[frogoutofwater]

I had my first weekend photo trip with the K-1 this past weekend. I was particularly interested to see how well I handled the extra weight of the camera + unmodified 60-250, and of course I wanted to see how the images turned out.

Most importantly, I love how the images turned out. The K-1 stabilization seems to have made it possible for me to get sharp images at slightly lower shutter speeds than I'm used to, even while hand-holding a much larger and heavier lens than the 55-300 (my usual lens of choice for these excursions).

I also loved having more pixels to work with - because I often crop down with these images at the sanctuary (because I can't zoom or foot zoom to get the composition I want).

The vignetting that comes with using the unmodified 60-250 on some settings wasn't nearly as limiting as I expected it to be - I was conscious of trying to shoot a bit loose (something I do anyway), so that vignetting that I couldn't fix could be cropped out, but when I reviewed images I often found that the vignetting only affected the very outer corners of the shot, so there was little adjustment/cropping needed. And the 60-250 works well most of the time for the kind of images I'm making.

Images at high ISOs were significantly less noisy than what I'd experienced with the K-3. This is a HUGE plus for me, because I often photograph without flash in poor light (at the Wild Bird Fund hospital, for example).

The negatives:

Well, that lens/camera combo is significantly heavier, and for someone like me with back, shoulder and hand difficulties, I noticed it. I used the Cotton Carrier vest to relieve some of the weight when I was just walking, not shooting, and that helped. But I think I need some strength training - and I'm not sure I'll be able to handle a heavier lens.

I did miss the extra reach that a longer lens would have a few times.

But all in all, that's a very short list of cons, compared to the pluses.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

   

[normhead]

A nice workout routine can do wonders in terms of keeping yourself flexible and functional.That being said, I bought the DA*200 so I wouldn't have to carry the 60-250 every where. That half a pound makes a lot of difference.

[frogoutofwater]

A nice workout routine can do wonders in terms of keeping yourself flexible and functional.That being said, I bought the DA*200 so I wouldn't have to carry the 60-250 every where. That half a pound makes a lot of difference.

Yeah, I know I need to do more to be in better shape. I do walk, bike or use the elliptical machine for 30-60 minutes almost every day, but it's about time I added back the Pilates core and strength training again. (I stopped because of injury.)

I do have some full-frame primes (50mm and 100mm macros, plus the 77 and the 200) but I find them really limiting for what I do at the Sanctuary. I'm very restricted as to where I can stand, sit or crouch, and a fixed focal length often doesn't work for the image I want to take. And the moments are too fleeting and varied to make switching primes an option, except in very limited circumstances. I also carry all my gear for a couple of hours at a time. They are a better option at the Wild Bird Fund (and I'll try them out this weekend).

[repaap]

Interesting to hear this. I'm considering of buying Tamron 70-200 for my K-1 but if it is not that bad, maybe 60-250 would be better because of AW sealing. I'd hesitate to do that modification my self... Nice images. That hog/puh picture seems really sharp and with good textures.

---

Last edited by repaap; 08-24-2016 at 07:15 AM. Reason: Spelling

[frogoutofwater]

Interesting to hear this. I'm considering of buying Tamron 70-200 for my K-1 but if it is not that bad, maybe 60-250 would be better because of AW sealing. I'd hesitate to do that modification my self... Nice images. That hog/puh picture seems really sharp and with good textures.

I've been thinking through the options myself. Since I already had the 60-250, I'vde decided to use for a few months so that I can assess its weight and its limitations (e.g., vignetting, max aperture, max reach) and whether it would make sense to get the 70-200 instead. Also, for most purposes, I think f/4 is enough for what I do - I don't need f/2.8.

For the kind of photography I do, which is mostly animal portraiture, it's usually not going to be a problem to have some issues around the edges of my frame. As I mentioned earlier, I often crop images a little anyway and I'm not photographing a subject where corner-to-corner sharpness and squareness is essential.

I would be interested in the modification that some people have done to their lens, but I'm not comfortable doing it myself. I wonder if I could persuade a repair shop in NYC that is used to dealing with funky camera gear to do it for me, using the template and instructions that Pentaxians have developed.

BTW, the first photo is of Shy Girl (an ancient pot-bellied pig) and Jaqueline the goat in the background. The second is of Violet the goat with a rooster friend whose name I don't know.

[repaap]

They seem to be nice animals, well captured too