What do you think.....really?

Kguru · 12-18-2007, 08:54 PM

Originally posted by Chako

And I took about 80 photos of various mallards cleaning themselves this past October..and each and every shot turned out like this one. I was not pleased to say the least.

Try back off a little bit, say 270mm max, you should find pf significantly less.

seymop · 12-18-2007, 10:05 PM

Kind of disappointing that I cant get a lens for little dough.

OK, next question for the pros then. What would be a good baseline rock bottom price that I should look for when it comes to a 200mm or 300mm lens without compromising too much quality? Should i just stick to Pentax brand???? Im looking to shoot deer/bear in the outdoors, scenery also. (K100D)

thanks for the patients everyone. This is helping alot before i go out and make a big mistake.

justin

SpecialK · 12-18-2007, 11:30 PM

Originally posted by seymop

So I posted a thread about 3 weeks ago for help on filters and lenses and it was mentioned to me to get the Sigma 70-300mm APO Macro. The user said that it was an excellent lens. My only worry is that it won't give me the professional quality I want for that price. I'm on a budget right now so i cant spend much more than that but i want a zoom lens that will reach out and touch someone for nature shots!

Examples of what you've done or even just your opinion would be great! thanks alot as usual.

justin

The Sigma is a budget zoom for people on a budget. Mine seems OK if I bump the contrast a lot.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/4768-lens-comp...-70-300-a.html

Chako · 12-19-2007, 03:59 AM

I can see that the Sigma is clearly washed out compared to the Pentax. The Tamron doesn't suffer from this, just some purple fringe depending upon what you’re shooting.

May I suggest you look at the Tamron 18-250 or the Pentax variant? I just received the Pentax lens and it is sharp, and it doesn't seem to suffer from purple fringing. Mind you, I only had the chance to take it out once. It sells for around 599 Canadian though, so it might be a little too steep if your looking for a bargain, but the lens sure does seem to perform.

You could always stick with the Pentax 50-200mm kit lens. I have found the colours and quality of the images are quite nice for something that sells for $199 Canadian. In fact, I find the lens to be a little gem considering the price.

**Lowell Goudge** · 12-19-2007, 06:14 AM

Originally posted by Chako

You definitely have some purple fringe on a few of your photos. The worst is your second photo.

Here are a few examples of what I found with my Tamron 70-300mm copy aka the Purple Monster.

Here is a macro shot taken in August of last summer.And I took about 80 photos of various mallards cleaning themselves this past October..and each and every shot turned out like this one. I was not pleased to say the least.

I think I read somewhere that purple fringing is largely the result of over-exposing the whites. That is clearly the case here.

I have not noticed any purple fringing with my zigma 70-200 f2.8 plus 1.4x TC, but have not shot any white birds for a while. I did notice some, plus green CA with my SMC 300mm f4 and 1.7x AF TC, but again it was shooting white (great egret) against a dark background.

CA was due to out of focus and purple fringing was due to over-exposure of whites. Both were removed using the CA tool in PSP X2

Chako · 12-19-2007, 09:15 AM

I do not think this is as clear as you stated.

Yes, I have heard that it could be sensor bloom. However, the purple monster is the biggest offender of this behaviour.

Here is a wiki definition for purple fringe.

Purple fringing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I feel this lens suffers from Chromatic Aberration something fierce. I have no other lenses that behave like this in my arsenal.

12-18-2007, 08:54 PM	#16
Kguru Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Perth - WestAust Posts: 602	Originally posted by Chako And I took about 80 photos of various mallards cleaning themselves this past October..and each and every shot turned out like this one. I was not pleased to say the least. Try back off a little bit, say 270mm max, you should find pf significantly less.

12-18-2007, 10:05 PM	#17
seymop Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: harrisville, ny Photos: Gallery Posts: 40 Original Poster	Kind of disappointing that I cant get a lens for little dough. OK, next question for the pros then. What would be a good baseline rock bottom price that I should look for when it comes to a 200mm or 300mm lens without compromising too much quality? Should i just stick to Pentax brand???? Im looking to shoot deer/bear in the outdoors, scenery also. (K100D) thanks for the patients everyone. This is helping alot before i go out and make a big mistake. justin

12-18-2007, 11:30 PM	#18
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	Originally posted by seymop So I posted a thread about 3 weeks ago for help on filters and lenses and it was mentioned to me to get the Sigma 70-300mm APO Macro. The user said that it was an excellent lens. My only worry is that it won't give me the professional quality I want for that price. I'm on a budget right now so i cant spend much more than that but i want a zoom lens that will reach out and touch someone for nature shots! Examples of what you've done or even just your opinion would be great! thanks alot as usual. justin The Sigma is a budget zoom for people on a budget. Mine seems OK if I bump the contrast a lot. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/4768-lens-comp...-70-300-a.html

12-19-2007, 03:59 AM	#19
Chako Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sault Ste Marie, Ont, Canada. Posts: 563	I can see that the Sigma is clearly washed out compared to the Pentax. The Tamron doesn't suffer from this, just some purple fringe depending upon what you’re shooting. May I suggest you look at the Tamron 18-250 or the Pentax variant? I just received the Pentax lens and it is sharp, and it doesn't seem to suffer from purple fringing. Mind you, I only had the chance to take it out once. It sells for around 599 Canadian though, so it might be a little too steep if your looking for a bargain, but the lens sure does seem to perform. You could always stick with the Pentax 50-200mm kit lens. I have found the colours and quality of the images are quite nice for something that sells for $199 Canadian. In fact, I find the lens to be a little gem considering the price.

12-19-2007, 06:14 AM	#20
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	Originally posted by Chako You definitely have some purple fringe on a few of your photos. The worst is your second photo. Here are a few examples of what I found with my Tamron 70-300mm copy aka the Purple Monster. Here is a macro shot taken in August of last summer.And I took about 80 photos of various mallards cleaning themselves this past October..and each and every shot turned out like this one. I was not pleased to say the least. I think I read somewhere that purple fringing is largely the result of over-exposing the whites. That is clearly the case here. I have not noticed any purple fringing with my zigma 70-200 f2.8 plus 1.4x TC, but have not shot any white birds for a while. I did notice some, plus green CA with my SMC 300mm f4 and 1.7x AF TC, but again it was shooting white (great egret) against a dark background. CA was due to out of focus and purple fringing was due to over-exposure of whites. Both were removed using the CA tool in PSP X2

12-19-2007, 09:15 AM	#21
Chako Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sault Ste Marie, Ont, Canada. Posts: 563	I do not think this is as clear as you stated. Yes, I have heard that it could be sensor bloom. However, the purple monster is the biggest offender of this behaviour. Here is a wiki definition for purple fringe. Purple fringing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I feel this lens suffers from Chromatic Aberration something fierce. I have no other lenses that behave like this in my arsenal.