[jpzk]

I can't wait to see what that yields!!!

---------- Post added 07-19-16 at 10:58 AM ----------





It is important to note that with this lens as with other lenses, of the last few years, are more susceptible to variations in quality control. I think older series of lenses were built better in the sense that it was on a smaller scale and QC was easier to control. Now the operations have grown too big to hope to adequately control what comes out of the factory. I bought a 150-450 and it was a lemon, I had trouble getting the seller to process the return and never got a replacement. I've heard about more variations in quality with the big Sigma super zooms. I think there are some good 150-450s and some better than good ones as well.

Interesting ...
So, my in-the-money daughter has just bought a 150-450 today !!! to fit on her K3 and she'll be here for a week; plans are we are going out "birding" !
Now, is there any sure way to find out if this brand new lens of hers "could" be a lemon. I mean in terms of IQ?

[noelpolar]

Interesting ...
So, my in-the-money daughter has just bought a 150-450 today !!! to fit on her K3 and she'll be here for a week; plans are we are going out "birding" !
Now, is there any sure way to find out if this brand new lens of hers "could" be a lemon. I mean in terms of IQ?

Most people seem to take a while with it before they are getting good reliable shots with it....... so don't be to harsh to soon to judge it I reckon....especially on a K3.

[jpzk]

Most people seem to take a while with it before they are getting good reliable shots with it....... so don't be to harsh to soon to judge it I reckon....especially on a K3.

I realize each new lens does need a bit of getting used to but ... why are you specifically saying "....especially on a K3" ?
JP

[noelpolar]

I realize each new lens does need a bit of getting used to but ... why are you specifically saying "....especially on a K3" ?
JP

24mp crop..... very hard at 450mm...... most people coming from 300mm struggle for a while I believe...... also a lot come from a prime to a zoom..... I believe the transmittance of this zoom costs you noticable light over a prime.

Generally, much easier lens on the K-1.

---------- Post added 21-07-16 at 01:55 PM ----------

I can't wait to see what that yields!!!

---------- Post added 07-19-16 at 10:58 AM ----------





It is important to note that with this lens as with other lenses, of the last few years, are more susceptible to variations in quality control. I think older series of lenses were built better in the sense that it was on a smaller scale and QC was easier to control. Now the operations have grown too big to hope to adequately control what comes out of the factory. I bought a 150-450 and it was a lemon, I had trouble getting the seller to process the return and never got a replacement. I've heard about more variations in quality with the big Sigma super zooms. I think there are some good 150-450s and some better than good ones as well.

Mike's a very discerning photographer and the F*300/4.5 is noted by some to be a bit better IQ wise then the DA 300..... so I'd put his observations down to that rather then lens QA issues. I also believe the 150-450 has noticeably less light transmittance at a given aperture over the 300.

---

Last edited by noelpolar; 07-20-2016 at 09:31 PM.

[Murra54]

3 from me ... great air show but crap weather. Grey skies and grey aircraft do not make great pictures.

Still got some good shots if these are a representative sample. I would print abd frame#2, love it.

---------- Post added 07-21-16 at 02:46 PM ----------

Interesting ...
So, my in-the-money daughter has just bought a 150-450 today !!! to fit on her K3 and she'll be here for a week; plans are we are going out "birding" !
Now, is there any sure way to find out if this brand new lens of hers "could" be a lemon. I mean in terms of IQ?

I use mine on both my K3 and K1; maybe I am not as discerning as others but I print 438mm x 329mm (13 x 19) on Ilford Pearl paper and am more than happy with results. Have had friends who have held the combination of body, battery grip and lens who suggest it is heavy, so quality of images may be more affected by camera shake than lens problems. My version seems to be quite good through the zoom range. (photos in post 743 in this thread)

[mikeSF]

...
It is important to note that with this lens as with other lenses, of the last few years, are more susceptible to variations in quality control...

...

[/COLOR]
Mike's a very discerning photographer and the F*300/4.5 is noted by some to be a bit better IQ wise then the DA 300..... so I'd put his observations down to that rather then lens QA issues. I also believe the 150-450 has noticeably less light transmittance at a given aperture over the 300.

Agreed, I was not implying that the lens was not at it's best, as I found it to be quite good across the range, especially at the long end where traditionally tele zooms really fall off. The F*300 is a very good performer (sharper than the DA* by my experience), and I am not surprised that the D FA 150-450 zoom was not quite as sharp at 300mm as the F*300. That's why there are primes.

---------- Post added 07-20-2016 at 11:17 PM ----------

here's one at 200mm

Blue Dinghy

[timautin]

I also believe the 150-450 has noticeably less light transmittance at a given aperture over the 300.

I can confirm that! Something like 1/2 - 1 stop.

Agreed, I was not implying that the lens was not at it's best, as I found it to be quite good across the range, especially at the long end where traditionally tele zooms really fall off. The F*300 is a very good performer (sharper than the DA* by my experience), and I am not surprised that the D FA 150-450 zoom was not quite as sharp at 300mm as the F*300. That's why there are primes.

OK!

[Dieseler]

I can confirm that! Something like 1/2 - 1 stop.



OK!

I have suspected that too, my ISOs seem to be higher than I thought they would be, even in good light.

I use TAv and let the ISO float up to 3200 (on the K5IIs) and generally try to keep the shutter speed around 1/1000s for action and aperture at 7.1 (which I seem to recall is the sharpest - probably read it somewhere here). I have no hesitation in using this lens wide-open though, if I need to.

[noelpolar]

I have suspected that too, my ISOs seem to be higher than I thought they would be, even in good light.

I think this has been more noticeable in Pentax land as more of us have come from using relatively efficient 300mm primes as opposed to other brands where more might upgrade from a cheaper zoom. It took a bit of the edge off using this lens with the K3 for me unless light was great. K-1 is a different animal though.

[redpit]

I have suspected that too, my ISOs seem to be higher than I thought they would be, even in good light.

I use TAv and let the ISO float up to 3200 (on the K5IIs) and generally try to keep the shutter speed around 1/1000s for action and aperture at 7.1 (which I seem to recall is the sharpest - probably read it somewhere here). I have no hesitation in using this lens wide-open though, if I need to.

What creates this "problem" is the fact that you come from the DA* 300 or other bright primes that you compare with the DFA 150-450... What I noticed when I got the DFA 150-450 in comparison with the Bigma 50-500 I was using before, is that it gave me at least half stop advantage under the same lighting conditions and same settings! So, it's just a matter of previous experience! That said I really look forward to the new prime tele (or super tele) that Pentax will eventually release! That will be the cherry on the top on my cake...

[timautin]

That said I really look forward to the new prime tele (or super tele) that Pentax will eventually release

If you are talking about the "Large aperture medium telephoto single focus lens" on the roadmap, don't hope to much, it is clearly said "medium telephoto", not "super tele" :/ . Seems closer to a 85mm than a 400 2.8 ^^.
Or maybe you were referencing something else?

[redpit]

If you are talking about the "Large aperture medium telephoto single focus lens" on the roadmap, don't hope to much, it is clearly said "medium telephoto", not "super tele" :/ . Seems closer to a 85mm than a 400 2.8 ^^.
Or maybe you were referencing something else?

I'm reffering to something else. I know for sure that Pentax is updating its FF lens arsenal and it will include one or more very fast prime telelenses (I'm GUESSING here with some teleconverters maybe as well). People who are closer to Ricoh-Pentax than I am, won't be surprised if we even get a superteleprime like a 600/4 at some point in the future...

I don't want to start the "which tele lens you would like Pentax to release" argument once more, but seeing the FF project doing very well and since we speak about the K-1 being a real advanced-pro tool I would expect a DFA* 300/2.8 or 400mm lens to accompany the DA* 300/4 along with DFA converters after the more popular regular and short teles primes find their way to the market. I think everyone sees that coming

[littledrawe]

Agreed, I was not implying that the lens was not at it's best, as I found it to be quite good across the range, especially at the long end where traditionally tele zooms really fall off. The F*300 is a very good performer (sharper than the DA* by my experience), and I am not surprised that the D FA 150-450 zoom was not quite as sharp at 300mm as the F*300. That's why there are primes.

Mike's a very discerning photographer and the F*300/4.5 is noted by some to be a bit better IQ wise then the DA 300..... so I'd put his observations down to that rather then lens QA issues. I also believe the 150-450 has noticeably less light transmittance at a given aperture over the 300.

I suppose more of what I was trying to express was that with the F* being a prime and the practices of the company likely being different at that time, you could expect good consistent results from that lens and likely not give it more thought than that. Now with what I believe to be lower standards of quality control, larger operations that are more difficult to manage, the variations in the 150-450 are greater than they would have been with the F* so you have people getting results like Vcollerp(?) and Noel in contrast with other people's, mine for instance, that are marginal at best related to the problems with the lens. How many focus calibration tools and lens testing threads were there or would there have been when the F*/FA* series was released verses now. How many people's first or second outing with a lens of this genre back then was to test the accuracy of the focus? Now you almost have to do it just to make sure you don't have to send the lens back within the return/repair window of your seller.

[timautin]

I'm reffering to something else. I know for sure that Pentax is updating its FF lens arsenal and it will include one or more very fast prime telelenses (I'm GUESSING here with some teleconverters maybe as well). People who are closer to Ricoh-Pentax than I am, won't be surprised if we even get a superteleprime like a 600/4 at some point in the future...

I don't want to start the "which tele lens you would like Pentax to release" argument once more, but seeing the FF project doing very well and since we speak about the K-1 being a real advanced-pro tool I would expect a DFA* 300/2.8 or 400mm lens to accompany the DA* 300/4 along with DFA converters after the more popular regular and short teles primes find their way to the market. I think everyone sees that coming

OK, I though you were speaking in near future. I agree, it seems logical to see some fast tele-primes at some point in the future, but I suspect that we'll have to be patient. Seems that 2017 will be the year of ultra-wide to medium tele light primes, maybe after...

[mikeSF]

I suppose more of what I was trying to express was that with the F* being a prime and the practices of the company likely being different at that time, you could expect good consistent results from that lens and likely not give it more thought than that. Now with what I believe to be lower standards of quality control, larger operations that are more difficult to manage, the variations in the 150-450 are greater than they would have been with the F* so you have people getting results like Vcollerp(?) and Noel in contrast with other people's, mine for instance, that are marginal at best related to the problems with the lens. How many focus calibration tools and lens testing threads were there or would there have been when the F*/FA* series was released verses now. How many people's first or second outing with a lens of this genre back then was to test the accuracy of the focus? Now you almost have to do it just to make sure you don't have to send the lens back within the return/repair window of your seller.

the demographic of discerning users(vs "who cares"-types) has probably grown since then.