300mm plus Lens Club: discuss your long lenses

**luftfluss** · 01-06-2018, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by stihlmania

Someday I will get a good photo of a male cardinal, never any detail, until then I aim for the females!

What lens are you shooting with? I'm seeing 700mm f/4.5 in EXIF

**luftfluss** · 01-06-2018, 07:24 PM

Originally posted by ivanvernon

Here are a few backyard birder shots. All are with the K-3 and Pentax-M 400mm f 4.5, a nice lens for this purpose, I think. At 0 degrees F, they birds sure seemed to appreciate the sunflower seed, suet cake, and peanut butter/cornmeal mix!

Damn, your birds are living the high life! From me they get mostly cracked corn, with some millet and sunflower seed.

derekkite · 01-06-2018, 07:52 PM - **1 Like**

K1 150-450. Muskrat with vegetation.

**stihlmania** · 01-06-2018, 08:08 PM - **4 Likes**

Originally posted by luftfluss

What lens are you shooting with? I'm seeing 700mm f/4.5 in EXIF

Sorry I did not get the exif data set correctly, its a SMC A * 400 f2.8 with the Pentax AF 1.7 adaptor. Technically a 680mm but I set the lens length on camera to 700 for the shake reduction [I have not really tested the SR at this lens length to see if it helps at the shutter speed I was using]. I used this set up today with the cardinals and this fox...

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

**luftfluss** · 01-06-2018, 09:25 PM

Originally posted by stihlmania

Sorry I did not get the exif data set correctly, its a SMC A * 400 f2.8 with the Pentax AF 1.7 adaptor. Technically a 680mm but I set the lens length on camera to 700 for the shake reduction [I have not really tested the SR at this lens length to see if it helps at the shutter speed I was using]. I used this set up today with the cardinals and this fox...

Oh, you set the EXIF data correctly, I just couldn't figure it out!

In my experience using the AFA 1.7x with a 300/2.8, I needed to stop down a bit to get decent results, not just for sharpness and contrast but also because depth of field is so thin, particularly when backyard birding.

**luftfluss** · 01-06-2018, 09:54 PM - **10 Likes**

**ivanvernon** · 01-06-2018, 11:14 PM

Originally posted by stihlmania

Sorry I did not get the exif data set correctly, its a SMC A * 400 f2.8 with the Pentax AF 1.7 adaptor. Technically a 680mm but I set the lens length on camera to 700 for the shake reduction [I have not really tested the SR at this lens length to see if it helps at the shutter speed I was using]. I used this set up today with the cardinals and this fox...

Please pardon me for interjecting. However, SR should always be set at the stated lens designation, i.e., 400mm, not the equivalent focal length created by use of an extender, different sensor size, etc.

**Canada_Rockies** · 01-06-2018, 11:43 PM

Originally posted by ivanvernon

Please pardon me for interjecting. However, SR should always be set at the stated lens designation, i.e., 400mm, not the equivalent focal length created by use of an extender, different sensor size, etc.

I disagree.

The Shake Reduction should treat the glass assembly as a single lens. SR works on the camera movement as determined by the body sensor, and then calculates the rate of subject movement on the sensor based on the magnification of the whole assembly, including extender. It should NOT be adjusted, as you say, for any fictitious sensor size factor. The subject movement on the sensor is proportional to the change in focal length.

Kombivan · 01-07-2018, 01:07 AM

Just a shilouette & sunrise using a 1/2 purple filter. 28-300mm lens. I also wonder why there is not a category for shilouettes like nature, landscapes etc...

Kombivan · 01-07-2018, 01:26 AM

Sunrise this morning, I am interested in the camera shake conversation goin on as I hand hold most of the time and shake is a problem as I got very average owl photo's yesterday due to shake any tips I would appreciate.

**tduell** · 01-07-2018, 01:58 AM

Originally posted by Kombivan

Sunrise this morning, I am interested in the camera shake conversation goin on as I hand hold most of the time and shake is a problem as I got very average owl photo's yesterday due to shake any tips I would appreciate.

Hello Kombivan,
Camera shake shouldn't have been an issue with this pic...1/8000s should stop anything.
High shutter speed is the best cure, and if that's not possible, use a stable object (tree, post etc) to steady the camera.

Cheers,
Terry

**ivanvernon** · 01-07-2018, 03:03 AM

Originally posted by Canada_Rockies

I disagree.

The Shake Reduction should treat the glass assembly as a single lens. SR works on the camera movement as determined by the body sensor, and then calculates the rate of subject movement on the sensor based on the magnification of the whole assembly, including extender. It should NOT be adjusted, as you say, for any fictitious sensor size factor. The subject movement on the sensor is proportional to the change in focal length.

Perhaps I am incorrect on this. I was only parroting what Adam told me when I asked this question.

**ffking** · 01-07-2018, 03:56 AM - **11 Likes**

I've been a little critical of the FA*400mm f/5.6 on digital - it felt at times like it couldn't handle the pixel density of the K-3, but I'm wondering if slightly higher ISOs are the way to go - I was more pleased by the sharpness of this sparrowhawk visiting our garden in rather poor light, hence ISO1000, than with some of my other shots at lower ISOs.It might be something entirely else, but worth exploring.

**stihlmania** · 01-07-2018, 07:21 AM

My experience with shake reduction on a telephoto, my A*400 f2.8 only. I have tried various "lens" settings on my K-3II with this lens. With and without the 1.4-XL and the AF1.7. All on a rather heavy and stable Bogan tripod, with and without SR enabled. Always with a wired remote. So far SR seems to produce better results, but not always. Operator error is usually the case there! Last night I spent about 3 hours reviewing many SR discussions and recommendations, something I should do more often. There seems to be no set in concrete answer for older telephotos and SR so I just experiment with my equipment to see what works best for me. Against the advice of more experienced users and Ricoh/Pentax, I have SR on most of the time with my tripod. I recently, for the first time, tried the 400 on my equally beefy and sturdy Bogan monopod. That I may not try much, the lens is like a nose heavy 13 pound weight on a stick, even though I have a camera strap and a lens strap [attached to the lugs] for safety! I was overly careful, which was not enjoyable! But the SR worked well on the monopod with the lens and AF 1.7 length set at 550. Next time I dare to try the monopod I will set the lens length at 700. This is my experience, others will no doubt vary. On a side note, I had to decide what my first shot with my new camera was.... Haha!

**ffking** · 01-07-2018, 08:06 AM

Originally posted by stihlmania

My experience with shake reduction on a telephoto, my A*400 f2.8 only. I have tried various "lens" settings on my K-3II with this lens. With and without the 1.4-XL and the AF1.7. All on a rather heavy and stable Bogan tripod, with and without SR enabled. Always with a wired remote. So far SR seems to produce better results, but not always. Operator error is usually the case there! Last night I spent about 3 hours reviewing many SR discussions and recommendations, something I should do more often. There seems to be no set in concrete answer for older telephotos and SR so I just experiment with my equipment to see what works best for me. Against the advice of more experienced users and Ricoh/Pentax, I have SR on most of the time with my tripod. I recently, for the first time, tried the 400 on my equally beefy and sturdy Bogan monopod. That I may not try much, the lens is like a nose heavy 13 pound weight on a stick, even though I have a camera strap and a lens strap [attached to the lugs] for safety! I was overly careful, which was not enjoyable! But the SR worked well on the monopod with the lens and AF 1.7 length set at 550. Next time I dare to try the monopod I will set the lens length at 700. This is my experience, others will no doubt vary. On a side note, I had to decide what my first shot with my new camera was.... Haha!

You've effectively got a 1000mm f/4,5ish lens there on APS-C - you could do some nice moon shots with that

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The Sigma Lens Club- All lenses	Blue	Lens Clubs	3237	5 Hours Ago 07:23 AM
Soviet lenses club	Voe	Lens Clubs	4208	1 Day Ago 03:41 PM
Wanted - Acquired: Long lens >300mm in K-mount	pop4	Sold Items	1	10-03-2010 03:03 AM
Pentax DA 55-300mm vs Tamron 70-300mm at long end (brickwall)	tcdk	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	11-15-2009 12:52 AM

01-06-2018, 07:22 PM	#27196
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Originally posted by stihlmania Someday I will get a good photo of a male cardinal, never any detail, until then I aim for the females! What lens are you shooting with? I'm seeing 700mm f/4.5 in EXIF

01-06-2018, 07:24 PM	#27197
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Originally posted by ivanvernon Here are a few backyard birder shots. All are with the K-3 and Pentax-M 400mm f 4.5, a nice lens for this purpose, I think. At 0 degrees F, they birds sure seemed to appreciate the sunflower seed, suet cake, and peanut butter/cornmeal mix! Damn, your birds are living the high life! From me they get mostly cracked corn, with some millet and sunflower seed.

01-06-2018, 07:52 PM - 1 Like	#27198
derekkite Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Nelson B.C. Posts: 3,782	K1 150-450. Muskrat with vegetation.

01-06-2018, 09:25 PM	#27200
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Originally posted by stihlmania Sorry I did not get the exif data set correctly, its a SMC A * 400 f2.8 with the Pentax AF 1.7 adaptor. Technically a 680mm but I set the lens length on camera to 700 for the shake reduction [I have not really tested the SR at this lens length to see if it helps at the shutter speed I was using]. I used this set up today with the cardinals and this fox... Oh, you set the EXIF data correctly, I just couldn't figure it out! In my experience using the AFA 1.7x with a 300/2.8, I needed to stop down a bit to get decent results, not just for sharpness and contrast but also because depth of field is so thin, particularly when backyard birding.

01-06-2018, 09:54 PM - 10 Likes	#27201
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619

01-06-2018, 11:14 PM	#27202
ivanvernon Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Medina, OH Photos: Albums Posts: 7,224	Originally posted by stihlmania Sorry I did not get the exif data set correctly, its a SMC A * 400 f2.8 with the Pentax AF 1.7 adaptor. Technically a 680mm but I set the lens length on camera to 700 for the shake reduction [I have not really tested the SR at this lens length to see if it helps at the shutter speed I was using]. I used this set up today with the cardinals and this fox... Please pardon me for interjecting. However, SR should always be set at the stated lens designation, i.e., 400mm, not the equivalent focal length created by use of an extender, different sensor size, etc.

01-06-2018, 11:43 PM	#27203
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by ivanvernon Please pardon me for interjecting. However, SR should always be set at the stated lens designation, i.e., 400mm, not the equivalent focal length created by use of an extender, different sensor size, etc. I disagree. The Shake Reduction should treat the glass assembly as a single lens. SR works on the camera movement as determined by the body sensor, and then calculates the rate of subject movement on the sensor based on the magnification of the whole assembly, including extender. It should NOT be adjusted, as you say, for any fictitious sensor size factor. The subject movement on the sensor is proportional to the change in focal length.

01-07-2018, 01:58 AM	#27206
tduell Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2015 Location: Melbourne Posts: 1,514	Originally posted by Kombivan Sunrise this morning, I am interested in the camera shake conversation goin on as I hand hold most of the time and shake is a problem as I got very average owl photo's yesterday due to shake any tips I would appreciate. Hello Kombivan, Camera shake shouldn't have been an issue with this pic...1/8000s should stop anything. High shutter speed is the best cure, and if that's not possible, use a stable object (tree, post etc) to steady the camera. Cheers, Terry

01-07-2018, 03:03 AM	#27207
ivanvernon Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Medina, OH Photos: Albums Posts: 7,224	Originally posted by Canada_Rockies I disagree. The Shake Reduction should treat the glass assembly as a single lens. SR works on the camera movement as determined by the body sensor, and then calculates the rate of subject movement on the sensor based on the magnification of the whole assembly, including extender. It should NOT be adjusted, as you say, for any fictitious sensor size factor. The subject movement on the sensor is proportional to the change in focal length. Perhaps I am incorrect on this. I was only parroting what Adam told me when I asked this question.

01-07-2018, 03:56 AM - 11 Likes	#27208
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,038	I've been a little critical of the FA*400mm f/5.6 on digital - it felt at times like it couldn't handle the pixel density of the K-3, but I'm wondering if slightly higher ISOs are the way to go - I was more pleased by the sharpness of this sparrowhawk visiting our garden in rather poor light, hence ISO1000, than with some of my other shots at lower ISOs.It might be something entirely else, but worth exploring.

01-07-2018, 08:06 AM	#27210
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,038	Originally posted by stihlmania My experience with shake reduction on a telephoto, my A*400 f2.8 only. I have tried various "lens" settings on my K-3II with this lens. With and without the 1.4-XL and the AF1.7. All on a rather heavy and stable Bogan tripod, with and without SR enabled. Always with a wired remote. So far SR seems to produce better results, but not always. Operator error is usually the case there! Last night I spent about 3 hours reviewing many SR discussions and recommendations, something I should do more often. There seems to be no set in concrete answer for older telephotos and SR so I just experiment with my equipment to see what works best for me. Against the advice of more experienced users and Ricoh/Pentax, I have SR on most of the time with my tripod. I recently, for the first time, tried the 400 on my equally beefy and sturdy Bogan monopod. That I may not try much, the lens is like a nose heavy 13 pound weight on a stick, even though I have a camera strap and a lens strap [attached to the lugs] for safety! I was overly careful, which was not enjoyable! But the SR worked well on the monopod with the lens and AF 1.7 length set at 550. Next time I dare to try the monopod I will set the lens length at 700. This is my experience, others will no doubt vary. On a side note, I had to decide what my first shot with my new camera was.... Haha! You've effectively got a 1000mm f/4,5ish lens there on APS-C - you could do some nice moon shots with that