Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-15-2016, 04:15 AM   #16
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
redpit's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Athens
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,042
QuoteOriginally posted by lemonsoda Quote
My preferred option would be a Sigma 150-600 with PK mount.
So why on the K-1? Is it better than the 800E?

07-15-2016, 04:24 AM - 1 Like   #17
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: near Munich airport
Posts: 60
In my opinion? Yes. The K-1 would be the perfect camera for me - I like the handling, the menus, the IQ, things like in-body-SR and PSR. But I need roundabout 600mm on FF for my wildlife photography. And with the TK mounted on 150-450, the AF of K-1 didn't perform well. So I go along with K-3 II, DA*300 + TK as the "lightweight wildlife stuff" (and all the other pleasure of shooting Pentax) and the D800e + 150-600 for "FF wildlife".
07-15-2016, 05:00 AM   #18
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
redpit's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Athens
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,042
QuoteOriginally posted by lemonsoda Quote
In my opinion? Yes. The K-1 would be the perfect camera for me - I like the handling, the menus, the IQ, things like in-body-SR and PSR. But I need roundabout 600mm on FF for my wildlife photography. And with the TK mounted on 150-450, the AF of K-1 didn't perform well. So I go along with K-3 II, DA*300 + TK as the "lightweight wildlife stuff" (and all the other pleasure of shooting Pentax) and the D800e + 150-600 for "FF wildlife".
Thanks for the answer. I hope that Tamron will offer the 150-600 for K mount. There were rumours that they are designing a new 150-600 to compete with the Sport version of the Sigma lens. If it's true then I wouldn't be surprised if it would also come in K-mount (or as a pentax rebadged lens).
07-15-2016, 08:02 AM   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 11,497
I think the difference is too big... is the 5DMkIII's AA filter that strong? Can we rule out issues with the Canon?
Anyway, with all due respect to beholder3 - which I consider an experienced shooter which doesn't post nonsense - I'd wait for an independent test showing the same difference.

QuoteOriginally posted by lemonsoda Quote
What hmmm?

You can find the other 10.000 posts on pentaxians.de and dslr-forum.de
Really? Why would I?

07-15-2016, 09:27 AM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,143
Original Poster
I own two cameras so I just wanted to find the best lens for real far away tele subjects. The Canon was set for lightness and speed anyhow.

I just wondered if plugging a 600mm on the Canon would be a better solution than the DFA on the K-1 and if the Sigma would perform signfificantly better than the TC+ 100-400 combo (which it does not, the Sigma's sucking OS makes it even a less fun option even if it wasn't larger, heavier, slower and cheap feeling plastic fantastic - the latter compared to the very high quality build DFA and EF).

The shots shown were alread best of and included manually focussed ones so no, AF is not a topic here.

The Canon JPG engine is not competitive to Pentax, so the embedded JPGs are not the best you can get, and that explains about 10% of the difference.

I worked on the raws in LR and they came out a little better, but more detail? Not really.
Actually the K-1 DNGs are much more malleable and using LRs raw sharpening makes the difference even larger.

It does come down to +60% pixelcount induced sharpness and no AA filter.

Keep in mind the images are crops beyond 150% magnification. That is sick. For all practical purposes the details and sharpness on the Canon lens combos is good enough for everything.
If you want to max out details then Canon 22 Mpx with AA filter is just not the optimum as the shorter lens on the K-1 delivers more details than extra 200mm on the Canon.

And the Canon option with competitive pixelcount and no AA-filter 5DsR, costs a whopping +1.600 EUR or +100% more than the K-1. It does not help nearly enough that the Sigma lens is 600 EUR cheaper than the Pentax one. And I would not want to sacrifice SR or DR either.

Anyone with those combos feel free to show different results of the same subject.
07-16-2016, 12:46 PM   #21
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,857
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
I own two cameras so I just wanted to find the best lens for real far away tele subjects. The Canon was set for lightness and speed anyhow.

I just wondered if plugging a 600mm on the Canon would be a better solution than the DFA on the K-1 and if the Sigma would perform signfificantly better than the TC+ 100-400 combo (which it does not, the Sigma's sucking OS makes it even a less fun option even if it wasn't larger, heavier, slower and cheap feeling plastic fantastic - the latter compared to the very high quality build DFA and EF).

The shots shown were alread best of and included manually focussed ones so no, AF is not a topic here.

The Canon JPG engine is not competitive to Pentax, so the embedded JPGs are not the best you can get, and that explains about 10% of the difference.

I worked on the raws in LR and they came out a little better, but more detail? Not really.
Actually the K-1 DNGs are much more malleable and using LRs raw sharpening makes the difference even larger.

It does come down to +60% pixelcount induced sharpness and no AA filter.

Keep in mind the images are crops beyond 150% magnification. That is sick. For all practical purposes the details and sharpness on the Canon lens combos is good enough for everything.
If you want to max out details then Canon 22 Mpx with AA filter is just not the optimum as the shorter lens on the K-1 delivers more details than extra 200mm on the Canon.

And the Canon option with competitive pixelcount and no AA-filter 5DsR, costs a whopping +1.600 EUR or +100% more than the K-1. It does not help nearly enough that the Sigma lens is 600 EUR cheaper than the Pentax one. And I would not want to sacrifice SR or DR either.

Anyone with those combos feel free to show different results of the same subject.
If you need magnification and the lens sharp enough, go for a 24MP APSC body. that cheaper even in Canon and give you more reach/details. Counting the lens is sharp enough.
07-16-2016, 03:22 PM   #22
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 156
QuoteOriginally posted by lemonsoda Quote
... And with the TK mounted on 150-450, the AF of K-1 didn't perform well...
Then you have the wrong settings or a faulty copy of the 150-450. AF has worked better for me with the K-1 and 150-450 combo than any other Pentax body and lens combo I've tried. Granted I haven't tried the Sigma 150-500, but the 150-450 focuses exceptionally fast and well for me.
07-16-2016, 03:42 PM   #23
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Slovenia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,184
QuoteOriginally posted by carolina_sky Quote
Then you have the wrong settings or a faulty copy of the 150-450. AF has worked better for me with the K-1 and 150-450 combo than any other Pentax body and lens combo I've tried. Granted I haven't tried the Sigma 150-500, but the 150-450 focuses exceptionally fast and well for me.
He is using a teleconverter though, but expecting any f>4 lens to perform well with one is wishful thinking IMO.

07-16-2016, 03:51 PM   #24
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 12,481
QuoteOriginally posted by Giklab Quote
He is using a teleconverter though, but expecting any f>4 lens to perform well with one is wishful thinking IMO.
Exactly. PDAF points like f5.6 or wider to focus. There has to be enough light spread to hit the two detectors.
07-16-2016, 04:02 PM   #25
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,896
QuoteQuote:
I have a K-1 with the DFA 150-450 an a D800e with Sigma 150-600 C at home. The K-1/150-450 is sold an waits for shipping. Must I write more?
The Sigma 150-600 is simply "sharp", even wide open and there is no way to get the same details by cropping a 450mm shot.

(Yesterday, I compared my Sigma to the Nikon 200-500 5.6 => same result.)

Ok, I don't shoot roofes at 170 meters of distance with my telezoom, but birds an other animals at 5 to 50 meters. My preferred option would be a Sigma 150-600 with PK mount.
I see red.

Just my advice... one guy come to one conclusion and posts pictures to back it up. Another guy claims he's wrong, and posts nothing.

Always take the best evidence. That would be the guy who presents his data. Anyone can write the above post (highlighted in red) whether he actually has the lenses claimed or not. He doesn't even have to own a camera to make that post.
07-16-2016, 04:33 PM   #26
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,105
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
Here a screenshot of the comparison of the JPGs embedded int he RAWs:
Thanks for the comparison photos. I would caution that the embedded JPEGs may or may not represent best quality from either camera. I believe that CR2 uses 20% compression and am not sure about the K-1 DNG. Edit: I am aware that comparison with the processed RAW along with deficiencies of the Canon JPEG engine were discussed in comments above.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I think the difference is too big... is the 5DMkIII's AA filter that strong? Can we rule out issues with the Canon?

Steve

Last edited by stevebrot; 07-16-2016 at 04:42 PM.
07-16-2016, 04:53 PM - 1 Like   #27
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,105
QuoteOriginally posted by lemonsoda Quote
Must I write more?
Apparently, yes...though your purpose is a little muddy. From what I can tell, you are saying that you sold your Pentax gear because a Nikon/Sigma combo was better for your style of shooting. Fair enough, though it seems a bit strange to join an online forum just to post an off-topic comment.


Steve

(...Dale Carnegie rolls over in grave...again...)
07-17-2016, 04:20 AM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,143
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Thanks for the comparison photos. I would caution that the embedded JPEGs may or may not represent best quality from either camera. I believe that CR2 uses 20% compression and am not sure about the K-1 DNG. Edit: I am aware that comparison with the processed RAW along with deficiencies of the Canon JPEG engine were discussed in comments above.
I did add the LR processed versions in full res to the folder here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/karlknipser/albums/72157649680231157
See for yourself.

JPG compression is more of an issue with regrads to sky and other areas of little detail but slow color changes. Where there is small details JPG compression usually is not an issue, unless it is really, really strong, which is not the case for the embedded images.
07-17-2016, 03:52 PM   #29
Site Supporter
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Site Supporter
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,123
I have received my degree from the Normhead School of Skeptical Thinking...and to be honest, I put little or no confidence in any tests I see on the internet. There must be a thousand variables on most any test like the one done here......if you do all thousand of them, I won't have time to analyze the results......

The best test is to just buy it and try it...if you like it, that's great. If not, send it back and try something else.

I always find it sort of unusual that these tests always seem to confirm the greatness of what the testing poster owns or shoots with.......did anyone ask a Canon or Sigma guy to perform the same test? Now that might be an interesting test!

Regards!
07-17-2016, 05:29 PM   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 11,584
QuoteOriginally posted by lemonsoda Quote
with the TK mounted on 150-450, the AF of K-1 didn't perform wel
Ugh.

Which TC was used w. K-1 and 150-450? The DA 1.4 TC isn't officially FF compatible. In K-1 crop mode it might perform OK optically, I guess, but it will still make the 150-450 a f5.6-f8 lens, so the AF may struggle.

Also put a 1.4 TC on any Tamron or Sigma 150-600 + D810, and the optical or AF results won't be great either, particularly at the longest end.
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!
5d, canon, ii, iii, image, k-1, k-mount, lens, mark, mpx, pentax, pentax lens, sigma, slr lens, tele lens, wildlife
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax 150-450 vs Sigma 150-500 questions stemked Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 05-28-2018 09:38 AM
Dilemma: Sigma 100-400 f4 Apo DG EX + Sigma TC 1.4x or Pentax 150-450 Mel_PL Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 03-22-2016 05:59 PM
AF speed: DA*300 vs DFA 150-450 jeffryscott Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 02-02-2016 04:41 PM
Nikon D7200+ Sigma 150-600 S vs Pentax DFA 150-450 Shanti Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 43 12-13-2015 09:02 AM
Nikon 80-400 VRIi vs Pentax DFA 150-450 Shanti Pentax DSLR Discussion 19 05-16-2015 09:03 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:48 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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