Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-24-2014, 12:50 PM   #151
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 804
I think some AF points are optimized for f5.6 some others for f2.8
See here
EAST ENTERPRISE.NET
The AFmaps shows that 3 central points are optimized for f2.8

11-26-2014, 10:57 PM   #152
Site Supporter
rvannatta's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Apiary, Oregon
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,171
QuoteOriginally posted by goubejp Quote
I can't tell. I made a try with a FA*400 f5.6 + Pentax TC, the focus doesn't lock that good. And anyway, the IQ is just terrible with this lens - it is just fine with the FA*600f4 tough, and the AF is fast and reliable. But is is an F4 lens.
You are saying that the FA600f4 is happy with the new TC? that is good news. I had been thinking of buying one but was worried as the FA lens family isn't listed by Pentax as compatible. I have been using the older nn - L TC's wth
my FA600, but of course that don't support any AF.
11-27-2014, 01:26 AM   #153
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 804
Yes I can confirm that, AF is fine, fast and reliable with the FA*600f4 and the new Pentax TC. Image quality is also better than with the old 1,4 L TC
11-27-2014, 05:27 AM   #154
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 231
I tested the combo DA560 + HD DA 1.4 TC in the field and although the AF becomes rather sluggish/slow compared to the lens bare, it did lock on confidently overall, and unless flat and dull light/scene, was pretty accurate.
Overall, better than my Sigma 500/4.5 with the 1.4TC, which was mainly hit and miss AF wise. But certainly a f5.6 lens has its limits with a 1.4TC. It will take some more overall testing in various circumstances to know whether it has benefits over using the lens bare and cropping, as the DA560 bare has excellent resolving power.

Chris

11-27-2014, 03:11 PM   #155
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
QuoteOriginally posted by Chris Mak Quote
I tested the combo DA560 + HD DA 1.4 TC in the field and although the AF becomes rather sluggish/slow compared to the lens bare, it did lock on confidently overall, and unless flat and dull light/scene, was pretty accurate.
Overall, better than my Sigma 500/4.5 with the 1.4TC, which was mainly hit and miss AF wise. But certainly a f5.6 lens has its limits with a 1.4TC. It will take some more overall testing in various circumstances to know whether it has benefits over using the lens bare and cropping, as the DA560 bare has excellent resolving power.

Chris
For starts, I hope you know and understand about what kind of magnification you are writing about, so we can evaluate your expectations.

In 35mm terms, and with that setup, you talk about 560mm x 1.4 x 1.5 = 1175 mm equivalent tele photography.

What kind of 'speed' or 'focus accuracy' you want to approve of with your setup? Do you even have the necessary means to set up equipment for such kind of photography, and enough mileage to be able to successfully take such shots and say a definite word about the experience?
11-27-2014, 06:19 PM   #156
Pentaxian
Transit's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Whanganui NZ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,880
You do what ever you like Chris Mak
It's not like we are charging for your efforts or something
11-27-2014, 07:30 PM   #157
Loyal Site Supporter
Mikesul's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,479
QuoteOriginally posted by Chris Mak Quote
I tested the combo DA560 + HD DA 1.4 TC in the field and although the AF becomes rather sluggish/slow compared to the lens bare, it did lock on confidently overall, and unless flat and dull light/scene, was pretty accurate.
Overall, better than my Sigma 500/4.5 with the 1.4TC, which was mainly hit and miss AF wise. But certainly a f5.6 lens has its limits with a 1.4TC. It will take some more overall testing in various circumstances to know whether it has benefits over using the lens bare and cropping, as the DA560 bare has excellent resolving power.

Chris
We all appreciate your reports since there has been so little reported about the lens and less about the lens TC combo. Thanks for sharing.
11-27-2014, 10:43 PM   #158
Site Supporter
rvannatta's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Apiary, Oregon
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,171
QuoteOriginally posted by goubejp Quote
Yes I can confirm that, AF is fine, fast and reliable with the FA*600f4 and the new Pentax TC. Image quality is also better than with the old 1,4 L TC
This is indeed good news. I'll put that TC on the top of my wish list as I frequently want a TC on my FA*600. That is plenty of reason enough to get the new TC. It's been a long time in coming.

I will also likely use it with the the FA300f/2.8 and the A400f/2.8 which I have and use where appropriate. I am particularly fond of the A400 for small birds because it focuses closely
and if you are going to get a good shot of a small bird you better be close anyway.

---------- Post added 11-27-2014 at 10:07 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Chris Mak Quote
I tested the combo DA560 + HD DA 1.4 TC in the field and although the AF becomes rather sluggish/slow compared to the lens bare, it did lock on confidently overall, and unless flat and dull light/scene, was pretty accurate.
Overall, better than my Sigma 500/4.5 with the 1.4TC, which was mainly hit and miss AF wise. But certainly a f5.6 lens has its limits with a 1.4TC. It will take some more overall testing in various circumstances to know whether it has benefits over using the lens bare and cropping, as the DA560 bare has excellent resolving power.

Chris
I've debated extensively with myself and even written articles on the alternative merits of in optical vs. electric cropping More than a few times I have produced results suggesting that using a TC vs. image cropping didn't change much.

a couple of things that make a LOT of difference include:
a) Distracting backgrounds that can be eliminated with a stronger optical combination: strong backlighting on part of a scene can really raise havoc with the image---thus if adding TC power lets you avoid the back lit
areas (your bird is always in the shadows), it's a strong plus to 'TC up'.

b) the second problem which works the other way is 'camera shake'. ---- to my observation, the longer the optical focal length, the worse it gets. when you get up to a 1000mm effective focal length, a camera on
a tripod simple doesn't compare in image quality to a camera nestled in a pillow on a block of concrete. (assuming a remote release in both cases). I have a heavy Bogen 3046 6 legged tripod sold to hold UP TV cameras
and it still shows vibration.

11-28-2014, 05:20 AM   #159
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 231
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
For starts, I hope you know and understand about what kind of magnification you are writing about, so we can evaluate your expectations.

In 35mm terms, and with that setup, you talk about 560mm x 1.4 x 1.5 = 1175 mm equivalent tele photography.

What kind of 'speed' or 'focus accuracy' you want to approve of with your setup? Do you even have the necessary means to set up equipment for such kind of photography, and enough mileage to be able to successfully take such shots and say a definite word about the experience?
For me, practical use and performance is paramount. I use my birding gear exclusively handheld and hiking. That is why the DA560 made sense to me: a lightweight option to get near to a 600mm reach. The FA600/4 is a wonderful lens going by what I have seen posted, but was not an option for me. So I only test shooting handheld in the field. I have a very steady grip, I had no problems shooting the Sigma500/1.4tc combo handheld with regards to keeping it steady, but the AF was very unreliable. The DA560+1.4 TC is harder to use overall because of the near 100mm extra range, but the AF is more secure in locking on. The Sigma 500+1.4tc always went on making minor zip-zip corrections at each half press and point of focus was different after each half press, and rarely really spot on. The DA560 simply does better, mostly locking on at first or second try with confidence, although real accuracy depends on how clearly the subject is contrasting with the surroundings. D.O.F. is minimal obviously. So in short: I know the caveats, and what it would take to properly test the DA560+1.4tc combo, but the only relevance to me is how I can make this combo perform handheld in the field, and whether the images that it produces are attractive in rendering and sharp enough for practical use. I don't expect pixel level sharpness with the K3, but contrast and color rendering are very important. The Sigma 500/4.5 suffered from flatness with the 1.4 tc on, contrast and color vibrancy took a real hit.
The Pentax 1.4 tc b.t.w., seems to compress the tonal range quite a bit with a long supertele on, leading to very unreliable metering, and in contrasty but relatively low light levels, you may get images that look darkish as if underexposed, but simply raising the exposure level leaves a gap at the blackpoint level of the histogram, or starts to blow highlights. This was also the case with the Sigma 500, and makes metering very difficult and unpredictable. I seem to remember that the Sigma 1.4tc (sold) suffered less from this tendency to create darkish images.
Anyway, I will soon post some samples. The strength of the DA560+1.4 tc combo is the sheer reach, enabling me to get images that would otherwise be impossible in areas with restricted possibilities of approach, amongst which happen to be some of my favorite areas for birding and hiking.

Chris
11-28-2014, 06:09 AM   #160
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,781
QuoteOriginally posted by Chris Mak Quote
(...)
The Pentax 1.4 tc b.t.w., seems to compress the tonal range quite a bit with a long supertele on, leading to very unreliable metering, and in contrasty but relatively low light levels, you may get images that look darkish as if underexposed, but simply raising the exposure level leaves a gap at the blackpoint level of the histogram, or starts to blow highlights. This was also the case with the Sigma 500, and makes metering very difficult and unpredictable. I seem to remember that the Sigma 1.4tc (sold) suffered less from this tendency to create darkish images.
(...)
This is typically a reduction in contrast due to the teleconverter, isn't it?
11-28-2014, 06:42 AM   #161
Loyal Site Supporter
Mikesul's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,479
QuoteOriginally posted by Mistral75 Quote
This is typically a reduction in contrast due to the teleconverter, isn't it?
Is the 1.4 TC any better or worse in the regard than other modern TCs?
11-29-2014, 05:33 AM   #162
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 121
thoughts on Pentax vs alternatives for super telephoto

I haven't been on this forum for quite a while, but I commented on this thread when it originated and thus have been copied on the recent posts. The reason I'm no longer a forum participant is relevant to this thread. I'm a committed bird and wildlife photographer. It isn't how I earn a living but I spend a lot of time and money to capture the best possible images I can. At the same time, I was a committed Pentaxian, starting with film bodies and going through the K-5, with a full complement of the best lenses. My Pentaxian leanings and my enthusiasm for bird photography led me to the Sigma 500 along with the two Sigma TCs, which I used extensively, and the Pentax F* 250-600 f5.6, which I loved to look at but kept only a short while because it was too heavy to be practical and not as sharp as the Sigma. Now I shoot Nikon, with my primary birding gear being a D7100 and a Nikkor 500mm f/4 G.

How is that relevant to this thread? Because the entry price for my Nikon setup, if the lens is purchased used, is in the same ballpark as a Pentax K-3 and Pentax 560 or Sigma 500 (purchased new). And (here's the point), the Nikon setup is in a different league altogether than anything available on Pentax. The Nikon super-teles are tack sharp across the frame wide open. The ability to shoot at f4 (vs. f5.6) means that shutter speeds can be higher with lower ISOs, which results in visibly less noise with resulting better feather detail. And it means a 1.4TC can be used without too big a penalty. The Nikon lens/body combo produces excellent autofocus tracking of birds in flight -- the superiority on this dimension of the Nikon setup compared to the Pentax gear is so striking that I was blown away the first day. I'm sure the same points could be made for the equivalent Canon gear compared to Pentax.

The day that Ricoh/Pentax produces professional-level super-telephotos and brings its autofocus system up to level of Nikon and Canon, I'll be back. But until then, it doesn't make sense to me for an enthusiast bird photographer to be using Pentax gear for that particular purpose. It took me a while to get to this point because of my psychological commitment to Pentax, but here I am and happy with it. I pass my experience along for whatever it is worth.

Russ https://www.flickr.com/photos/russ-w/
11-29-2014, 07:03 AM   #163
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,587
QuoteOriginally posted by oeriies Quote
autofocus system up to level of Nikon and Canon
Your views reflect older Pentax tech. There's a big difference between K-3 and K-5 AF performance, you will find, if you look into it. Comparisons between Nikon, Canon and Pentax AF are not as valid today as they used to be.
12-10-2014, 05:57 PM   #164
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 23
Rumors on future models

Any rumors on updated K3? I like the Adorama offer on K 5 IIs but feel like I'm going backwards from the K3. It would great if Pentax came out with advanced body from the K3.
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!
af, bird, camera, image, length, lens, pentax news, pentax rumors, tc, tripod, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looks Like Rumors Of A New Flash Are True iCrop Pentax News and Rumors 46 01-09-2013 07:12 AM
Pentax 560mm, 18-270mm, and DFA 645 90mm Macro Officially Announced Adam Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 09-11-2012 05:58 AM
Pentax q10 Jaymie0613 Pentax News and Rumors 12 09-10-2012 01:37 PM
Pentax Q10 yygomez Pentax News and Rumors 5 09-07-2012 06:58 AM
18-200mm or 18-270mm? Damian.T Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 11-09-2011 03:38 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:32 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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