[riseform]

Thought I'd post an interesting high f-stop (f/22 and f/29), slow shutter speed (1/180) experiment for BIF with the DA 560.
I underexposed the background, relying on the Godox X Pro and two remote Godox V860ii flashes to "stop" the action. Manual setting at 1/8 power positioned near the feeder created an interesting blur.

K3ii, DA 560 1/180 at f/22 Pine Siskin


K3ii, DA 560 1/180 at f/29 Mountain chickadee


And just to remind everyone that the DA 560 can actually take clean photos, here's my resident white-headed woodpecker in the snow.

---

Last edited by riseform; 03-01-2021 at 12:09 AM. Reason: forgot to identify the chickadee

[ivanvernon]

Deer in meadow, 50% crop.

NOTE: Using Pentax-FA 645 150-300mm f 5.6. EXIF shows 260mm setting, but I thought it was set at 300mm, sorry!

[HoutHans]

Thought I'd post an interesting high f-stop (f/22 and f/29), slow shutter speed (1/180) experiment for BIF with the DA 560.
I underexposed the background, relying on the Godox X Pro and two remote Godox V860ii flashes to "stop" the action. Manual setting at 1/8 power positioned near the feeder created an interesting blur.

K3ii, DA 560 1/180 at f/22 Pine Siskin


K3ii, DA 560 1/180 at f/29 Mountain chickadee


And just to remind everyone that the DA 560 can actually take clean photos, here's my resident white-headed woodpecker in the snow.

These are interesting photos and some great experimentation. I particularly like the top one.

[kengoh]

Didn't tightly crop this pic and leave the red leaf at the top left corner so that can compare the size of the bird.
Shot with 500mm + cropped APSC K3, if full frame + 300mm the bird will appear smaller in frame....

[RICHARD L.]

[kengoh]

Fantastic. Great shots

Passport refused. They don't accept profile shots. ;-) Thanks Luis.

Thanks Peter. Old story: proximity and a good lens.

That's some shot for a newby!

Thanks siva.ss.kumar and Des.

[mattb123]

You've got me looking at them on eBay now. Would be fun for extreme tele moon photos, I bet.
How do you like it? Have you tried it on a K-1 or crop body?

[RICHARD L.]

Hello Matt,

Up to now, I only mounted the 645Z to it and results were "surprising", to say the least. I posted an evaluation in the P67 "Lens Reviews" section of the forum. A K1 body, or even a K3, could easily be used with it with the proper Pentax adapter. I will certainly try this later when Spring comes around. Images were flat at f/5.6 but picked up contrast and resolution starting at f/8 and held steady up to f/22. Only problem was handling it as it is insanely heavy and cumbersome but a solid ballhead with a sliding quick-release plate solved the problem. It sold for peanuts (around 300 US $) only, so it represents a "no-risk" investment.


Regards

[mattb123]

Hello Matt,

Up to now, I only mounted the 645Z to it and results were "surprising", to say the least. I posted an evaluation in the P67 "Lens Reviews" section of the forum. A K1 body, or even a K3, could easily be used with it with the proper Pentax adapter. I will certainly try this later when Spring comes around. Images were flat at f/5.6 but picked up contrast and resolution starting at f/8 and held steady up to f/22. Only problem was handling it as it is insanely heavy and cumbersome but a solid ballhead with a sliding quick-release plate solved the problem. It sold for peanuts (around 300 US $) only, so it represents a "no-risk" investment.


Regards

Thanks and yeah I saw your informative review. The size and heft of it make me think twice but they don't seem to be rare so I'll keep pondering.
I have a nice big ball head and RRS clamp so I imagine I'll be OK there.
I'd really like the 150-450 for my K mount gear but I don't want to spend that kind of money right now.

[MossyRocks]

Only problem was handling it as it is insanely heavy and cumbersome

Now try a 400/2.8, a little shorter but a lot heavier. I've had people tell me they could shoot my 400 handheld, without knowing what I have, since they can shoot their 400 handheld but they don't realize that a 400/6.3 or even a 400/5.6 weighs nothing compared to a 400/2.8. I probably could shoot that thing handheld if I got a rifle stock to mount it on with a proper rifle sling and rigged it kind of like the old photo-sniper. However that is a lot of work for something that 99 out of 100 outings I would want to shoot off of a tripod anyway. Add in that now I use that 400/2.8 during the day with the 2X-L converter sometimes and being on a tripod is really the only way to go at a 800mm f/5.6 setup.

[ivanvernon]

I do not have that lens, but I do have the Pentacon 500mm f 5.6 which I have never really used. It is a monster, much too heavy hand hold and also turn the focus ring, and it come with M42 mount so can only use it on Pentax K-mount cameras, not K-mount. It has a larger than standard mounting screw size so have not been able to fit it o any of my standard tripods, which anyway are too light weight for this monster. Has anyone ever made use of one of these lenses?

[weverka]

Now try a 400/2.8, a little shorter but a lot heavier. I've had people tell me they could shoot my 400 handheld, without knowing what I have, since they can shoot their 400 handheld but they don't realize that a 400/6.3 or even a 400/5.6 weighs nothing compared to a 400/2.8. I probably could shoot that thing handheld if I got a rifle stock to mount it on with a proper rifle sling and rigged it kind of like the old photo-sniper. However that is a lot of work for something that 99 out of 100 outings I would want to shoot off of a tripod anyway. Add in that now I use that 400/2.8 during the day with the 2X-L converter sometimes and being on a tripod is really the only way to go at a 800mm f/5.6 setup.

I know what you mean, I shoot the 600mm f4 which weighs the same as your 400/2.8, but extends a little longer. A 6 inch aperture is not something to fumble with. The 500/5.6 weighs half as much.

[MossyRocks]

I know what you mean, I shoot the 600mm f4 which weighs the same as your 400/2.8, but extends a little longer. A 6 inch aperture is not something to fumble with. The 500/5.6 weighs half as much.

They are impressive slabs of glass. Once you understand how to use them they are great and there are cases where a monster like that is needed but big glass really is a specialty item. Also the 500/5.6 probably isn't any where near as front heavy as your 600/4 or my 400/2.8, even if it is a 6x7 lens, so that also helps with handling.

[Lowell Goudge]

Thanks and yeah I saw your informative review. The size and heft of it make me think twice but they don't seem to be rare so I'll keep pondering.
I have a nice big ball head and RRS clamp so I imagine I'll be OK there.
I'd really like the 150-450 for my K mount gear but I don't want to spend that kind of money right now.

Now try a 400/2.8, a little shorter but a lot heavier. I've had people tell me they could shoot my 400 handheld, without knowing what I have, since they can shoot their 400 handheld but they don't realize that a 400/6.3 or even a 400/5.6 weighs nothing compared to a 400/2.8. I probably could shoot that thing handheld if I got a rifle stock to mount it on with a proper rifle sling and rigged it kind of like the old photo-sniper. However that is a lot of work for something that 99 out of 100 outings I would want to shoot off of a tripod anyway. Add in that now I use that 400/2.8 during the day with the 2X-L converter sometimes and being on a tripod is really the only way to go at a 800mm f/5.6 setup.

I do not have that lens, but I do have the Pentacon 500mm f 5.6 which I have never really used. It is a monster, much too heavy hand hold and also turn the focus ring, and it come with M42 mount so can only use it on Pentax K-mount cameras, not K-mount. It has a larger than standard mounting screw size so have not been able to fit it o any of my standard tripods, which anyway are too light weight for this monster. Has anyone ever made use of one of these lenses?

I know what you mean, I shoot the 600mm f4 which weighs the same as your 400/2.8, but extends a little longer. A 6 inch aperture is not something to fumble with. The 500/5.6 weighs half as much.

They are impressive slabs of glass. Once you understand how to use them they are great and there are cases where a monster like that is needed but big glass really is a specialty item. Also the 500/5.6 probably isn't any where near as front heavy as your 600/4 or my 400/2.8, even if it is a 6x7 lens, so that also helps with handling.

Hello Matt,

Up to now, I only mounted the 645Z to it and results were "surprising", to say the least. I posted an evaluation in the P67 "Lens Reviews" section of the forum. A K1 body, or even a K3, could easily be used with it with the proper Pentax adapter. I will certainly try this later when Spring comes around. Images were flat at f/5.6 but picked up contrast and resolution starting at f/8 and held steady up to f/22. Only problem was handling it as it is insanely heavy and cumbersome but a solid ballhead with a sliding quick-release plate solved the problem. It sold for peanuts (around 300 US $) only, so it represents a "no-risk" investment.


Regards

When I read these I think back to my tamron 200-500/5.6. A complete monster and totally unbalanced, but, the DA560 is nice and light at 3.6 kilos, and being AF you only need to hold it up, not do anything else with your non shutter finger hand.

I hand hold the 560 all the time, but I think the FA400/2.8 or 600/4 at 6 kilos might push me over the top to.

[Weevil]

Northern winters are still difficult for the non-migratory Carolina wren, but the fact that they are surviving through the winter more regularly and farther north than they did 20 years ago should not make any of us happy.

I was told that as far as they have their daily McMeal (suet) and a good hide, they can stand the winter here... Well, I live in one of the warmest area for Canada winters... so that can help also!