[reh321]

As much as I like my 55-300 PLM, there are times when the big guy can do a lot more. This pair was in in deep evening shadows, so handheld at 450mm on my K3iii at ISO 4000 at F5.6 and 1/200th

Did you try the PLM lens at a higher ISO?

My KP gives no noticeable noise - with fine color and DR - at values as high as 50K.
{ may need slightly higher ISO than expected}

[mlt]

Did you try the PLM lens at a higher ISO?

My KP gives no noticeable noise - with fine color and DR - at values as high as 50K.
{ may need slightly higher ISO than expected}

I've used my 55-300 in higher iso modes with excellent results, but on this outing I knew deep shadows and/or lots of deep tree shade that tends to lean more blue in the evening would be a potential issue. That coupled with wanting to control depth of field closer to the F5.6 to 6.3 range (I shoot mostly in TAV mode allowing the ISO to float) when looking for s specific target (Wood Ducks) in late evening predicated bringing the 150-450 instead of the 55-300. Not too much luck with the Wood Ducks that night, but the beavers were a bonus.

[Ishpuini]

I wouldn't buy it at any price, because it is too heavy for me to lug it on birding walks with my wife.
My "77-420mm PLM" lens works just fine.

It is very heavy indeed. If it were lighter I would probably take it out more often. I did get a BlackRapid Sport sling strap to carry this lens specifically and that helps. I prefer a regular strap otherwise, but that's just impossible for me on the DFA150-450. The BlackRapid is a great solution to distribute the weight on my shoulder while keeping the lens at hand, but still the weight pushing against my hip is not really comfortable. But even then a full day out shooting with the DFA150-450 will often end with a painful left arm (=lens support arm). I'm always hoping that would help some muscular build, but have been disappointed so far...

[thibs]

Tell me about it. At that price I couldn't afford not to get it.

Yeah, 400€ for Tammy 100 macro (newest version) + Tammy 70-200/2.8 was a deal I thought was of the same type: just can't say no.

[Mikesul]

Why is this thread in news and rumors?

[Mccsiz]

I've used my 55-300 in higher iso modes with excellent results, but on this outing I knew deep shadows and/or lots of deep tree shade that tends to lean more blue in the evening would be a potential issue. That coupled with wanting to control depth of field closer to the F5.6 to 6.3 range (I shoot mostly in TAV mode allowing the ISO to float) when looking for s specific target (Wood Ducks) in late evening predicated bringing the 150-450 instead of the 55-300. Not too much luck with the Wood Ducks that night, but the beavers were a bonus.

Thanks for providing some details about your settings for the wood ducks. Are you trying to capture them in flight? That would be quite challenging in the early evening light. I would like to photograph owls and bats. Perhaps your settings will work.

Cheers,
Loyd

[mlt]

Thanks for providing some details about your settings for the wood ducks. Are you trying to capture them in flight? That would be quite challenging in the early evening light. I would like to photograph owls and bats. Perhaps your settings will work.

Cheers,
Loyd

Haven’t gotten a chance for them in flight. See them either on the water near rushes or on low branches next to the water.

[reh321]

Why is this thread in news and rumors?

One could also ask why it continues and continues
I guess it was news when it began six years ago - then it was disinterred and continues and continues.

[Mccsiz]

Haven’t gotten a chance for them in flight. See them either on the water near rushes or on low branches next to the water.

Do you have any advice for photographing songbirds with the 150-450? They are very quick. I would like to capture the clearest possible image.

Cheers,
Loyd

[Ishpuini]

One could also ask why it continues and continues

I guess it was news when it began six years ago - then it was disinterred and continues and continues.

Giveaways based on number of posts don't help either in quieting threads like this. ;-)

[reh321]

Giveaways based on number of posts don't help either in quieting threads like this. ;-)

A person could easily qualify for the ‘raffle’ by commenting on seven images a day - enough are being posted in PYP! each day that it could be done without ever going over the same ground. I think continuation of this thread is more likely a futile attempt by a few to convince whoever will listen that there is still a place for long-focal-length wide-aperture lenses like the lens this thread is about, regardless of what sales data shows.

[Mccsiz]

Love, love, love this lens. Handheld at 450mm on a K3. One of thousands I could post.

When you photograph birds, do you have fixed settings on one of your User Modes, or do you make adjustments on the fly? I am just learning the ropes, so any advice on using the 150-450 for bird photography will be appreciated.

Cheers,
Loyd

[RobG]

When you photograph birds, do you have fixed settings on one of your User Modes, or do you make adjustments on the fly? I am just learning the ropes, so any advice on using the 150-450 for bird photography will be appreciated.

On the K3i I have three user modes - birds, landscape and night. On the K3iii I'm going to end up with a lot more, because the settings for birds in flight will be different to birds which are not in flight. Most of the time using the K3i, I photographed wildlife in aperture priority and spot focus single autofocus. The only time I've found AFC useful on the K3i was with birds overhead against the sky. Even then, I found AFS more useful than AFC.

[Mccsiz]

On the K3i I have three user modes - birds, landscape and night. On the K3iii I'm going to end up with a lot more, because the settings for birds in flight will be different to birds which are not in flight. Most of the time using the K3i, I photographed wildlife in aperture priority and spot focus single autofocus. The only time I've found AFC useful on the K3i was with birds overhead against the sky. Even then, I found AFS more useful than AFC.

Hi Rob,

I'm trying to improve my photos of songbirds and other small birds that flit about. In some cases, I can sneak up to within 25 feet. Mostly, however, the small birds are farther away. My camera body is the K3 (I also have a K5). Any suggestions?

Cheers,
Loyd

[RobG]

I'm trying to improve my photos of songbirds and other small birds that flit about. In some cases, I can sneak up to within 25 feet. Mostly, however, the small birds are farther away. My camera body is the K3 (I also have a K5). Any suggestions?

It's going to be hard unless you can get closer. If you're shooting from a fixed location, a tripod will help to reduce motion blur. DXO Photolab works with the K3 (not yet with the K3iii) and has some excellent AI noise reduction on RAW. I find however that its JPEG engine tends to produce artifacts in subtle shades like sunsets. I mention it because it may help you use a higher ISO like 1600 to get a better shutter speed. The sort of settings I was using on the K3 was - spot focus AFS, centre weighted AE, aperture priority, auto ISO up to 1600, and I think you can also set the camera to bias for high shutter speeds. On APS-C, the DFA 150-450 is reasonably sharp wide open and gives really nice bokeh. Make sure that SR is on, of course.

The only other thing if you have enough light is to consider the HDDA 1.4x TC but honestly I don't use mine very much. It adds a little softness and creates a field of view which is very small. I am generally shooting hand held while I walk around rather than from a specific spot with a tripod. Maybe try camouflage clothes to see if you can get closer? It doesn't seem to help me much though!