Best bet here would have been the 500 mm lens or the 300 and 1.4 converter. The 60/250 plus 1.4 converter would be an okay substitute with cropping. Tripod or monopod would be helpful but with ISO 1600 quite acceptable you could get away with hand held, shooting wide open.
Paul via phone > On Nov 1, 2014, at 6:41 AM, Jack Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > > Brave stuff, Christine! Dramatic shots in very tough conditions. > > Jack > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christine Aguila" <[email protected]> > To: "PDML" <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 10:15:27 PM > Subject: GESO--Windy Day at the Lake & lens question > > Hi Everyone: > > We had exceptional winds today, so I thought I’d head to the lake to catch > some waves. The white caps were prominent to be sure, and there was a bit of > splashing waves a tad north of where we were. Higher waves, which flooded > bits of Lake Shore drive, could be found south of us—closer to downtown. We > were up north by Wilson ave. > > Anywhooo, The spot we stopped at is the put-in spot for jet skis and > windsurfers and such, and we got lucky since a handful of windsurfers were > taking advantage of the high winds—and boy were the winds high. > > It was really hard to take pictures. I couldn’t keep the camera or myself > steady. The wind was coming from the northeast, and if I tried to shoot into > the wind, sand carried along by the wind stung my face so bad—for the first > time, I was glad to be wearing glasses! By the end of the shoot, I had sand > everywhere, hair, mouth, ears, and even in my camera bag. I had to do a big > shake-out when I got home. > > Darrel was with me, and he tried to act as wind-break for me, but it didn’t > really help much. It was such an exhilarating shoot—lots of fun to try to > deal with the elements while trying to shoot. I’d like to do more bad > weather shooting—though I don’t think I’d like to chase tornados and such. > > I really would have loved a longer lens. Most of the photos below are deep > crops. I did the best I could with the DA* 50-135. > > So I have a question: Darrel thinks were were about 100 yards (a football > field) from the surfers. Given this distance, which would have worked > better, a 200mm or 300 mm prime to catch the surfer action? > > > http://www.caguila.com/windyday/index.html > > Cheers, Christine > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
