Originally posted by normhead My DA* 60-260 is about 2, my Tamron 300 2.8 is about 6 pounds. My DA* 200 is only 1.5 but a little heavier with TC on it to give me a comparable focal length.
I was in varying light conditions. The first was 1600 ISO, I thought "I can live with that." I had no idea I'd be shooting at 6400 ISO. So, I'm not sure I was willing, tricked by light conditions would be more like it.
But all is well that ends well.
I've sometimes got a good shot at ISO 3200 on the K-3, but usually it's pretty ordinary. Maybe the difference is the light. In good-ish light 3200 is OK, allowing for narrower apertures and/or faster shutter speeds. But in poor light it seems better to drop the shutter speed and keep the ISO to 1600 or less. Is that your experience Norm?
This is an area where I'd be hoping for big improvements in the next APS-C flagship. Seems the K-P is already well on the way. High-ISO capability seems very important for APS-C because users want relatively compact, light-weight lens like the 55-300 PLM. With a max aperture of f6.3 at the long end, and typically wanting fasting shutter speeds for wildlife, better high ISO performance matters.