my 530ST was £109 from SRS.

Although it lacks the advanced features like wireless and HSS, it has Bounce, swivel and PTTL, so what more could an occasional flash user want?

The light will probably be pretty good, so you shouldn't need a particualrly fast lens.

Deppending on how paranoid I was feeling about salt spray and missing shots, I'd either take 18-55 + 55-300 or 18-250.

this is the best result I've ever managed

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v68/thatguypinchedmyname/web-dolphin.jpg[/IMG]

can't remember the settings, but it was taken with an MZ-7 and Sigma 28-200.

As an amateur I would go for the Sigma, buy it from a reputable dealer like Chris at SRS and be prepared to take it back if you get a lemon.

I have had the pleasure of using the Pentax 12-24 it really is phenomenal, but for amateur use I couldn't justify the extra price tag.

this is called "shallow depth of field" since the distance over which focus appears sharp is quite short. This is achieved by using a wider aperture (say F4 instead of F8, or wider still if your lens allows). Depth of Field is also influenced by the focal length. Longer focal lengths have shallower depth of field at the same aperture.

Your kit lens has a fairly short focal length (18-55mm) and slow maximum aperture (F3.5-5.6). By contrast the 50mm FA F1.4 has a much faster maximum aperture, 4 full stops faster in fact, at close to the longest focal length the kit zoom offers. The 50mm F1.4 often has the opposite problem in fact, used wide open it is entirely possible that the persons eyes may be in focus and their nose is blurry!!

the rule is, the winner of this weeks comp sets the subject and does the judging next week. One of the best ways to learn about photography is to critically examine others work and decide what you like and dislike about it. Whatever knowledge I have (admittedly megre) is gained from looking at others work on forums like this and giving honest feedback (which it now occurs to me I haven't done for a while!).

There's nothing at stake save the honour of winning, so ultimately it doesn't matter a jot if no one agrees with the judge. The important thing about the weekly comp is that the entrants and the judge all get something out of the experience, and we all get to see 20 or 30 takes on the suggested subject.

wow the zeiss Jena M42s are fetching a packet at the moment!

I'm almost tempted to let go of my Flektogon and Sonar.

I've been whale and dolphin watching a few times. It seems to go one of two ways, either 300 isn't long enough (and as George noted camera shake is a big issue at the long end) or 18 is berely wide enough.

I have always tried to limit lens changes on the boat because of salt spray.

it has been noted before that there are "revisions" of the K10D, with later ones having better noise control than the early ones. Is it possible the later ones are also just that tiny bit faster and more responsive? so that Nathan's original K10 is actually performing as it always did, but the new one is just naturally ever so slightly better?

just an idea.

does the ability to shoot video increase the:

1. Size

2. Weight

3. cost

of the camera. If no to all 3, I'm happy for them to include it, hell I might even use it once in a while. If yes to any one of those, I'd rather they left it out. If I wanted to shoot video, I'd buy a video camera.

Now the high ISO capabilitys they alluded to in that video, that's a different matter. The one thing I will one day probably upgrade my K10D to get is better high ISO performance.

hi duroo,

F2.8 is as slow as I would go for fast action sports in the kind of halls that martial artists tend to use. It's good enough to get 1/250th at ~ISO 800 in most gyms, although I've been to a couple of places where I just put my camera away.


I'll try and dig out some shots from the Oxford-Cambridge Varsity Fencing for you to look at, I did that one with K10D and Sigma EX 24-60.


As for getting near the action, I've always been lucky. Most of my fencing shots I'm either on the team or good friends with someone who is, so I can get right up to the edge of the piste.

If you need some more reach, for example shooting from a balcony down into a hall (often a good perspective), I've found 90 or 135mm to be a good focal length. I believe JohnMcD has a 135 F2.8 for sale at the moment in Classified. If I wasn't a poor student, I'd be buying it myself!