First DSLR

[Groucho]

Can you even get Extreme 3s in SD? I've seen them on Sandisk's site but never seen them for sale (but I haven't looked recently.) Their write speeds are very good but when I did look, comparable cards (with 20m/sec write speeds) were $100 for 2g. OUCH.

I wouldn't pay extra for Sandisk cards. Their Ultra 2s are often pricey and slower than competing memory cards. If you find a good deal, then perhaps, but they're not immune to failing like any other cards - you're mostly just paying for the name IMHO. And 4g is a little light if that's going to be your sole storage for photos on your vacation. On my 6mp Pentax, I went through probably 3-4 gigs most days (except the first few days, when I was sick!)

A few months ago, I put together a list of 2gb SD cards and what their actual advertised read and write speed was; I'm going to try to recreate that on my site one of these days. Granted, it'd go off manufacturer's data rather than real-world test results, but it's still worthwhile IMHO.

The Pentax 16-45mm is supposedly a very nice lens with wonderful image quality, but is a bit pricey. If it were an F2.8, I'd probably have to seriously consider it. The new Pentax 16-50mm F2.8 is likely going to be really fantastic, but it should be - I think its list price is $900, and the 50-135mm F2.8 is $1,000. (OK, you Canon guys are used these kind of prices, I'm not. )

And yes, both the 18-55mm and 50-200mm lenses have hoods as standard, and both have a removable cutout to adjust your filter. Both also have non-rotating front elements (and "real" focus rings) so CP filters are no problem. (pics linked from Adorama)

sniff... they're beautiful! Just beautiful!

 

[YEKCIM]

I filled 1 card each day taking approx. 330 pics each day.

Hey, Kyle; don't you ride any rides down there??? Shooting 300 pix per day doesn't leave much time for anything else. I should know; I did the same thing! Only real problem was, after I got my shot, I looked up to find that my family was nowhere in sight. Commando Mom (the pro photographer) was on a mission and was not gonna let photography stand in the way of her checklist!

~Ed

 

[handicap18]

Hey, Kyle; don't you ride any rides down there??? Shooting 300 pix per day doesn't leave much time for anything else. I should know; I did the same thing! Only real problem was, after I got my shot, I looked up to find that my family was nowhere in sight. Commando Mom (the pro photographer) was on a mission and was not gonna let photography stand in the way of her checklist!

~Ed

I certainly did my share of rides. Though I would have liked to gone on a few of them more than once. Luckily I was able to get a lot of alone time. DW was 5 1/2 months pregnant and it was a HOT weekend. So she did a lot of shopping in the air conditioned shops and I went shooting with my camera. We both had a GREAT time too.

 

[Groucho]

I'm with Kyle - 330 pics isn't that difficult to accomplish even with riding the rides. If you're in full commando mode, then probably not, but I think I hit 300 on most days (except the first few, when I was ill) and I might have maxed out somewhere around 400 on one or two days.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I think I averaged 400 per day, but that was in pure tourist mode rather than photographer mode. And that's an average...you need to plan for peak.

 

[Anewman]

I dont think I have hit 400 shots Total on my two trips to WDW...

But I had never been there so I was in AWE the entire time, maybe this year I will settle down and take some pictures.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I keep thinking that next time I'm there for a conference, I'll stay over for a day on my own. If that's the case, I expect that I'll take a well over a thousand shots in a day. My thought is "if you can't get quality, go for quantity...maybe you'll get lucky on a few of them."

 

[Anewman]

I keep thinking that next time I'm there for a conference, I'll stay over for a day on my own. If that's the case, I expect that I'll take a well over a thousand shots in a day. My thought is "if you can't get quality, go for quantity...maybe you'll get lucky on a few of them."

Hey that is the strategy I use in Vegas

 

[GrumpyOne]

I considered buying more memory but I'll be bringing two laptops along so a nightly cleansing will be likely. I was assuming 100 shots per card at worst (20MB) and that would be if all were RAW+JPG with a large dynamic range, while the truth will probably be more like 75% in JPG with the rest in RAW+JPG for around 200 pics per card. I've never progressed far into PP and while I want to, the camera will undoubtedly do better initially which means lots of JPGs.

I'm pretty sure that most of the shots taken by most people don't benefit from faster cards but based on the data available when the buffer is full and the camera is still taking 1.2 RAW images per second, that's a write speed of 14MB/sec. While I'm not sure that the 100 would make use of the extra speed, it appears the 10 can. Given that I'll be doing some sports shooting sooner rather than later, the faster cards made some sense. Unfortunately, Newegg doesn't carry the Extreme III SD, that I saw. It certainly wouldn't cost much to get a few more gig in the slower speeds though.

I was doing some drooling over the available other lenses but couldn't quite pull the trigger. It's one thing to read reviews and see the numbers but without the practical application experience, it's all sort of fuzzy. I decided to hold off on buying the better lenses until I had a better appreciation for the benefit I would get. A superb low-light lens will definitely be required inside the pyramids and other tombs and I'll figure out a good safari lens once that trip is scheduled. If nothing else, I'll have some lenses I can pass down after an upgrade.

 

[DueyDooDah]

I decided to hold off on buying the better lenses until I had a better appreciation for the benefit I would get.

I envy those that have self-control.

 

[Master Mason]

I dont think I have hit 400 shots Total on my two trips to WDW...

But I had never been there so I was in AWE the entire time, maybe this year I will settle down and take some pictures.

And I bet I had to trash 400 shots that were compleatly unusable... But I was just learning really.

 

[ukcatfan]

I was assuming 100 shots per card at worst (20MB) and that would be if all were RAW+JPG with a large dynamic range, while the truth will probably be more like 75% in JPG with the rest in RAW+JPG for around 200 pics per card. I've never progressed far into PP and while I want to, the camera will undoubtedly do better initially which means lots of JPGs.

If you plan on doing a bunch of JPGs with the K10D, check out the review of it from DCResource. It will help you get the most out of JPG. The defaults are not the greatest that the camera is capable of doing. You should look in to learning more RAW processing. It is like opening up a whole new world.

Kevin

 

[GrumpyOne]

I decided to hold off on buying the better lenses until I had a better appreciation for the benefit I would get.

I envy those that have self-control.

Perhaps knowing that I can take blurry pics of headless people with either lens would be more accurate.

You should look in to learning more RAW processing. It is like opening up a whole new world.

It's on the plate. I wish I had more time back home and could take a proper class. At least I have a week or so I'll be able to take pictures of a dim hotel room and take smoggy pictures from the mountains around Phoenix, I ought to be able to find some basic books at a local book store. Pentaxforum also had a review that commented on the default settings and the guy provided some sample pics and what he used.

 

[ukcatfan]

It's on the plate. I wish I had more time back home and could take a proper class. At least I have a week or so I'll be able to take pictures of a dim hotel room and take smoggy pictures from the mountains around Phoenix, I ought to be able to find some basic books at a local book store. Pentaxforum also had a review that commented on the default settings and the guy provided some sample pics and what he used.

The best way to learn RAW is by playing with it if you ask me. Learning curves was also a great eye opening experience. To start out, it does not hurt to let the processing do an auto fix and then go back to tweak the few that need it. For shots with a lot of blue sky, the auto still seems to beat my best work.

Kevin

 

[Groucho]

The only reason not to shoot RAW, imho, is if you don't have enough memory to store all the photos you want, or if you absolutely need more continuous shooting ability. (I did some on-ride rollercoaster photos in JPG to make sure that I had enough buffer, for example.)

The benefits are many, one of the biggest IMHO is painless and simple white balance adjustment after the fact. This can help tremendously with indoor photos, as DSLRs pretty much all universally struggle under tungsten lights, giving a yellow cast to the image. If you think the camera can do better, just leave the settings at default, the RAW converter will use those settings automatically.

You will also be able to revisit the photos later once you're more familiar with RAW processing... I've been thinking about going back to my shots from the last trip one of these days and seeing if I can make some improvements from the original RAWs.

I don't remember if tripods were covered... are you bringing one? Setting up a tripod and using the remote shutter release during a fireworks show can easily chew up a ton of pictures, if people are wondering how it's possible to take so many during the day.

One last thing, if at all possible, make sure you're burning DVDs of your pictures nightly; laptop hard drives aren't very reliable (no matter how new or old) and it'd be pretty disappointing to lose all your work due to a drive failure.

 

[GrumpyOne]

I tossed another 4GB of memory onto the order. That'll be 4x 2GB. I stuck with the 2GB cards so they'd be compatible with the Canon P&S we have. You're right, there's no reason not to shoot RAW if you have the space, as long as you don't need more than the buffer can handle, and having the space is just a matter of planning.

I've looked at the Gorillapod and it looks interesting. I think I want to see one in person though before deciding.

Yep, I'll have blank DVDs and a couple of thumb drives. I believe in redundancy.

I'd guess my biggest concern now will be finding an acceptable carrying container. I like how some laptop bags have morphed into a backpack style, I'd like to find something similar for cameras.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

There are a lot of good camera equipment backpacks. The downside is that to access them, you have to take them off of your back (or hunch over and have your spouse do it). I think Lowepro makes a "Slingback" (or something like that) bag that goes on your back but rotates down to your hip for access. I haven't tried it, but it looks cool.

On my last WDW trip, I traveled light (for me) and just kept stuff on pods on a belt. I looked even geeker than usual, but it was a bit easier than using the backpack.

 

[GrumpyOne]

That's good to know. I hadn't seen anything like that here, but unless you're buying a P&S or rolls of film, most camera shops here are worthless.

I'm ordinarily the pack mule so get to carry sun block, ponchos, etc. I figure it'll be easier to have it in one bag rather than two.

 

[Groucho]

I actually got a proper mountaineering carabiner to hang my monopod off my belt last trip... worked OK for the times when I wanted it near me without carrying it, though you do have to be careful not to bounce it against other people's legs while you're walking.

The swing-around bags sound interesting - I love the idea of a backpack but I loathe the idea of having to take it off to get to anything. The thoughts of a possible solo trip in the future have me thinking about that, since that might be more comfortable than my current boxy-bag, even with its big Op-Tech SOS strap. Oh yes, and I am a big fan of the belt-mounted lens pouches. I had one last trip and will definitely get 1-2 more before next trip. This cuts down greatly on the main reason that you have to go in the camera bag at all, and really helps distribute the weight.

GrumpyOne, that sounds like a terrific setup. For the Gorillapod, remember that it comes in three sizes - you'll want at least the medium size ("SLR"), and possibly the biggest ("SLR Zoom"), which more or less requires a proper ball head.

 

[YEKCIM]

That's good to know. I hadn't seen anything like that here, but unless you're buying a P&S or rolls of film, most camera shops here are worthless.

I'm ordinarily the pack mule so get to carry sun block, ponchos, etc. I figure it'll be easier to have it in one bag rather than two.

You might want to consider a good shoulder bag for organizing and toting your gear, and a vest to actually "work" from. I have used a vest for years, hiking, WDW, and elsewhere, and it works very well, at least for me. Main advantage is having your stuff where you can get to it easily.

~YEKCIM