What do you have for a normal length lens?

quote:

Originally posted by GESince1958:

quote:

_{Originally posted by Fish:
After I did a little more digging, I found that Tamron (and probably Sigma too) have released the 70-200 f/2.8 in canon and nikon mounts but have not released the Pentax mount version. It looks like you can order the Pentax mount on Amazon, but will have to wait until at least April for delivery.}

April isn't that far away. So this will act as a 107-300mm lens with your camera body's sensor crop. What do you have for a normal length lens?

I've got the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens that came with the camera and a tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3. Neither of which are fast enough for indoor, sports and low light.

Fish, why change cameras? You take such wonderful photos with the camera you currently have. That picture of a duck....wow....a total masterpiece.

quote:

Originally posted by GE Fan:
Fish, why change cameras? You take such wonderful photos with the camera you currently have. That picture of a duck....wow....a total masterpiece.

Thanks, how very thoughtful of you to mention it.