Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-17-2010, 02:29 PM   #691
Pentaxian
8540tomg's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,462
Nice images Wildman. Well done.

It's just a guess, as I'm not sure, but I think number 2 might be the 1000mm. To be honest I really have no idea.

Cheers

Tom G

06-17-2010, 04:57 PM   #692
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,288
Assuming subject distance is about equal, I think I have a pretty good idea about the lenses but, wow, those are beautiful birds and beautiful photos!
06-17-2010, 05:55 PM   #693
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Photos: Albums
Posts: 650
Beautiful bird shots! Also I feel the same way the bird can be twice as far but still fill the center of the frame. That is why I asked how can I guesstimate the magnification of a focal length and I became confused due to the range scale on some of my lenses. I Thank You Everyone for educating me further. It is why this forum is so Great!
Alan.
06-17-2010, 09:12 PM - 1 Like   #694
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chennai, India
Photos: Albums
Posts: 369
The 1st one is @1000 and the 2nd is @ 560. Right?

Adding couple of my birds Both using Bigma. 1st one @ 500 and the 2nd @ 270 (almost half of your pictures )

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K200D  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K200D  Photo 
06-18-2010, 02:27 AM   #695
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 367
Later, i will post some photos from mine A*600/5.6
06-18-2010, 02:53 AM   #696
Veteran Member
xjjohnno's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Melbourne Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,115
Lovely birds Siva, that green one especially.
06-18-2010, 03:33 AM   #697
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,288
QuoteOriginally posted by xjjohnno Quote
Lovely birds Siva, that green one especially.
Agree--it's a very interesting bird and very nicely photographed!
06-18-2010, 11:33 PM   #698
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Flyover America
Posts: 4,475
Nice shots but what are they?

I don't have a clue about the first one but I would guess the second one is a Painted Sandgrouse (Pterocles indicus). But then i live 8000 miles from India.

BTW my first pic was with the 560mm and second at 1000mm taken at about 100 feet across a small stream.

06-19-2010, 05:09 AM   #699
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chennai, India
Photos: Albums
Posts: 369
Thanks all for the feedback. The 1st one is Green Bee Eater. As wildman said, the 2nd one is Painted Sandgrouse.
So, I got my guess incorrect on the focal length. I kind of thought that more depth of field meant longer focal length
06-19-2010, 10:22 AM - 1 Like   #700
Pentaxian
Marc Langille's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NW Arkansas, USA
Posts: 4,702
QuoteOriginally posted by 8540tomg Quote
I haven't checked this thread for a while but there have been some great posts of late.

Marc - I've seen that Kildeer before but it always blows me away.

Jan - Your wolf shot is amongst the best I ever seen of its kind. That 600mm is an awesome lens in your hands.

Managed an image of a female Red Wing Blackbird today with the old M 400/5.6.

Tom G

Great image of the female RW Blackbird Tom! Those wolf images by Jan are quite striking - beautiful.



BTW, that Killdeer image was only converted from RAW this year - it's sometimes a bit difficult to sift through thousands of images from the VLF library and find an acceptable image (one that I want after meeting the technical aspects)...



EXIF

Here's a 1600 x 1067 pixels version of that first image - I hope you enjoy the larger version - the small mud flecks on it's white breast are better seen in this image: http://www.marclangille.com/photos/879225070_uTeGL-X3.jpg



I suspect you are thinking of one of these two?





That previous Killdeer image was converted from RAW the day I posted it on Once you've seen one Killdeer image...?

Cheers,
Marc
06-19-2010, 10:23 AM   #701
Pentaxian
Marc Langille's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NW Arkansas, USA
Posts: 4,702
Wildman and Siva: beautiful colors - breathtaking!
06-19-2010, 11:17 AM - 1 Like   #702
Pentaxian
8540tomg's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,462
QuoteQuote:

I suspect you are thinking of one of these two?


That previous Killdeer image was converted from RAW the day I posted it on Once you've seen one Killdeer image...?

Cheers,
Marc
You're are probably right Marc. Great images as always.

In any case I wish I could get the clarity you guys achieve with your images. I keep plugging away with the old M 400/5.6 but can't seem to reach your level. Here's a couple more of the same blackbird.





Actually, I'm fairly pleased with these given the conditions they were shot under. I think #1 is just an interesting shot if not a technical masterpiece. #2 is a nicer composition.

It's probably just LBA but I can't help but wonder how different these images might be if they were taken under the same conditions with an A 400/2.8 for instance. Setting aside expertise and skill level, would they be dramtically sharper with better colour/contrast etc? Do you really get that much more with the more expensive glass or it it just another case of diminishing returns for higher investments? Thoughts?



Cheers

Tom G

Last edited by 8540tomg; 06-19-2010 at 11:19 AM. Reason: typo
06-19-2010, 11:57 AM - 1 Like   #703
Pentaxian
Marc Langille's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NW Arkansas, USA
Posts: 4,702
QuoteOriginally posted by 8540tomg Quote
You're are probably right Marc. Great images as always.

In any case I wish I could get the clarity you guys achieve with your images. I keep plugging away with the old M 400/5.6 but can't seem to reach your level. Here's a couple more of the same blackbird.
You've got an extra step to contend with - MF. That doesn't always mean AF is the better choice, but it sure doesn't hurt to have it!

QuoteOriginally posted by 8540tomg Quote
Actually, I'm fairly pleased with these given the conditions they were shot under. I think #1 is just an interesting shot if not a technical masterpiece. #2 is a nicer composition.

It's probably just LBA but I can't help but wonder how different these images might be if they were taken under the same conditions with an A 400/2.8 for instance. Setting aside expertise and skill level, would they be dramtically sharper with better colour/contrast etc? Do you really get that much more with the more expensive glass or it it just another case of diminishing returns for higher investments? Thoughts?

Cheers

Tom G
I do like #2!

I'll preface my answer first... yours is actually a difficult question to quantify and answer in a simple manner, given so many variables involved! Therefore I'll try to tackle it from a few angles - please bear with me...

Having started off with better quality or pro level optics, I'm pretty confident in giving you this answer: expertise and skill will count for a great deal; better optics can often just make it easier to get that shot, no question! They will also quickly reveal any weakness, lack of skill or something similar with the person or the setup - putting aside any camera or lighting limitations of course. However, I don't really think it's fair to say much more on this, since I don't know the skill level of the person taking the photo, etc. I do know that once you hit premium quality glass, the technique+support system+photographer's skill/experience plays a big role in the final result.

Now to your question: is the better, much more expensive glass really that much better? To be honest, I would have to shoot with a less expensive zoom or prime, say the Sigma 150-500 to truly answer that question in a balanced manner. Bases on the better image samples I have seen, I don't think the color/contrast will show a huge difference. However, the sharpness of the optics may be a definitive factor - I can see that as a potential benchmark quite often. Therefore it's an incremental value within certain price points and above: it's what the photographer's requirements and/or the value he/she places upon those images than can determine lens choices.

For example, here is a hummingbird image, cropped, taken with the inexpensive 50-200 kit lens, F/5.6 @125mm:


Link to EXIF

Rest assured, this is at best a very difficult lens to use with this kind of subject matter in mind. Therefore it's a travel kit lens for landscape use - that's it. Considering the lens I used for the shot above, it's much better than I thought possible.

If I've missed something, provided an incomplete answer, you have another question or need further clarification, please let me know. I'll do my best to oblige. I sincerely hope I didn't confuse or muddy things with my answer(s).

Regards,
Marc
06-19-2010, 01:02 PM   #704
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,288
The light in that hummingbird shot is magnificent, Marc!
06-19-2010, 08:48 PM   #705
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Flyover America
Posts: 4,475
QuoteOriginally posted by siva.ss.kumar Quote
Thanks all for the feedback. The 1st one is Green Bee Eater. As wildman said, the 2nd one is Painted Sandgrouse.
So, I got my guess incorrect on the focal length. I kind of thought that more depth of field meant longer focal length
They are lovely birds whatever they are. Was the grouse taken in the South of India? I would think a grouse, at least here in the states, is pretty much limited to cold climates. Perhaps taken at a high altitude? Other than the front range of the Himalayas I think of India as being desert, tropical or subtropical. My understanding of Indian geography is probably flawed.

Focal length vs DOF:
So far as I have seen, all else being equal, for any given image scale DOF does not change with FL.

That is a pic taken with a 50mm at 50 feet will have the same DOF as a picture at 100 feet taken with a 100mm lens. Thus the 1000mm shot was taken at 5x the distance as the 560mm so more apparent DOF in the 1000mm shot.

Magnification does not change perspective so far as I know.
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!
300mm, 300mm plus lens, 560mm, beach, birds, canada, chickadee, club, coast, couple, dogs, feb, flickr, friend, gulf, half, lens club, lenses, love, moon, pentax lens, pm, post, scene, sea, series, shore, shot, sigma, sunset, wife
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Sigma Lens Club- All lenses Blue Lens Clubs 2278 1 Day Ago 10:35 AM
Soviet lenses club Voe Lens Clubs 3752 2 Days Ago 12:18 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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:25 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