All Forum Comments
Comment by Technoblurb posted on Pentax 16-45mm at 25/01/2011 - 18:09
gillbod wrote:
others have mentioned it already.
my general rule when going ultra wide is to try and keep it simple (base your compositions on symmetries, leading lines, frames, a single object with the rule of thirds obeyed), and add foreground interest. it took some time, but it forced me to think about compositions all the time, and this trickled into how i used my other lenses, and i think helped me learn a lot of composition in general.
i owned a sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 when i was with sony. i liked it as a lens, but it was too big, so when i moved to pentax i went with the 15/4.
one last idea. don't forget to look up with an ultra-wide angle. there are a ton of abstract possibilities out there. here are a couple of 10mm shots looking up, from when i was still shooting sony (exif embedded)
enjoy your lens—it'll definitely provide you with images with impact.
Some great advice and two stunning images, I think a trip to The Sage Gateshead is on the cards others have mentioned it already.
my general rule when going ultra wide is to try and keep it simple (base your compositions on symmetries, leading lines, frames, a single object with the rule of thirds obeyed), and add foreground interest. it took some time, but it forced me to think about compositions all the time, and this trickled into how i used my other lenses, and i think helped me learn a lot of composition in general.
i owned a sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 when i was with sony. i liked it as a lens, but it was too big, so when i moved to pentax i went with the 15/4.
one last idea. don't forget to look up with an ultra-wide angle. there are a ton of abstract possibilities out there. here are a couple of 10mm shots looking up, from when i was still shooting sony (exif embedded)
enjoy your lens—it'll definitely provide you with images with impact.
thoughton wrote:
What everyone else has said, plus it's great for huge skies
I must admit that is was the huge skies that had attracted me to the lens, although I may have to think a little differently about how to use it, that should make those little grey cells work harder. What everyone else has said, plus it's great for huge skies
Smeggypants wrote:
I'm just getting into using the hyperfocal distance in conjunction with TAv mode for my Drive By Shooting.
I'm basically setting Aperture, Shutter speed and focus and letting the ISO changes cope with fluctuating lights levels.
Driving along even at 30Mph you need a fairly fast shutter speed to avoid motion blur for close subjects ( people on the pavement for example ). I try and go for 1/500 or 1/1000
A very interesting idea, it must be hard framing a shot whilst pottering along at 30mph I'm just getting into using the hyperfocal distance in conjunction with TAv mode for my Drive By Shooting.
I'm basically setting Aperture, Shutter speed and focus and letting the ISO changes cope with fluctuating lights levels.
Driving along even at 30Mph you need a fairly fast shutter speed to avoid motion blur for close subjects ( people on the pavement for example ). I try and go for 1/500 or 1/1000
simonkit wrote:
Sorry if my "advice" isn't very specific but I don't think there's a definitive process - trial & error is probably the only one
Just to add - it's worthwhile checking your copy of the 10-20, it took me 3 attempts to get a decent one (now sold due to the DA 12-24)
Simon
Your advice is just fine and appreciated. As this lens is so different to any type I have owned before what would you consider a good test scenario for it?Sorry if my "advice" isn't very specific but I don't think there's a definitive process - trial & error is probably the only one
Just to add - it's worthwhile checking your copy of the 10-20, it took me 3 attempts to get a decent one (now sold due to the DA 12-24)
Simon
Comment by Technoblurb posted on Help: how to get the best out of Sigma 10-20 4.6 at 24/01/2011 - 18:47
Pentaxophile wrote:
Probably around f8 to f16, to get a reasonable depth of field. Hyperfocal technique would probably help - I don't truly understand hyperfocal distance but I think on the shot above I focussed in front of the rock in the middle distance in order to get the background and the foreground rock in focus. Perhaps someone can explain hyperfocal technique a bit more scientifically lol!
Probably around f8 to f16, to get a reasonable depth of field. Hyperfocal technique would probably help - I don't truly understand hyperfocal distance but I think on the shot above I focussed in front of the rock in the middle distance in order to get the background and the foreground rock in focus. Perhaps someone can explain hyperfocal technique a bit more scientifically lol!
johnriley wrote:
Hyperfocal distance can be used very effectively with this rule of thumb:
Set a small aperture and focus on a point one third of the way into the scene. This will maximise DOF.
I have read about the hyperfocal technique in the past but never really tried to put it into practice, time I think to start.Hyperfocal distance can be used very effectively with this rule of thumb:
Set a small aperture and focus on a point one third of the way into the scene. This will maximise DOF.
snappychappy wrote:
I love this lens, it's extreme angle's really appeal to me. For architecture and landscape's it's invaluable. As mentioned before in confined spaces it's unbeatable, see examples.
Monday Morning Blues.
What a great set of examples, the bread shot is very inspired.I love this lens, it's extreme angle's really appeal to me. For architecture and landscape's it's invaluable. As mentioned before in confined spaces it's unbeatable, see examples.
Monday Morning Blues.
Algernon wrote:
If it's on a K-7 try to avoid shutter speeds around 1/100th sec.
Use 1/60th with SR on or try 1/250th with SR on and off.
The K-7 suffers from shutter-induced blur around 1/100th sec.
Surprised no one else has mentioned this.
A very interesting article, thanks for that. If it's on a K-7 try to avoid shutter speeds around 1/100th sec.
Use 1/60th with SR on or try 1/250th with SR on and off.
The K-7 suffers from shutter-induced blur around 1/100th sec.
Surprised no one else has mentioned this.
Don wrote:
composition wise:
try to look for s-curves, receding lines and repeating elements, rather than simply following the rule of thirds...
level the camera if you want to keep vertical lines straight.
when shooting group shots if you line your subjects in a straight line the persons near the center will appear alright but the people near the edges will appear distorted and smaller especially with fisheyes and ultra wides, the fix for that is to line your subjects in an arced curve with the persons near the center being the furthest from the camera and people near the edges standing closer to the camera....
the wide angle distortion is always the result of distance from the camera and the tilt of the camera...
the more your camera is tilted the more verticle lines will bow and converge.... the closer something is to the camera the bigger it will appear relative to everything else in the frame.
hope that helps.
Now my head is beginning to hurt, yet more stunning advice, I think alcohol is required to aid the absorption of this information.composition wise:
try to look for s-curves, receding lines and repeating elements, rather than simply following the rule of thirds...
level the camera if you want to keep vertical lines straight.
when shooting group shots if you line your subjects in a straight line the persons near the center will appear alright but the people near the edges will appear distorted and smaller especially with fisheyes and ultra wides, the fix for that is to line your subjects in an arced curve with the persons near the center being the furthest from the camera and people near the edges standing closer to the camera....
the wide angle distortion is always the result of distance from the camera and the tilt of the camera...
the more your camera is tilted the more verticle lines will bow and converge.... the closer something is to the camera the bigger it will appear relative to everything else in the frame.
hope that helps.
Comment by Technoblurb posted on Help: how to get the best out of Sigma 10-20 4.6 at 23/01/2011 - 18:57
Snootchies wrote:
I've pretty much always used F13 (it's sweet spot) and the advice I've read here already (not an excuse to try and pack in EVERYTHING - still consider composition as you usually would) is great advice.
I also find shots converted to black and white seem to be more vibrant than I tend to get with other lenses.
A sterling bit of advice and two cracking shots as well, thanks.I've pretty much always used F13 (it's sweet spot) and the advice I've read here already (not an excuse to try and pack in EVERYTHING - still consider composition as you usually would) is great advice.
I also find shots converted to black and white seem to be more vibrant than I tend to get with other lenses.
Comment by Technoblurb posted on Help: how to get the best out of Sigma 10-20 4.6 at 23/01/2011 - 18:46
Pentaxophile wrote:
Live view is helpful for focussing. I find the normal AF with this lens a bit hit and miss.
As Jon says its a good lens for shots with significant foreground interest, or shots taken in confined spaces. My first outing with the lens was in a little rocky valley with a waterfall, with good light, so my first impressions of the lens were good. But I've had experiences similar to yours since then!
A great example of the lenses capability and a nice photo, it has provided me a good starting point to work from, my pending trip to the Lakes should provide me with plenty of subjects of this style.Live view is helpful for focussing. I find the normal AF with this lens a bit hit and miss.
As Jon says its a good lens for shots with significant foreground interest, or shots taken in confined spaces. My first outing with the lens was in a little rocky valley with a waterfall, with good light, so my first impressions of the lens were good. But I've had experiences similar to yours since then!
So what are the best settings for this lens, what F-Stop provides the sharpest results?
Comment by Technoblurb posted on Help: how to get the best out of Sigma 10-20 4.6 at 23/01/2011 - 14:12
Dangermouse wrote:
If I wasn't aiming for a K-r (and also trying to save for a summer of 4x4 events and vehicle upgrades) I'd be sorely tempted by a 16-45mm at the quoted prices!
This is the one lens I have purchase that produced a wow factor straight out of the box, consiquently it is always the lens attached to my camera when I set out for the day.If I wasn't aiming for a K-r (and also trying to save for a summer of 4x4 events and vehicle upgrades) I'd be sorely tempted by a 16-45mm at the quoted prices!
Comment by Technoblurb posted on Pentax 16-45mm at 23/01/2011 - 14:06
JonSchick wrote:
My one biggest hint: don't use ultra wide angle lenses simply to fit more stuff in - you simply end up getting a shot of everything and nothing. They're at their best when you have something of significant foreground interest, and you need to be not far off touching that to get the best effect. I seem to recall that Ken Rockwell did a reasonable piece on how to get the best out of ultrawide lenses, even though most of his stuff is deeply irritating!
I have not encountered Ken Rockwell before, his web site is quite a mine of information though. I will give your suggestion of picking out a significant subject in the foreground a go, if it ever stops raining today.My one biggest hint: don't use ultra wide angle lenses simply to fit more stuff in - you simply end up getting a shot of everything and nothing. They're at their best when you have something of significant foreground interest, and you need to be not far off touching that to get the best effect. I seem to recall that Ken Rockwell did a reasonable piece on how to get the best out of ultrawide lenses, even though most of his stuff is deeply irritating!
Comment by Technoblurb posted on Help: how to get the best out of Sigma 10-20 4.6 at 23/01/2011 - 13:37
chrism_scotland wrote:
Graham,
Have you got any shots you've taken?
I must confess that the images I took are so poor I am reluctant to upload them for fear of the question getting diluted into an image critique. What I am looking for is some advice on the best techniques for using this type of lens and what the best settings are. It is such a different type of lens compared to my Pentax 16-45. Graham,
Have you got any shots you've taken?
Comment by Technoblurb posted on Help: how to get the best out of Sigma 10-20 4.6 at 23/01/2011 - 12:34
I need some advice, having just purchased a Sigma 10-20 4.6 from those fine people at SRS. I took this lens for its first outing yesterday, unfortunately the weather was very poor and dull giving me no stunning vistas to show for my eight mile walk, so instead I fired off some test shots on random rocks and landscapes, the resulting images were poorly lit and soft. I don't thinks this is the Sigma's fault, but my lack of experience with this type of lens. So I would appreciate any top tips for shooting this with this lens, what are the best settings, what is the best focusing and metering method for landscapes and any other suggestions.
Graham
Graham
Comment by Technoblurb posted on Help: how to get the best out of Sigma 10-20 4.6 at 23/01/2011 - 12:13
I have a 55-300, it is a very sharp lens for the price, my only gripe is that the focus dial is a little wobbly and the autofocus is not lightning fast.I have also owned a Sigma 70-300 APO II (the old version) this was not a touch in the Pentax.
Graham
Graham
Comment by Technoblurb posted on 55-300 Questions at 21/01/2011 - 21:04
1 Auto focus was bang on
2 The horizon had very little distortion wide open, I always had to correct this with the kit lens.
3 the colours were bright vibrant and true to the subject taken, this again required quite a bit of adjustment.
4 Images taken at F11-F16 were definitely sharper when shot in RAW.
The upshot of this is that I started to spend less time in front of the computer and my kit lens has been collecting dust (metaphorically speaking) ever since.
Graham