ON a rare occasion I agree with you. Get out the champange! And put this in the record books. Sports/ACTION is one area where AF is indispensable, DSLR is almost indispensable and AE helps somewhat but not nearly as much as digital and AF. I don't do sports but someone would have to be brain dead to attempt sports/ACTION now without DSLR and AF. I couldn't find if I.S was used but with long lenses and action I would consider that as mandatory as AF and DSLR too.
Disclaimer: Sports/ACTION is only a very narrow portion of the entire photographic realm. These things are not needed or even desireable for a whole bunch of other types of photography... And there is one other caveat to be aware of and that is we are talking STILL photography. If you carry Sports/Action still photography too far with frame rates and such you end up being a cinemaphotographer in essence which is ok with me but there might be better techniques/equipment for that beyond the realm of PENTAX and still cameras... jco -----Original Message----- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 10:35 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: How Pentax Could Survive (was:Re: Pentax K 2.5/200mm) ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: How Pentax Could Survive (was:Re: Pentax K 2.5/200mm) > I dont agree with you in that the content of the images depend on the > technology. In my view the lack of content is just more evident when the > technology is better. You haven't tried to shoot sports in the way it is being done these days. It's completely technology dependant now. Or: http://www.pbase.com/sjbousson/the_steal Is a pretty technology dependant set of pictures. I doubt if a manual focus, manual exposure, manual film advance camera would be capable of getting this series. William Robb
