[boriscleto]

Oh, I forgot that. It would be useless then. First I'd need bifocal glasses to be able to switch from spotting the subject to looking at the LCD, and holding it at arm's length with a DA300 on the end would be pretty awkward. Definitely tripod territory IMO.

You're not going to hand hold a 300mm on a Q anyway. The 35mm eq. FOV is 1686mm. Even with a 100mm lens you would need a tripod.

[RobG]

You're not going to hand hold a 300mm on a Q anyway. The 35mm eq. FOV is 1686mm. Even with a 100mm lens you would need a tripod.

Fair enough. Might be good for birds or animals that aren't moving around much - perched or waterbirds etc.

[derekkite]

The focus difficulties that I've experienced with my DA300 may have been specific to the lens; it is being repaired under warranty for focus mechanism issues. Others may confirm or have other experiences.

The focus speed of the 150-500 is faster than the DA300. The increased magnification of the subject makes the large focus points of the K5 more effective, where a subject at any distance is a fraction of the center focus point at 300 mm, making it difficult to focus on the contrast point that you want in a busy scene.

I used someone elses DA300 to try out and it seemed more decisive and accurate, so it may have been my copy.

The Q with adapter is fine for static targets, or nearly so, on a tripod. If that fits your style of shooting, then it may work for you. I use a manual focus 400mm on a monopod with gimbal, and it worked well. Anything you choose will have limits, it simply is a matter of figuring out what you will be shooting, at what distance, in what light, if they are static or moving, and what results you want. Then you spend the money

[Finntax]

Depends on the size of the birds you are aiming for. I have the DA* 60-250 and I have found it long enough for my occational bird shots. I'd go with the DA* 300.

Sample with DA* 60-250 slightly cropped:

[Reptilezz]

Depends on the size of the birds you are aiming for. I have the DA* 60-250 and I have found it long enough for my occational bird shots. I'd go with the DA* 300.

Sample with DA* 60-250 slightly cropped:

Wow thats amazing! Great shot. I do think im leaning toward the DA*300 bacause of weathersealing, light weight and fast aperture.

[Reptilezz]

The focus difficulties that I've experienced with my DA300 may have been specific to the lens; it is being repaired under warranty for focus mechanism issues. Others may confirm or have other experiences.

The focus speed of the 150-500 is faster than the DA300. The increased magnification of the subject makes the large focus points of the K5 more effective, where a subject at any distance is a fraction of the center focus point at 300 mm, making it difficult to focus on the contrast point that you want in a busy scene.

I used someone elses DA300 to try out and it seemed more decisive and accurate, so it may have been my copy.

The Q with adapter is fine for static targets, or nearly so, on a tripod. If that fits your style of shooting, then it may work for you. I use a manual focus 400mm on a monopod with gimbal, and it worked well. Anything you choose will have limits, it simply is a matter of figuring out what you will be shooting, at what distance, in what light, if they are static or moving, and what results you want. Then you spend the money

Nah i dont really like the Q. I think ill be in low light most of the time so im leaning more towards the 300 and im going to savedup for a 1.7x tc as well. Thnks for your help

[Michaelina2]

Nah i don't really like the Q. I think ill be in low light most of the time so im leaning more toward the 300 and im going to savedup for a 1.7x tc as well. Thnks for your help

The Q7/adapted 100mm kit consideration was offered as a 'thinking outside the box' suggestion to help you make a good decision. Some demonstrate excellent results and I've done the same, but in the end, I find it all to be a bit fussy.

Anyway, going with the 300 is the much better decision. I really like my K5IIs/DA*300 kit for walk-around wildlife. I can easily carry it all day, it's quick to the shot and the IQ is superb. I'll be very surprised to hear any disappointments.

One additional suggestion...

Don't expect your kit to do everything. It will get you about 50% of the way. The rest is post-processing. So, if you are not there already, consider dedicating about six months of undivided attention to becoming a world class pp wizard. It's not that difficult and can be done before you get the 300. For years I toyed with all sorts of pp software (free to expensive) and finally settled on Lightroom with NIK plug-ins as being the most time, cost and output effective when used on a computer kit that makes the most of them. Both offer free on-line tutorials, plus NIK adds free live pod-casts that make learning in real time easy and fun. I can drone on about all of this, but I'll spare you the pain... Questions are always welcome.

Best of success... M

---

Last edited by Michaelina2; 10-14-2013 at 05:28 AM.

[derekkite]

The Q7/adapted 100mm kit consideration was offered as a 'thinking outside the box' suggestion to help you make a good decision. Some demonstrate excellent results and I've done the same, but in the end, I find it all to be a bit fussy.

Anyway, going with the 300 is the much better decision. I really like my K5IIs/DA*300 kit for walk-around wildlife. I can easily carry it all day, it's quick to the shot and the IQ is superb. I'll be very surprised to hear any disappointments.

One additional suggestion...

Don't expect your kit to do everything. It will get you about 50% of the way. The rest is post-processing. So, if you are not there already, consider dedicating about six months of undivided attention to becoming a world class pp wizard. It's not that difficult and can be done before you get the 300. For years I toyed with all sorts of pp software (free to expensive) and finally settled on Lightroom with NIK plug-ins as being the most time, cost and output effective when used on a computer kit that makes the most of them. Both offer free on-line tutorials, plus NIK adds free live pod-casts that make learning in real time easy and fun. I can drone on about all of this, but I'll spare you the pain... Questions are always welcome.

Best of success... M

I'll second this. After a day shooting you will have hundreds of shots. It is not unusual for me to come home with 400. Most are junk of course, but having software where you can handle this quickly, choose the ones worth a second look will make a big difference.

[Reptilezz]

The Q7/adapted 100mm kit consideration was offered as a 'thinking outside the box' suggestion to help you make a good decision. Some demonstrate excellent results and I've done the same, but in the end, I find it all to be a bit fussy.

Anyway, going with the 300 is the much better decision. I really like my K5IIs/DA*300 kit for walk-around wildlife. I can easily carry it all day, it's quick to the shot and the IQ is superb. I'll be very surprised to hear any disappointments.

One additional suggestion...

Don't expect your kit to do everything. It will get you about 50% of the way. The rest is post-processing. So, if you are not there already, consider dedicating about six months of undivided attention to becoming a world class pp wizard. It's not that difficult and can be done before you get the 300. For years I toyed with all sorts of pp software (free to expensive) and finally settled on Lightroom with NIK plug-ins as being the most time, cost and output effective when used on a computer kit that makes the most of them. Both offer free on-line tutorials, plus NIK adds free live pod-casts that make learning in real time easy and fun. I can drone on about all of this, but I'll spare you the pain... Questions are always welcome.

Best of success... M

Thanks for the tips.would I be better to get lightroom 5 or 4?

[snostorm]

Oh, I forgot that. It would be useless then. First I'd need bifocal glasses to be able to switch from spotting the subject to looking at the LCD, and holding it at arm's length with a DA300 on the end would be pretty awkward. Definitely tripod territory IMO.

Hi Rob,

Most Qusers who shoot super tele with adapted lenses have found that an LCD loupe is an almost indispensable accessory. It eliminates the arm's length hold, removes the problem seeing the LCD in bright sunlight, and allows one to steady the camera against the face for handholding. Since we can be talking about some extremely long FL EQs (well over 1000mm EQ), many use a Red Dot Sight mounted on the flash shoe to sight the subject then switch to the loupe to focus and compose. Personally, I've found that a lens like the DA 55-300 can work well with the Q. With the zoom, I don't need the Red Dot to sight, I just use the short end of the zoom, zoom to 300mm, focus and shoot. I have to admit that I'm better than average handholding cameras at long FLs, but this works for me. I do have quite a few lenses that cover 300mm (9 in fact, including 3 f4s and 3 f2.8s), and the DA 55-300 gets most use with the Q for me because it's compact and light. A very lightweight tripod can certainly help because shooting at over 100mm EQ with MF needs a lot of concentration. With good long lens technique, handholding can definitely be and option, but it takes practice. Many have found that their ability to handhold a Q with adapted lenses tops out at between 135 and 200mm.

Some would object to the added bulk of an LCD loupe, but the criticism is a bit confused. With any long lens, the Q is no longer compact, and adding more bulk is really not an issue. Add a 1000+mm lens to an APS-C DSLR and compare it to a Q with a 300mm lens, and even with the loupe, relatively compact will definitely come to mind.

Some examples with the DA 55-300 handheld can be found in these posts:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-q/204091-q-fw-v1-1-da-55-300-handh...ml#post2156152

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-q/223850-q-da-55-300-pied-billed-g...ml#post2374943

Scott

[Serpiente]

I rain forests you can't see far and there is barely any light. There is also a lot of moisture. Both 300mm and 500mm is not enough reach. The DA* 300 has better IQ and F4 at 300mm.

If you want to see some samples, check (only the first one was made with the 50-200, the others DA*300):
http://ronaldzimmerman.nl/birds/

I am not a real bird photographer.

[Michaelina2]

Thanks for the tips.would I be better to get lightroom 5 or 4?

I'm an early adopter when it comes to software updates, so LR5+ is the way to go. Plus, LR 5+ is a better product than the earlier versions. Adobe offers a trial period making LR easy to check out. Also, LR is frequently bundled with hardware purchases. As a negotiating point, ask for a free, or heavily discounted, copy to be included when you buy the 300, or something else.

Cheers... M

[RobG]

I rain forests you can't see far and there is barely any light. There is also a lot of moisture. Both 300mm and 500mm is not enough reach. The DA* 300 has better IQ and F4 at 300mm. I am not a real bird photographer.

FWIW, it's really hard to get close to birds in rainforest areas except at the edges of the forest or the edges of breaks in the forest. If it's in the middle of mature rainforest - depending on the type - you can actually see a long way. Under the canopy in many types of rainforest, not much grows because of the poor light. The birds in those circumstances are usually on the ground or in the canopy; if the latter you won't get photos unless you climb up there. Yes the humidity is probably high, so a weather sealed lens would be a bonus. My old 80-200 ended up with mould on some of the elements. The OP said he wasn't setting up hides, so IMO the speed and portability of the DA300 would be better than a lens which would be best on a tripod.

[Reptilezz]

FWIW, it's really hard to get close to birds in rainforest areas except at the edges of the forest or the edges of breaks in the forest. If it's in the middle of mature rainforest - depending on the type - you can actually see a long way. Under the canopy in many types of rainforest, not much grows because of the poor light. The birds in those circumstances are usually on the ground or in the canopy; if the latter you won't get photos unless you climb up there. Yes the humidity is probably high, so a weather sealed lens would be a bonus. My old 80-200 ended up with mould on some of the elements. The OP said he wasn't setting up hides, so IMO the speed and portability of the DA300 would be better than a lens which would be best on a tripod.

Thats what i was thinking. And if i needed more reach and i have good ight at say a park i could always use a good tc.

[RobG]

Thats what i was thinking. And if i needed more reach and i have good ight at say a park i could always use a good tc.

It's funny - I spent years wandering around Lamington National Park with an 80-200mm zoom, but got very few photos of birds in the rainforest itself. With the DA55-300 and the K5iis I could get more in the same situations because it handles the dim light better for birds like Logrunners or Scrubwrens. The DA*300 f4 would be better. I'm still planning to get the DA*300 myself but I'm waiting for a discount opportunity!