[Dieseler]

...I'm even wondering whether I'd be better off buying a Canon or Nikon DSLR and a Sigma lens for the same price because the AF may be that much better. Lower IQ perhaps, but getting a shot with lower IQ would still be better than not getting the shot at all. After four Pentax bodies I'm loathe to go elsewhere.

The tracking would likely be better with the Canikon bodies, but would a compromise of a Sigma lens on the Pentax body give you an increase in focus speed/decrease in hunting? Cheapest option of all?

[christiandre]

maybe... best similar config :
canon 7d mark II + canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II USM ?

[redpit]

maybe... best similar config :
canon 7d mark II + canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II USM ?

Maybe... Great AF, FPS and Buffer rate but from what I've seen average quality pictures, at least for my taste.
Every "system" has its advantages and disadvantages, if there was one with clear advantage over all the others then everybody would own that.

[capturef22]

Hi all,

I live in a slow internet part of the world and can barely keep up with 'the other message board' and others I subscribe to. Nonetheless, I rented the D FA 150 - 450 over the past week. I shoot mostly birds with a long lens like this. I have threads on DPR under the same username (capturef22) or you should be able to search for my SmugMug site (user name there: photorefuge).

Here's a link to the images in my test gallery so far: photorefuge . Osprey pics include fledgling juvenile (pics are in descending order). Click the 'i' under each pic there for other EXIF data.

I will try to check back and answer any questions but this is yet another crazy week for me. Long story short: fabulous lens. My results were better with this one than I ever got with the Sigma 50-500 APO DG OS HSM, though I have gotten a lot of good use from that lens!

Happy shootin'!

[Namajam]

Nice. Looking at the second one the choppy background looks like what I was getting with the 300mm and 1.4tc, and sometimes the 300mm alone. It is partly bokeh characteristics in harsh light, but it seems worse if there is slight movement blur. You had 1/500 shutter speed. Was the SR operating? I haven't seen many shots using this lens with that characteristic.

The first and third have nice buttery bokeh.

Thanks! Yes, the SR was on.

[derekkite]

Hi all,

I live in a slow internet part of the world and can barely keep up with 'the other message board' and others I subscribe to. Nonetheless, I rented the D FA 150 - 450 over the past week. I shoot mostly birds with a long lens like this. I have threads on DPR under the same username (capturef22) or you should be able to search for my SmugMug site (user name there: photorefuge).

Here's a link to the images in my test gallery so far: photorefuge . Osprey pics include fledgling juvenile (pics are in descending order). Click the 'i' under each pic there for other EXIF data.

I will try to check back and answer any questions but this is yet another crazy week for me. Long story short: fabulous lens. My results were better with this one than I ever got with the Sigma 50-500 APO DG OS HSM, though I have gotten a lot of good use from that lens!

Happy shootin'!

Very nice! The osprey shots are lovely, you must have been close. This lens seems to perform very well in skilled hands.

[redpit]

Hi all,

I live in a slow internet part of the world and can barely keep up with 'the other message board' and others I subscribe to. Nonetheless, I rented the D FA 150 - 450 over the past week. I shoot mostly birds with a long lens like this. I have threads on DPR under the same username (capturef22) or you should be able to search for my SmugMug site (user name there: photorefuge).

Here's a link to the images in my test gallery so far: photorefuge . Osprey pics include fledgling juvenile (pics are in descending order). Click the 'i' under each pic there for other EXIF data.

I will try to check back and answer any questions but this is yet another crazy week for me. Long story short: fabulous lens. My results were better with this one than I ever got with the Sigma 50-500 APO DG OS HSM, though I have gotten a lot of good use from that lens!

Happy shootin'!

Great pictures! Good job! Since most of your pics were shot at speeds 1/1600 or greater your K-3 SR was off?

[capturef22]

---------- Post added 07-29-15 at 08:24 AM ----------

Great pictures! Good job! Since most of your pics were shot at speeds 1/1600 or greater your K-3 SR was off?

Thank you! Yes, SR was off for most or all of the shots.

I used to shoot the BigmOS at f/8 or better. This lens gives consistently good results in these good light conditions to get great results at f/6.3, allowing me to boost shutter speed and/or drop ISO. Either choice seems to bump IQ up a bit and the extra edge helps me!

[capturef22]

Very nice! The osprey shots are lovely, you must have been close. This lens seems to perform very well in skilled hands.

Thanks derekkite. I replied earlier but it looks like it didn't take.

Anyway, our ospreys are few and at least a little ways between but I'm fortunate to have some good sites relatively close to home. Most of these were taken from about 25 m distance but the nest is about 5 m in the air. The ospreys are getting to know me a bit it seems and don't seem too agitated by me.

The lens is really wonderful! Well balanced on the K3 and its IQ is stellar, especially with good light.

[christiandre]

... but Canon with the 100-400 (very qualitative also) stayed in the "easy handled - transportable" lens (1640g for 94×193mm) : videos are many of canonists who use it without too much hardship, in rather flickering activities (nothing very professional / elaborate in any case) It's the same for very estimated Nikon 80-400 (1360g for 91×171 mm !)

150-450mm pentax: it's over 2kg for 95mm x 241.5mm

pentax forgot to take into account this factor, canikons knew how to satisfy amateurs fringe attached to the handship of their equipment, retaining the quality & perfs... pentax also bring these characteristics but by losing on the way soft dreamers / nature walkers who did not necessarily want to turn into camouflaged Rambo clothes during static hours in the mud & under a little army tent

Technically, the 150-450 appears to be an undeniable success, but commercially, it is very poorly understood, poorly targeted, unless we see this as the "uncompromising" strategy...

[Glorfindelrb]

I'm pretty sure it's already a success commercially.

[zantaphia]

I'm pretty sure it's already a success commercially.

I had to wait 6 weeks to get mine from Japan!

[Zygonyx]

... but Canon with the 100-400 (very qualitative also) stayed in the "easy handled - transportable" lens (1640g for 94×193mm) : videos are many of canonists who use it without too much hardship, in rather flickering activities (nothing very professional / elaborate in any case) It's the same for very estimated Nikon 80-400 (1360g for 91×171 mm !)

150-450mm pentax: it's over 2kg for 95mm x 241.5mm

pentax forgot to take into account this factor, canikons knew how to satisfy amateurs fringe attached to the handship of their equipment, retaining the quality & perfs... pentax also bring these characteristics but by losing on the way soft dreamers / nature walkers who did not necessarily want to turn into camouflaged Rambo clothes during static hours in the mud & under a little army tent

Technically, the 150-450 appears to be an undeniable success, but commercially, it is very poorly understood, poorly targeted, unless we see this as the "uncompromising" strategy...

The poors are not those you might think.
Have you calculated how much increase in volume you have physically btw 80 or 100/400mm f4.5/5.6 and 150/450mm f4.5/5.6 ?
Then evaluate what is the proportional increase in weight.

[christiandre]

Nikon 80-400 : 1360g
Canon 100-400 : 1640g
Pentax : over 2Kg

[Zygonyx]

And what if IBIS had an impact on the image circle ?