[bertwert]

So what have we learned in 31 pages? I learned how some people come in here just to get everyone riled up:

1. Make up some bogus specifications about the new camera
2. Complain loudly about the fake specification you just made up: "why would anyone buy this camera??????"
3. Sit down and watch.

It's called "trolling" and it's as old as the internet...

It is a bit fun in a way...

[normhead]

It is a bit fun in a way...

Fun until newbs who have no idea start quoting it.

Some of us are here for a bit more than our own entertainment.

Just a teeny tiny bit more, granted.

[bertwert]

Use the lens, then decide.

K-3 and DA 55-300 PLM....

Spring has sprung.









I find uses for it, especially as a walk around lens. Just another kick ass lens Pentax put out, lighter and better than the competition, that users of other systems will never appreciate because of their preconceptions and lack of willingness to give it a shot. Mostly of those because they've never seen a telephoto this small this good.

The fact that you think you couldn't find uses for it shows the limitations of your perspective and lack willingness to give anything Pentax a chance. The images posted on the forum convinced me to give this lens a chance. I would never have bought it's predesser, which IMHO was about on par with the offerings from other brands. I even take it out to the blind and put it on a small table. With the Tarmo 300 2.8 and 1.7x adaptor on the K-3 I put the and put the DA 55-300 PLM on the K-1 for birds that are too big and too close for 500mm, but you won't like the results, they aren't good enough for you.

Just posting the image so others won't be unduly biased by your prejudice.


Some people want you to know, this image isn't good enough for them...
Then post images of their own that in their own minds are better, further confusing the conversation.

But their photo objectives appear to mean it has to have Nikon in the exif, and it doesn't matter how good other gear is, they doesn't need to look at it to evaluate it. It's just not what the want, and they'll spend lots of time saying that.

The DA 55-300 is an ƒ8 and be there lens, and the images it gets with it are the best possible, because the other lens I brought with me was to big, to cumbersome and too bulky to be of use in the moment the image was taken. What might be possible with other gear in other situations is irrelevant. And it's been rated best in class, miles ahead of everyone else's 70-300 type offerings.

But if you buy one, be warned, some Nikon users don't like it.
They've never held it, they've never used it, they've never had anything like it, but they don't like it, and they need to let you know that.

All you have to do to believe in your brand is ignore what everyone else is doing.

In this case, I suspect he doesn't believe what the DA 5-300 can do, because it's not available on Nikon mount. A 300mm lens that works well with a TC in good light and weighs 442 grams and can be found for less than $500, and fits in the small detachable side pocket of a lens holster. How could something be useful to anyone if it doesn't have the Nikon label on it?

I've used big Sigma 120-400 type lenses, I use several 2.8 telephotos I have a DA*60-250 that in many ways runs circles around offerings from other companies, and I can find a use for this lens... but users of other brands can't ... pity.

When are all those other brands going to fill out their line ups with a less than a pound 300mm telephoto zoom that can perform on a full frame? And can be purchased new for $400 from time to time?

No wonder they're losing money. They are doomed.

That's not the point Norm... the whole point of this sub-argument (which is quite unrelated to the K-new...) is that folks were saying that the 55-300 PLM and a TC is all anyone needs, and they can shoot at ISO 25600 all the time.

First up, no one is saying the 55-300 PLM isn't a fine lens, especially for the price... a big part is that f/9.5 wide open is too slow for a lot of shooting. You prove that yourself having the 300/2.8...

[bertwert]

Fun until newbs who have no idea start quoting it.

Some of us are here for a bit more than our own entertainment.

Just a teeny tiny bit more, granted.

Well, I also like to win arguments...

And I've sort off started/continued one with you... now how will that go...?

[Larrymc]

I would never buy a camera with phrase detection ;-)

That all depends upon which Phrase you need detecting, I hear that feature will be added with the O-Me VRI (voice recognition) module at a later date or possibly in the soon to come K-New-Too-MirrorlessDSLR camera.

[reh321]

That's not the point Norm... the whole point of this sub-argument (which is quite unrelated to the K-new...) is that folks were saying that the 55-300 PLM and a TC is all anyone needs, and they can shoot at ISO 25600 all the time.

First up, no one is saying the 55-300 PLM isn't a fine lens, especially for the price... a big part is that f/9.5 wide open is too slow for a lot of shooting. You prove that yourself having the 300/2.8...

I'm sorry you misunderstood - or I mis-spoke.

The 55-300 PLM lens is fine for many of us - others who expect more may purchase more, but higher ISO capability brings more capability to those of us who don't have {or don't choose} to spend that much or carry that much. And I seldom shoot over 9000, but it is nice to know it is there if I need it.

[ThorSanchez]

So what have we learned in 31 pages? I learned how some people come in here just to get everyone riled up:

1. Make up some bogus specifications about the new camera
2. Complain loudly about the fake specification you just made up: "why would anyone buy this camera??????"
3. Sit down and watch.

It's called "trolling" and it's as old as the internet...

What I saw was:

1. Observe things about the K-new based on the new video.
2. Speculate about the feature set based on these observations, which Pentax clearly wants us to do given how they're intentionally obscuring key details.
3. Discuss whether this implied feature set makes the new camera a worthwhile purchase.
4. Negative reactions from people who don't like speculative threads or less than positive comments in general.


That's not trolling, it's having a conversation.

[bertwert]

What I saw was:

1. Observe things about the K-new based on the new video.
2. Speculate about the feature set based on these observations, which Pentax clearly wants us to do given how they're intentionally obscuring key details.
3. Discuss whether this implied feature set makes the new camera a worthwhile purchase.
4. Negative reactions from people who don't like speculative threads or less than positive comments in general.


That's not trolling, it's having a conversation.

And...

5. Flippy screen! No. What if... flippy screen! No. So it must be flippy screen! No.

[bertwert]

I'm sorry you misunderstood - or I mis-spoke.

The 55-300 PLM lens is fine for many of us - others who expect more may purchase more, but higher ISO capability brings more capability to those of us who don't have {or don't choose} to spend that much or carry that much. And I seldom shoot over 9000, but it is nice to know it is there if I need it.

I, and it looks like others, interpreted it as 'there is no use for fast tele lenses' to which we disagreed.

The 55-300 PLM and modern high ISO capabilities is an excellent solution for those of us with lower budgets (including myself - though I opted for older MF glass for reach).

[gatorguy]

I, and it looks like others, interpreted it as 'there is no use for fast tele lenses' to which we disagreed.

The 55-300 PLM and modern high ISO capabilities is an excellent solution for those of us with lower budgets (including myself - though I opted for older MF glass for reach).

Finally! That was the point in the first place.

[reh321]

I, and it looks like others, interpreted it as 'there is no use for fast tele lenses' to which we disagreed.

The 55-300 PLM and modern high ISO capabilities is an excellent solution for those of us with lower budgets (including myself - though I opted for older MF glass for reach).

I am 72. Even when I was younger, my wife and I would spend most of a day walking and looking for small birds. I remember a time in 2014 - almost exactly six years ago - when we were at Point Pelee NP {Canada) when an older man {about my age} walked from the shuttle dragging a wooden tripod {and presumably a camera} to the beach and took a few pictures, then dragged the tripod back to the shuttle. I hope those were really great pictures; my wife and I spent the entire {US} Memorial Day weekend wandering around the park. I am not interested in how many fleas a squirrel has or to see all the vanes of a bird's feathers - I don't see them when I take the picture, so I certainly don't expect to see them when I get home - but I do want to see when I get home what I saw in the field. The KP with the 77-420 PLM lens finally gives that opportunity to me. I could make similar comments about sports - how I struggled when our daughter played junior and senior high basketball with a 300mm lens and asa 200 film, and how much modern technology could improve upon that. For those of us who live for reasons other than photography, who spend on things other than $$$$ cameras and $$$$ lenses, modern technology is finally delivering so much good - and reliable AF and graceful modern ISO values are much of that.

[BruceBanner]

Had a friend this year want to get into photography, bird shooting specifically. Hand on heart I could not recommend Pentax. He started with Canon (got a cheap gumtree deal), used that for a few months and upgraded to a Nikon, could not be happier. D500 + 150-600 (no tripod or monopod yet), I think he's doing fantastic for his first year of shooting (first year of ever owning a camera, period!);



His stream;

Jake Harfield | Flickr

Before he went Canikon, we talked about Pentax, we looked at lens options and prices and even the upcoming K-new. He saw my 55-300PLM, he loved the results I was getting with it (both FF and Crop), but he also knew that he would eventually need a lot more than that. So there we have it, a young fella wanting to get into birding, went off and did his research and knew that Pentax was not the wisest brand to settle on for this specific genre, I really hope the K-new can change all that and pull more people like Jake towards becoming a Pentaxian.

Now... had he mentioned 'Landscape' as his genre of interest I would have influenced him heavily, you cannot look past a KP+DA* 11-18 or a K-1+15-30 without serious consideration compared to the rest of the competition.

[Parallax]

Especially since so many said they wanted a K-1 for the larger viewfinder. Well, now the larger viewfinder is also on APS-c.

Norm.
Norm, Norm, Norm.
I thought you were more in tuned than that.
The reason for the full frame hooplah is for the shallow DOF.
It's so people can take those coveted only-one-eye-in-focus portraits.
.........and you call yourself a photographer.
Sheeesh!

[BROO]

They simply hadn't quite made their minds up about a few things. Or... they're messing with us cuz its great passive marketing and hype aahahha

I think this camera might herald a step forward in video capabilities for Pentax. With the high likelihood the rumored Sony sensor will deliver 4K. I think it is possible that IBIS for video will be introduced with the ability to easily turn it off using the SR button ( in order to reduce audible noise) Plus the PLM motor, KAF4 (step less aperture) lenses ranging from 16-300mm.

[VoiceOfReason]

I'd like super high ISO (TBH wouldn't actually use above 1600 most likely), super high dynamic range, and a flippy screen. I'd be using it mainly for astrophotography.