Statistically speaking (and almost always, in my own case), the latter is more likely, although the former is sometimes tricky to rule out

Care to post an example or two just in case there's anything obvious in the frame that would account for the underexposure?

Smallish, darkish objects with a largish, brightish background frequently end up underexposed on auto in my limited experience. Which is annoying, since of course they're often the reason for using flash in the first place.

I have one of the Sigma 28-200s. I've had it for 20-odd years, it's been with me practically everywhere I ever took pictures, pre-digital.

Couldn't sell it now

Well I've had a really tough time with this; never judged a photo competition before, and I take my hat off to those that do it regularly. I console myself with Ammonyte's genius comment a couple of weeks ago - "It's my decision so it doesn't have to be right!"

Lots of entries, one clear winner, several that could easily have taken second and third. Here goes:

Daniel Bridge’s hover fly is captured in terrific detail, even down to the twist at the wing roots. The energy of the wings contrasts beautifully with the stationary body, there’s nothing in the background to distract, and the lighting and colour are rich and vibrant. Achieving this capture is impressive indeed. In my view, a clear First Place.

LiamD’s gull is detailed with a pleasingly non-distracting background. It seems just a touch front-edge-on to do justice to the wings, but to photograph birds in flight and get them as sharp as this is not easy.

GlynM has given us a shot of the EC135 T2 Surrey police helicopter, registration G-SURY. His exposure reveals the movement of the rotor blades, and manages to keep the softness down to a low level, despite how hard it is to focus manually with little DOF on a moving object with such a long lens.

Galoot has offered a very crisp crop of a De Havilland Tiger Moth*. Well engaged with the pilot, and excellent colour and detail, although it would have been nice to see more of it.

Camsterfactor has provided a silhouette of one of the Red Arrows. They’re very hard to capture well in my experience, and the smoke makes it very dramatic. The smoke trail from the aircraft that isn't in the frame makes the composition less compelling without the aircraft itself, however, and my preference would be for the colour version with more detail visible in the aircraft.

Lenscape’s take on the theme is very different. I was hoping (possibly unreasonably) to see the arrow on its way, as my eye flicked to the target, and its absence makes flight the potential rather than the reality. A strong composition, with the imminent action well presented, although a little more of the right and left extremities might be even better.

Overbeyond gives us an imposing composition in which the eye is forcefully escorted up the building, to the aircraft via the chimney. It’s a dramatic shot, with lots of detail, but I was left unconvinced that its dominant theme was really ‘flight’.

Amoringello has caught an amazing action moment, and the point of impact is sharp. The composition seems to me a little weakened by the way the faces are hidden, but it’s still an impressive piece of timing.

Clarky’s unusual interpretation shows a capsule from the London Eye. Very good exposure, with detail in the base as well as brightness in the sky. A strong idea – worth pursuing again maybe, with a polariser to cut down the reflections, more centrally for symmetry, and timing the shot so as not to cut the faces with the railing.

Ammonyte’s kite is beautifully lit, and shows its fabulous symmetry. An excellent capture, but the faint clouds (or is it smoke?) are somewhat distracting, especially the one above the main bush in the foreground. Otherwise Highly Commended.

Prieni’s tern is another excellent capture, nicely framed, with great symmetry in both the wing dihedral and the tailfeathers. Unusually good detail, considering the lighting from above. Second place.

HowardJ interprets the theme very differently again, with flights of steps. He presents a very unusual building with rich colours, and a lot of interesting detail. I found myself struggling with a sense of scale a little, and had to count steps to get an idea of size.

Leon’s alpine helicopter is very crisp, with excellent sharp detail visible despite the bright background. The exposure is so short that the rotors are completely frozen, as well as losing one of the rotor tips at the top, and this detracts a little from what is otherwise a great moment.

DaveM’s hovering kestrel is another example of just how lovely these birds look with their feathers spread, and lit from above. The urban background provides good thematic contrast, but the two poles are a little unfortunate. A strong idea, so worth pursuing a better vantage point and aiming for a larger final image.

Legasso gives us a moment of pure comedy with his self-portrait, which made me laugh out loud. Simple, clean, and very effective. Third place.

Justgetoutandride gives us another bird in flight, and captures it despite its speed, as evident from the trees. Too dark, though, to see any real detail in the bird - backlighting can be such a nuisance.

Lilly gives us a fabulous feather. It’s possibly my favourite of all the images presented here, just lovely. The detail and background texture are much clearer on my old monitor, than the much newer one I had to use to get the most out of many of the other entries. For me it evokes softness, gentleness, order and chaos, and I just love looking at it. But sadly, and very subjectively, I feel that the link to the theme is not quite strong enough, so I must reluctantly pass over it for a place on the podium. Nevertheless, Very Highly Commended.

Nyami presents a high contrast and impressive shot of the Red Arrows completing a Vertical Break. It would have been more stunning had the split dominated the top of the frame more, and been allowed to develop for a moment or two more before the capture. The dust specks on the sensor detract a little too but these could easily be removed. I like the way the enormous smoke trails contrast with the comparatively tiny aeroplanes.

Gashley gives us some more gulls. It’s instantly obvious what the subject of the photo is, and the gull in question is nicely sharp, and benefits from being well positioned against the darker part of the background, rather than the water. I like the way attention is drawn to it by virtue of it being the only sharp part of the image. It’s catching them coming towards you that’s hard – most of mine are flying away as well.

MrMuz has captured a lovely butterfly. More nature, than flight, maybe, and it would perhaps benefit from some cropping and careful sharpening to reveal more of the detail present.

Pschlute’s tripod is very imposing, with rich colours and interesting reflections. I hereby deem it to be the winner - of the ‘Most flexible interpretation of the theme’ award


Well done all. You've given me a tough week, and I'm very relieved that the mantle now passes to Daniel Bridge, this week's worthy winner.
________________________________________________

* Just as an aside, it’s hard to be sure, but I believe this is G-ANRF, a truly historic aircraft. In 1978 it was flown solo from Dunsfold in Surrey to Darwin in Australia, with no backup team, over 32 days.

http://www.loop.aero/features/hangarchat/2006/July/11, if you’re interested. Looks like it had been converted back to the two-seat configuration by the time this shot was taken, but retains the livery of the trip sponsor. It has a very different paint scheme now – if this shot is ‘RF, it must have been taken some time ago. Care to share the details, Galoot?

Very close to my heart, the theme for this week is:

Flight.

Good luck everyone. Looking forward to seeing the entries, nervous already about judging...

Hi there, and welcome!

Be warned... the more you learn, the more you realise there is to learn. I've been here for 6 months and I feel like I know less than I did before - for every one thing I learn I realise there are five more that I know nothing about.

Still, it's fun

Well there's the 10 and the 100D(S).

But you'd think it would be based on sales, not models, wouldn't you? Or at least the existence of a pro-level body with evidence of lots of people that would actually buy these lenses. I'm yet to be convinced that there's any pent-up demand for SDM from hordes of potential 100D(S) buyers.

£500, plus or minus, for one lens, isn't exactly a trivial investment for a lot of people. I won't be buying them when they come out - the best I can hope for, and that without any real expectation, is that it flushes a few of the lesser models out on to eBay at an accessible price.

Particularly with an extra couple of megapixels...

... at 72 dpi

Presumably, with the K100D, as with the K10D, you need to use stop-down metering if the lens has no A setting, or if it does, but isn't set to it?

Can you be more specific as to which camera and which lens?

I feel the same.

Let's be generous, and suppose that it's 12.8 MP, as Ben has 'requested'.

SQRT(12.8/10.2) = 1.12.

So you only get 12% more pixels in any direction.

They'd have to go to 17 MP to get the same relative increase as the difference between the K10D and the K100D.