Yes, multiple autofocus points are useful for a variety of reasons. I use the selective position and move the point around as needed. For verticals of people on the street, I'll use the top center point for example. I'm rarely right in the middle. Paul On Oct 10, 2006, at 9:20 PM, Doug Franklin wrote:
> gfen wrote: > >> #1 Lesson: Not caring about film cost kicks ass! > > Absolutely. Mine paid for itself in film (non) costs in two and a > half > pro events, ignoring the other shooting I did. > >> I need to read the manual. > > Uh yeah. :-) > >> Antishake is pretty clever. I'm hand holding below my old cutoff, >> 1/45. > > Awesome! I can't wait to try it. > >> The wireless remote doesn't let you utilize the autowinder, or >> whatever >> we'd call it. Multiple shot feature. Eh. Whatever. > > Really? Even when the camera is in sequential exposure mode? (Or > whatever they call it) On the *ist D, single exposure mode is > shown as > a rectangle in the LCD. Sequential exposure mode is shown as > what's to > look like a stack of rectangles, sort of like > > +--------+ > | |+ > +--------+|+ > +-------+| > +------+ > >> That having a 50/1.4 turn into a 75/1.4 isn't desirable. > > No, but having my 300/4.5 "turn into" a 450/4.5 is pretty handy and > pretty cool. And having my 400/5.6 "turn into" a 600/5.6 is even > better > sometimes. Not to mention that since you're only using the center of > the lens' coverage, you typically get better sharpness out to the > edges > of the digital image. Then again, I use long lenses far more than > short > ones. > >> Wait, I have to set ISO? It does for me? Huh? What? Eh? > > I really wish the *ist D showed the ASA/ISO in the viewfinder or on > the > top LCD panel. I keep forgetting to reset the darned thing. :-) I > just > noticed a minute ago that the photos I added to the "Stuck Filter" > thread a couple of days ago were shot at ASA 1600, a leftover from the > night shots at the Petit le Mans a week ago. > >> Multiple AF points seems to be useless. > > Not for me. When I'm panning fast moving racecars, I've found that > the > AF is usually "behind" what I'm seeing in the viewfinder. I think it > has to do with the amount the car moves during the "lock time" between > the shutter contact closing and the shutter tripping. It may also > have > to do with the way the intersection of the "focus sphere" with the > moving car changes as the car rotates and I rotate. > > What happens is that if the car is moving left-to-right across my > field > of view, the most in focus part of the car is typically aft of the > cockpit, even though the camera locks focus on the center AF > point. But > I've found that if I set the selected AF point to the one just to the > right of that, I see the focus toward the front of the car just before > the shutter trips, but in the photo the part that's most in focus is > around the center of the car. That all assumes, of course, that I've > done my job in panning and not shaking and the whole thing's not > just a > mess of motion blur. > >> Evidently, raw images from the camera don't go into Photoshop? > > They can go into newer Photoshop versions (CS1 and above?) that have > Adobe Camera Raw installed. > >> I wish I knew what I was doing. > > Welcome to the club. > >> I need to learn that I have a preview screen right on teh camera, >> and I >> don't need to go home, download the photos into the PC and then >> see what I >> got. > > That's "technically" known as "chimping". It can cause you to miss > shots and cause you to be ridiculed by your photographic compatriots. > If you do it in the wrong place, like on the Jersey barrier beside a > race track, it can get you killed. :-) > >> I haven't really tried full manual mode, so I haven't had to get >> used to >> using wheels and buttons in combinations, although I rarely used >> anything >> but Av mode, anyways. > > "Hyper" mode is awesome. > >> Alas, the days of the prime lens are probably as over as the days >> of film flagship bodies. > > I sure as hell hope not. After finally acquiring a couple of > really top > notch F* and FA* primes, it would take a stupendous zoom to make me > switch. I'd rather take a separate body for each lens. Some of the > shots from those lenses are just incredible. > > The major bummer from my perspective is a buffer small enough to fill > the way I use the camera. On the MZ-S, I've shot as many as > fifteen in > quick succession as a big incident on the track unfolded. For me, the > five/six shot buffer on the *ist D is OK 90% of the time, but that > other > 10% it's really a pain in the neck waiting on the camera to write the > buffer. > > -- > Thanks, > DougF (KG4LMZ) > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
