Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-05-2009, 09:10 AM   #46
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New England
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,286
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Langille Quote
It's discrimination I tell you... No love for the FA* 300/2.8...
QuoteOriginally posted by Mike.P® Quote
I am hoping to have an A* 300mm f2.8 and both 1.4 and 2.0 L converters by Friday.
Both good lenses (and I once had the A* 300/2.8, and I'd love to sometime get an FA* 300/2.8), but it seems as if the one-plus stop aperture advantage (f/4.5 to f/2.8) brings with it what seems almost like an order of magnitude loss in portability and usability.

While my osprey crops were taken hand-held (easy to do with an F* or FA* 300/4.5, or an M* or A* 300/4, or - I assume - with a DA* 300/4), it's a bit more difficult (but not impossible - I've done so on occasion with the A* 300/2.8) on any 300/2.8 lens.

Plus, there's the issue of portability - an F* 300/4.5 fits (sort of) comfortably in my old holster camera bag (circa 1980), while the A* 300/2.8 goes in a dedicated trunk case (next to the tripod).

I'd like an FA* 300/2.8 anyway, though - <g>. (I still have my 1.4X-L and 2X-L TC's - <g>.)

04-05-2009, 09:13 AM   #47
Veteran Member
Mike.P®'s Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Milton, Hampshire, UK
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,154
For the price I am paying it would be stupid of me not to buy the lens and TC's .. even if I just sell them straight away.(which I wouldn't)
04-06-2009, 12:37 PM - 1 Like   #48
Veteran Member
Cambo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,016
This one will make you cry....

Why I love this lens...



From my Pet Rescue Calendar 2005 - check my gallery - first upload of many.
Trusty old *ist D, Gitzo 80th Anniversary tripod, F* 300 f4.5 with Pentax SMC 'Cloudy' filter, Metx 40MZiii flash with Stofen softbox, mirror lockup at about f8, Pentax remote trigger. Processed in Adobe Photoshop CS 1 on an old Mac Dual 450 and ancient 17" monitor.

Cheers,
Cameron
04-06-2009, 11:52 PM   #49
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Posts: 264
Original Poster
Thanks for info and sharing.

04-07-2009, 02:32 AM   #50
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Posts: 264
Original Poster
Which filters do you use on this lenses? UV? CPL? None?

Thanks.
04-07-2009, 04:06 AM   #51
Veteran Member
Marc Langille's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NW Arkansas, USA
Posts: 4,702
QuoteOriginally posted by fwcetus Quote
Both good lenses (and I once had the A* 300/2.8, and I'd love to sometime get an FA* 300/2.8), but it seems as if the one-plus stop aperture advantage (f/4.5 to f/2.8) brings with it what seems almost like an order of magnitude loss in portability and usability.
Regarding the 300/2.8 usability: it is definitely not a loss! The viewfinder brightness is amazing, as is the low-light capabilities.My Sigma 500/4.5 I used with the Canon was effectively useless in shaded area with 30 minutes of sunset. The 300/2.8 gave me a longer window to shoot with it in those conditions - and those were important times for wildlife activity! Depends on your needs and/or requirements...

I too believe that portability is the sacrifice you make if you do a lot of travel and are not equipped or prepared to carry a larger amount of equipment. Obviously it's not a light travel lens compared to the smaller aperture 300's.

QuoteOriginally posted by fwcetus Quote
While my osprey crops were taken hand-held (easy to do with an F* or FA* 300/4.5, or an M* or A* 300/4, or - I assume - with a DA* 300/4), it's a bit more difficult (but not impossible - I've done so on occasion with the A* 300/2.8) on any 300/2.8 lens.
I've seen it done - shooting the FA* 250-600/5.6 hand held... Only for 3-4 shots of course - you need some strength to hold an 11 pound lens steady!

QuoteOriginally posted by fwcetus Quote
Plus, there's the issue of portability - an F* 300/4.5 fits (sort of) comfortably in my old holster camera bag (circa 1980), while the A* 300/2.8 goes in a dedicated trunk case (next to the tripod).

I'd like an FA* 300/2.8 anyway, though - <g>. (I still have my 1.4X-L and 2X-L TC's - <g>.)
My FA* 300/2.8 doesn't have a trunk and fits nicely in my Lowepro Nature Trekker II AW. I've become used to the weight. I agree that it's not for everyone, so I guess I'll keep mine...


Regards
Marc
04-07-2009, 06:21 AM   #52
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,783
A great lens to use

Just a little nervous with its bokeh

Pentax Fa* 300mm f4.5 image gallery

Cheers

04-07-2009, 08:26 AM   #53
Veteran Member
Cambo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,016
Try to get the 1.7 teleconverter

QuoteOriginally posted by Mike.P® Quote
For the price I am paying it would be stupid of me not to buy the lens and TC's .. even if I just sell them straight away.(which I wouldn't)
then you'll have a 450 f4 with autofocus.

I'll sell you mine for $10,000.00...that's Cdn!



Cheers,
Cameron
04-07-2009, 08:29 AM   #54
Veteran Member
Cambo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,016
I use a SMC Pentax 'Cloudy' filter...

QuoteOriginally posted by cooldude14es Quote
Which filters do you use on this lenses? UV? CPL? None?

Thanks.
I got 6 or 7 brand new in boxes about 10 years ago for $5.00 each - bought all of them! They are a very mild warming filter, and I don't mind using them on my good glass because they are very good glass, and SMC.

Don't use cheap filters! That's why we have lens caps.

Cheers,
Cameron
04-07-2009, 08:33 AM   #55
Veteran Member
Cambo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,016
Holy Zebra crap, Batman!

Nice shot, man! And I hear you on the weight - by the time I put all my stuff in a Lowepro backpack (2nd biggest one), it's just brutally heavy now. That's why I bought the travel zoom kit - DA 18-55II and the 50-200 - amazing little lenses, with a capital L on the little part.

But somebody sure needs to do some pooper-scooping in that animal sanctuary or wherever those were shot...whooo-eee.

Cheers,
Cameron

QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Langille Quote
Regarding the 300/2.8 usability: it is definitely not a loss! The viewfinder brightness is amazing, as is the low-light capabilities.My Sigma 500/4.5 I used with the Canon was effectively useless in shaded area with 30 minutes of sunset. The 300/2.8 gave me a longer window to shoot with it in those conditions - and those were important times for wildlife activity! Depends on your needs and/or requirements...

I too believe that portability is the sacrifice you make if you do a lot of travel and are not equipped or prepared to carry a larger amount of equipment. Obviously it's not a light travel lens compared to the smaller aperture 300's.



I've seen it done - shooting the FA* 250-600/5.6 hand held... Only for 3-4 shots of course - you need some strength to hold an 11 pound lens steady!



My FA* 300/2.8 doesn't have a trunk and fits nicely in my Lowepro Nature Trekker II AW. I've become used to the weight. I agree that it's not for everyone, so I guess I'll keep mine...


Regards
Marc
04-07-2009, 08:55 AM - 1 Like   #56
Veteran Member
ivoire's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,381
A lotta light = a lotta weight... but 2.8 is nice

Pentax FA* 300mm f2.8 2495g - 88oz

Pentax FA* 300mm f4.5 935g - 32.98oz

Pentax F* 300mm f4.5 880g - 31.04oz

Pentax DA* 300mm f4 1070g - 37.74oz

Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 1150g - 40.6oz

Last edited by ivoire; 04-07-2009 at 09:04 AM.
04-07-2009, 09:30 AM   #57
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Posts: 264
Original Poster
The zebras shot is simply amazing...!!
04-07-2009, 06:05 PM - 2 Likes   #58
Veteran Member
Marc Langille's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NW Arkansas, USA
Posts: 4,702
Thanks guys! Luckily the poop is very dry...

The bokeh on the FA* 300/2.8 is very, very good, no question! Here are a few more... no TC in these shots either.

Bewick's Wren:

EXIF

Not much cropping, and an intentional setup on this hummer shot:

EXIF


EXIF

Cheers,
Marc
04-07-2009, 06:55 PM   #59
Veteran Member
ivoire's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,381
Beautiful hummer shots Marc.... my lba for that 300mm 2.8 has kicked in
04-07-2009, 09:47 PM - 1 Like   #60
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New England
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,286
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Langille Quote
Regarding the 300/2.8 usability: it is definitely not a loss! The viewfinder brightness is amazing, as is the low-light capabilities. [...] Depends on your needs and/or requirements... [...] I too believe that portability is the sacrifice you make if you do a lot of travel and are not equipped or prepared to carry a larger amount of equipment. Obviously it's not a light travel lens compared to the smaller aperture 300's.
I do understand, Marc. Every telephoto lens is a compromise, I guess - a fast, long lens will be large and heavy, while a compact, light, long lens is gonna be slower. However, the best lens for the job is not the one that got left at home (again), but is the lens that's with you when you're ready to shoot - <g>.

QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Langille Quote
I've seen it done - shooting the FA* 250-600/5.6 hand held... Only for 3-4 shots of course - you need some strength to hold an 11 pound lens steady!
"Been there, done that..." (more or less). I used to have a gorgeous A* 600/5.6, and I even used it hand held on rare occasion (back in FF film days, and in very bright light only). But, most of the time it got left at home (along with the tripod, which also often got left home).

I eventually replaced the 600/5.6 with an A* 300/2.8 (comparatively "smaller"), which, with an A 2X-L TC, gave me a "more practical" (even though somewhat less sharp) 600/5.6. But, it was ~still~ a bit big to carry most of the time.

But, the F* 300/4.5 is small enough and fast enough (and certainly sharp enough) for ~most~ situations (even if not bright enough for ~all~ conditions). And, the bottom line is that an F* 300/4.5 (or, at an earlier time, an A* 300/4) can go with me ~most~ of the time.

In a sense, because of its excellent optical and mechanical qualities, but also because it is not overly large (or overly fast), an F*/FA* 300/4.5, compared to one of the 300/2.8's is sort of a "Limited" long telephoto lens...
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 3224 17 Hours Ago 07:24 AM
Soviet lenses club Voe Lens Clubs 4207 02-11-2024 03:07 PM
Wanted - Acquired: Long lens &gt;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 12:54 AM. | 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