Yes I do that. When travel I normally bring along two lenses (wide + tele) and some times a fast prime for low light. I prefer the sling bag over a backpack also as i can change lens inside the bag without putting my bags down. I think for DSLR, dust will some how find it's way into the camera no matter how careful you are, it is unavoidable but you can minimise the dust getting in like when changing lens, face the camera body down.
hi new guy here intending to go for k10d, a few queries
- Thread starter Equatorer
- Start date
- Status
Yes I do that. When travel I normally bring along two lenses (wide + tele) and some times a fast prime for low light. I prefer the sling bag over a backpack also as i can change lens inside the bag without putting my bags down. I think for DSLR, dust will some how find it's way into the camera no matter how careful you are, it is unavoidable but you can minimise the dust getting in like when changing lens, face the camera body down.
I not sure how long you've tried your hand in photography but the primary reason why the single lens reflex camera has gained wide acceptance compared to other types of cameras lies with the ability to shoot exactly what you see in the viewfinder and the plethora of interchangeable optics that can be used, from fisheye to macro to extreme telephoto. That certainly is not marketing spin.
Even if modern lens designs are able to produce something like an 18-300 f2.8 superzoom, several interchangeable prime lenses covering the same focal length will outperform the superzoom many times over image quality wise. The zoom lens may offer convenience but it won't beat a prime lens in terms of quality, period.
Ask yourself why do top pros and discerning photographers avoid the superzoom like the plague? Simple, they know that to achieve the wide zoom range many compromises would have to be made. Image quality and performance are likely to be mediocre and dare I say it not very good value in the light of the shortcomings (slow AF, bulky, chromatic aberration, barrel and pincushion distortion, low contrast, poor resolution, etc).
In cooking, a chef would use many different knives to cut different ingredients. The same analogy applies to photography.
It's interesting to note that nowadays an LCD arguably shows what you see will see more accurately - it takes DOF into account properly, and they're all 100%. Of course response times and (perhaps) resolution still mean that an optical viewfinder is king.
You're right, of course. But that's simply because there IS that performance differential. There's nothing intrinsically advantageous about changing lenses if your lens already does what you want it to do.
Lol. I think that "top pros" use whatever they want to.
Indeed, I think you'll find it hard to find a pro who actually uses a prime any longer. This probably wasn't true 20-30 years ago, but the advent of the 24/28-70/2.8 and the 70-200/2.8 have made -those- lenses the mainstays of the pro - even with their slightly compromised image quality as compared to a prime.
They're probably not using too many superzoom lenses now, but that's because of the current quality of those lenses.
--
Let me be clear about my purposefor bringing this up - the OP should know that for the flexibility given by a DSLR comes at a price.
Unless a person is intending to use a DSLR solely for pure photographic purposes (i.e. not for travel and etc.) the ultrazoom lens definitely has it's place. Of course it's better to have a specific (prime) lens for each situation, but this is not ideal, and if you're shooting a moving subject in all likelihood you won't be able to change lenses (and/or move) in time to get the shot.
So yes, it's great to be able to change lenses, because of the limitations of current superzooms, but also yes - it's a pain.
Remember that 20 years ago (creampuff?) there were probably similarly differing opinions about whether zooms should be used at all.
Actually, the LCD monitor DOES NOT give an accurate representation of DOF as compared to previewing through the optical viewfinder. The LCD monitor allows for a preview of composition, exposure and focus. That's why Pentax offers 2 preview methods: digital or optical preview.
Ha, ha I believe you've bought the marketing spin about superzoom lenses hook, line and sinker... :bsmilie:
Years ago, zoom lenses were a rarity and cost quite a lot of money. Despite the limited range of the early zooms and the so-so quality, these lenses caught on with photojournalists and eventually the hobbyist. Heck even I owned the so-so Nikkor 43-86mm push-pull zoom...
Obviously zoom lenses have improved over the years but with it's popularity also came the decline for prime lenses. Every lens maker now has more zooms in their lens line-up compared to prime lenses because it is driven by what the consumer wants - convenience.
Pros will use what works and what gives the best quality be it zoom or prime. Lens preference would depend on the type of photograph genre - action, sports, wildlife, studio, still life, etc. It could be a good quality zoom or prime lens but in my opinion unlikely to be a superzoom. :bsmilie: And btw, many pros I know still use prime lenses...
Actually, I respectfully disagree with your opinion that using a DSLR comes at a price. If anything, it opens up so many possibilities to create images that are different from what we normally perceive.
If shooting a moving subject using a prime lens is not ideal, then why are sports photographers and wildlife photographers still using prime lenses instead of zooms?
Can't get the shot? Zoom lenses isn't always the answer, good technique is.
You're saying that my final picture (which is what the pentax digital preview is) is not an accurate representation of DOF?
hahaha.
If you're speaking of "live view" modes generally, you're probably correct
(although that's really a software issue - which can be fixed. I don't think traditional DOF preview can be fixed to be really accurate...)I don't understand this comment...
yes yes. prime lenses in the 300+ range are common of course. Even there zooms are beginning to make their presence felt (200-400/4, 120-300/2.8, etc.)
The 50/1.4... I'm not sure if that's really in use. Of course there are pros who use primes - I did say that they tend to use whatever it is they want to, right?
Haha. Ok sure. I meant that comment specifically in relation to having to change lenses, but if you want to discuss the point, I think it's generally applicable too - think about the comparative weight/size/etc.
They're using primes because the current long zooms aren't up to snuff (not as fast/sharp/etc. as you mentioned).
--
Edit: And lets be clear - I meant use in non-specific photo settings.
A wildlife photographer is specifically going to take pictures of wildlife. He should have a nice fat tripod as well as his 300/2.8 (or longer), and each shot takes time and preparation. You might have been on safari before? The long lenses are used because there is no other choice (reach/speed). The reality is different for someone who uses the dslr for multiple purposes - a PJ or events photographer with a prime is the rarity.
You're saying that my final picture (which is what the pentax digital preview is) is not an accurate representation of DOF?
hahaha.
If you're speaking of "live view" modes generally, you're probably correct
Know the difference between looking at something in 2D and 3D? Try using the optical preview for a change. The Pentax operating manual mentions this as well...
I don't understand what is the PITA about changing lenses on the move. The point about having an SLR is having the ability to be able to change to the lens that suit the shot you want. It only take a few seconds and its easy to change. Practise... just practise more on the bed if you don't have confident to change lens on the road. If one is so worry and scare of changing lens or find changing lens troublesome, then there is not much point to use an SLR.
Maybe my palm is big, you gotto use 1 hand to hold 2 lenses and the other hand to hold the body. Line the lens you want to mount with index and thumb finger position, last 2 fingers and palm hold the lens to be un-mount. The other finger holding the body press down the mount release catch. Then at the same time, unscrew the lens. Immediately when lens unscrewed, flip over the other lens and mount it instantly into the body. 'click'. its done! less than 10sec.
I change lens very often when I am travelling, more than 101 times in a trip? At least 3 lenses in my sling bag, stretch my hand into the bag, grab it and change even when I am walking. Whether sunny, dusty, drizzling... all in the matter of seconds. If one is so concern about the dust, then blow the sensor more often when you are back in the hotel/accomendation.
LOL, i think there are still quite a number lot of prime shooter lah. 20year ago, zoom is cannot replace primes for the image quality. Today is still the same. What will makes it different in tomorrow? :bsmilie:
cheersss..
Maybe my palm is big, you gotto use 1 hand to hold 2 lenses and the other hand to hold the body. Line the lens you want to mount with index and thumb finger position, last 2 fingers and palm hold the lens to be un-mount. The other finger holding the body press down the mount release catch. Then at the same time, unscrew the lens. Immediately when lens unscrewed, flip over the other lens and mount it instantly into the body. 'click'. its done! less than 10sec.
I change lens very often when I am travelling, more than 101 times in a trip? At least 3 lenses in my sling bag, stretch my hand into the bag, grab it and change even when I am walking. Whether sunny, dusty, drizzling... all in the matter of seconds. If one is so concern about the dust, then blow the sensor more often when you are back in the hotel/accomendation.
LOL, i think there are still quite a number lot of prime shooter lah. 20year ago, zoom is cannot replace primes for the image quality. Today is still the same. What will makes it different in tomorrow? :bsmilie:
cheersss..
eh. ok. Obviously lots of people (at least 3!) don't think that changing lenses generally is a pain.
I disagree, having had to change lenses continually during one of my trips. (Although don't think I hit 101. Perhaps 50 in a 4 day span).
OP - please come to your own conclusion
I disagree, having had to change lenses continually during one of my trips. (Although don't think I hit 101. Perhaps 50 in a 4 day span).
OP - please come to your own conclusion
heee.. i think its the Pentax 'thing' lah.. Pentax has so many excellent primes lenses. Its such a waste not to use these beautiful SMC optic.
Its alot about technique too Equatorer. Honestly speaking, the kit lens is a decent travel lens.
Wide for landscape and a bit more zoom at the other end.
And dnaxe, what creampuff meant when he said you bought the marketing line hook, line and sinker is that you believed the lens makers that superzooms are the bomb completely. Sadly this isn't so, superzooms (like 18-300..) tend to have pretty poor optical quality and are really slow (aperture kinda small). There maybe a few that have decent optics and speed but they are expensive enough you need to sell your organs.
Re prime lenses, i can honestly say nothing beats their quality. My 50mm prime beats my kit lens anytime (needless to say). Its not as versatile, but i've left it on and forced myself to take photos with just that (and a polariser). You'll be amazed what you can come up with..
Wide for landscape and a bit more zoom at the other end.
And dnaxe, what creampuff meant when he said you bought the marketing line hook, line and sinker is that you believed the lens makers that superzooms are the bomb completely. Sadly this isn't so, superzooms (like 18-300..) tend to have pretty poor optical quality and are really slow (aperture kinda small). There maybe a few that have decent optics and speed but they are expensive enough you need to sell your organs.
Re prime lenses, i can honestly say nothing beats their quality. My 50mm prime beats my kit lens anytime (needless to say). Its not as versatile, but i've left it on and forced myself to take photos with just that (and a polariser). You'll be amazed what you can come up with..
nah..changing lens is not a pain.:bsmilie: If changing lens is a pain, i think i would have sticked with this camera.
No lenses to change is a pain.
seriously, i am not sure how you managed to come up with such conclusive statement like this when you haven't even start using one?
Not every photographer need a zoom as a travel lens. A photographer who truely understand photography should be able to make use of whatever his/her existing mounted lens to create the best possible shot at that instant in time.
The person behind the viewfinder determine the shot! Not what decent travel lens you choose to use!
cheerss...
Lol.
You think? But I specifically said creampuff was right when he said that the primes would beat the zoom
I shoot with a FA 50/1.4 myself most of the time, and yes, it's obviously better. However, it's also a complete pain (my subjective opinion, obviously) to change to the kit when I need a wider angle (it's not always possible to step back THAT much) and while I still do it on a regular basis I'm hoping not to have to do it pretty soon (hopefully the 16-50/2.8 is sufficiently acceptable to me).
Lol. I agree actually. You might find that a prime is so much better (and faster) than you'll suck it up and stick to using the prime as often as possible...
Uh. Yes, of course - if you're talking about "best possible shot" that's easily achievable. But are you saying that you've never been in a situation where you need a dramatically wider/narrower FOV than the glass you have mounted?
It can be a pain, one you have to live with. That said, sometimes you just have to anticipate what you need. Or carry two cameras .
A 50mm prime is a great portrait lens while the 16-50/2.8 (the sigma lens? I want!) is a great general purpose lens.
re the creampuff statement, i was just clarifying.. nvm.
.A 50mm prime is a great portrait lens while the 16-50/2.8 (the sigma lens? I want!) is a great general purpose lens.
re the creampuff statement, i was just clarifying.. nvm.
yes, indeed true! most of my lenses in my cabinet are primes. and i still use mainly primes these days.
surely there is such a scenerio, but it can always be avoided before reaching that stage. Use a sling bag, grab your lens and change before reaching there... you can always try to forecast what focal you need for the shot you going to do.
cheerss...
It can be a pain, one you have to live with. That said, sometimes you just have to anticipate what you need. Or carry two cameras
A 50mm prime is a great portrait lens while the 16-50/2.8 (the sigma lens? I want!) is a great general purpose lens.
The pentax DA*...
Well, he can clarify it himself, or he can remain unclear.. *shrug*
Haha. Yes. Most of the time I anticipate my prime (50) will be either too short or too long.. hahaha. but of course I generally prefer using the prime to the kit (or telezoom), so the prime stays on, then I fumble and curse when I'm forced to eventually change.
Ok ok.. I'm looking at the 18-50/2.8 from Sigma myself. But between my baby showing up in November and the kit lens and prime been in the same category, i can't justify the 800plus oz bucks. (here in perth).
- Status
