Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-07-2011, 12:28 PM   #46
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 535
Mike, because I approach wildlife photography in a similar way, most of the time I can figure out how they do it, and I'm impressed. But sometimes I wonder in complete awe "how in the world did they do that?"
Some of it, I strongly suspect, is set up under controlled conditions. It is Hollywood, after all. But still...it's not Photoshop or Dream Factory technology. It is photography.

01-07-2011, 12:45 PM   #47
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,166
The Attenborough thing i mentioned was from quite a way back and not the life in the undergrowth which is more recent. i watched a bit of the termite clip from that, it seems to be a combination of endoscopic type cameras and then controlled setups for the actual shots of the queen etc likely done in a studio environment
way back he actually crawled into under a termite mound for some pictures and study
Madman
01-07-2011, 01:13 PM   #48
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,754
Am I missing something, what is wrong with these lenses? 3rd party manufacturers make some very good lenses, and often for less money than name brand. I mean, this isn't research, this is going to the online catalogue of my favourite camera store and seeing what they have. So I'm expecting someone to chime in and tell me how much these lenses suck or something, because so far, I'm not seeing the argument, at all.I'm guessing some of these can be used with a teleconverter as well.







Not to mention that the shot below was taken at f:2.8 and 1/30 with a 50mm prime. I'd be remiss to mention, the two "pros" beside me with the huge canon bazookas on their cameras, got nothing. They only had the bazookas, no bag of short lenses. One of them muttered something about "too tight" and they both left.



Another image shot with my cheapy 70-300 Sigma zoom. It's amazing what you can do on the cheap. When I start having a few shots I might be able sell that are ruined by lens quality, I'll start thinking about blowing a pile of money on bigger lenses. Especially since I carry my glass over long distances. Light is good.


Last edited by normhead; 01-07-2011 at 01:30 PM. Reason: I thought some more.
01-07-2011, 01:25 PM   #49
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,166
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Not to mention that the shot below was taken at f:2.8 and 1/30 with a 50mm prime. I'd be remiss to mention, the two "pros" beside me with the huge canon bazookas on their cameras, got nothing. They only had the bazookas, no bag of short lenses. One of them muttered something about "too tight" and they both left.
HAHAHA that's brilliant. how can you invest all that cash in the big bloody lenses and not have the most basic of lenses in your kit

01-07-2011, 02:06 PM   #50
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 535
I think Sigma makes some great lenses. I've considered the 300 f-2.8, which is fast enough for the low-light situations one often encounters in real wildlife photography. To me that is a more practical lens then the Pentax 300 f-4. But I can get about 1/3 of the distance closer and get as good or better shot while saving $3,500.
Another thing usually not considered when people talk about "pro" equipment is the P/L aspect. Equipment purchases should be justified by a potential increase in income, and I just couldn't do that. If you are a hobbiest with expendable income, that's a different matter. Usually all you have to do is justify it to your wife.
Longer than 300mm (because of atmospheric interferrence) and slower doesn't work for me.
In strong light, stopped down, you can get a good shot with most any lens, but for so much of wildlife photography, faster is better.
As I think I mentioned before, however, the K5 looks like a game changer in this respect. Still, even if it gives me two stops advantage over my K20D, that advantage is still greater with an f-2.8 than an f.4. One of the great things about the DA* 200mm is how good it is wide open, but it is amazing when stopped down a click or two. I suspect the K5 not only will allow me to shoot it in lower light, but at compartively higher f-stops during normal conditions.
Much more than a longer lens, I want a K5.
01-07-2011, 02:08 PM   #51
Veteran Member
timh's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wales
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 445
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
One of them muttered something about "too tight" and they both left.
You had a fast 50 in your hand, did you manage a quick portrait entitled "Overequipped and Underprepared"?

In the impromptu "small bird, shortest lens" competition I can only offer this, shot a few weeks ago with the 100mm WR. Shame about the lighting.
01-07-2011, 02:10 PM   #52
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,312
what I don't get is the OP complained about the lack of new production glass, and when it was pointed out he could get the 600/4 new by special order for less than the comparable nikon glass, he pipes up that he bought a nikon lens used for less than a new pentax one.

Couldn't he have just bought one of many long pentax or sigma lenses used for his pentax system?

They are on the market almost all the time.

the other thing to mention is that regardless of lens, there is no substiture for the skill of getting close. That is relitively free and 100% independant of camera maker
01-07-2011, 02:18 PM   #53
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,166
QuoteOriginally posted by timh Quote
You had a fast 50 in your hand, did you manage a quick portrait entitled "Overequipped and Underprepared"?

In the impromptu "small bird, shortest lens" competition I can only offer this, shot a few weeks ago with the 100mm WR. Shame about the lighting.
no shame in that shot Tim very good

01-07-2011, 02:58 PM   #54
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,754
You had a fast 50 in your hand, did you manage a quick portrait entitled "Overequipped and Underprepared"?

Now you ask me. That would have been good. My wife was shooting from across the river from me and she actually got a few shots of me with her point and shoot, but none while the pros were there. I woudn't brag too much though. I did have to run back to my car to get mine. I either had a very co-operative subject.... or those were the tastiest branches on the lake.

Heres the situation in a nutshell, no room to move forward or backwards, sometimes you just have to have the right lens. And sometimes it's your fast 50mm prime.

01-07-2011, 03:29 PM   #55
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 535
Just saw a program last night that said far more people are killed in Alaska by moose than by bears.
01-07-2011, 03:37 PM   #56
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,754
QuoteQuote:
Just saw a program last night that said far more people are killed in Alaska by moose than by bears.
Probably because if you happen to run into one in your Toyota Echo, you're pretty much toast. And despite the publicity, bears don't kill very many people. The thing about being killed by hitting a moose is, the people are obviously stupid. No one wants to hear, "the guy would still be alive if he was driving 20 km slower." They'd rather hear about some guy killed in a bear attack. It's a so much sexier way to die.
01-07-2011, 05:49 PM   #57
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
The attraction of very long telephoto lenses have a strong tendency of wearing off after awhile. Carrying around a 600/4 and a matching tripod quickly take out the joy of wildlife photography, and life in general.

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 01-07-2011 at 06:02 PM.
01-12-2011, 10:34 AM   #58
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,754
QuoteQuote:
Just saw a program last night that said far more people are killed in Alaska by moose than by bears.
Hey, here's a story about the dangers of moose.
01-12-2011, 10:39 AM   #59
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,166
QuoteOriginally posted by Ron Kruger Quote
Just saw a program last night that said far more people are killed in Alaska by moose than by bears.
not just alaska, there is a big issue on the east coast in canada with people hitting them and demanding the gov't put up wildlife fences along the roadside
01-12-2011, 10:42 AM   #60
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,754
QuoteQuote:
not just alaska, there is a big issue on the east coast in canada with people hitting them and demanding the gov't put up wildlife fences along the roadside
Because we are the borg.. any hazard that keeps us from driving 20 miles an hour over the speed limit, must be assimilated.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, lens, pentax, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
which lens for wildlife/birds? axl Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 35 09-06-2009 08:22 PM
What is the BEST wildlife lens? Leo Miyanaga Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 11 08-30-2009 10:36 AM
Lens for wildlife?? Pic_Colo Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 12-22-2008 03:42 PM
Lens for birding/wildlife OrenMc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 111 06-01-2008 07:15 PM
Best wildlife lens? ronald_durst Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 10-30-2007 09:34 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:59 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top