Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-27-2021, 08:51 AM - 1 Like   #241
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 346
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
There's a Pentax 210 to 630 ƒ/8 ( the 150-450 with the 1.4)
If people won't pay the price for that, they probably won't pay the price for a Pentax 150-600.
That's an APS-C only, f/8, poor IQ, high vignetting and slow focusing lens. Pretty far from even the worst/cheapest 150-600 available, while both much heavier and much more expensive...

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Way to many threads are devoted to the lost cause of cheap telephotos over 300mm.
Likely because "way too many" people would buy one, just look how Tamron & Sigma's 150-600 sell like hotcakes. But while I indeed see a lot of people asking for telephotos lenses, not so many are asking for cheap ones, nor for zooms.

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It's all about what Pentax should cater too. Right now they are on the premium quality trajectory. In few years they may try a new direction, who knows, but it's unlikely.

If the Pentax DSLR market starts expanding, we can reasonably expect some "market share of available newbies" type lenses. The odds of that right now are pretty slim.

With available bodies from other brands at $400 and under and readily available with people switching to mirrorless, I don't understand why people who want cheap haven't gone for it. When you can get a body and 150-600 for half the cost of the K-3iii, what's the downside?
Why is it so hard for you to understand that people may want lenses that do not interest you, especially when the lens in question is a best seller of other brands, with no alternative in the current lineup? I don't want a cheap telephoto either, but I'd see it as a welcome addition. Many people do wildlife only occasionally, not having this option is a real shame. We should all hope for Pentax to make them rather than advising every people who'd like lens X or Y to switch brand... There are still a few gaps to fill in the lineup, the cheap telephoto is one of them, among an ultra-wide (ideally with good coma performance for astrophoto) and a fast telephoto. Mostly all the rest is covered, often with several choices.

As for the downsides:
- you're comparing apples to oranges, there's a world between the IQ of a $400 body + Tamron 150-600 and a K3-III + a 150-600 equivalent. If you want an equivalent IQ you'll need to buy something like a Nikon D500. Pretty far from half the K3-III's cost...
- you'll either need to cary an additional body, or switch system altogether. First option is not practical at all, second option is super expensive. Selling Pentax gear is close to impossible (at least here in France), so switching system means rebuying everything (in my case, that's at least 8k€). No longer that cheap, right?
- many of us do not want to go mirrorless. Buying a reflex body in another brand than Pentax isn't very wise, there will be no successor. Mirrorless options are not cheap, at least for now.

11-27-2021, 09:42 AM   #242
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,128
QuoteOriginally posted by timautin Quote
Why is it so hard for you to understand that people may want lenses that do not interest you?
I could ask you the same question. I photograph birds only a few times a year. I cannot justify spending muiti-thousands on a K-3iii plus the lens a few of you seem to want, but I do justify the {around $1.5K I spent on} my KP plus "DA77-420mm PLM" lens.

I am sure Pentax justifies production of the DA 55-300mm PLM and the DA 1.4X TC; we shall see what other lenses follow.


11-27-2021, 10:08 AM - 3 Likes   #243
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 346
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I could ask you the same question. I photograph birds only a few times a year. I cannot justify spending muiti-thousands on a K-3iii plus the lens a few of you seem to want, but I do justify the {around $1.5K I spent on} my KP plus "DA77-420mm PLM" lens.
Sorry, I don't get your point? I never said anything against the 55-300, it's a great lens as well. If it suits your needs, all good, but if it doesn't suits the needs of others, they have the right. Just like they have the right to wish for lens X or Y having no alternative, to avoid having to switch to another system.
11-27-2021, 10:47 AM - 2 Likes   #244
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2019
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,976
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I could ask you the same question. I photograph birds only a few times a year. I cannot justify spending muiti-thousands on a K-3iii plus the lens a few of you seem to want, but I do justify the {around $1.5K I spent on} my KP plus "DA77-420mm PLM" lens.

I am sure Pentax justifies production of the DA 55-300mm PLM and the DA 1.4X TC; we shall see what other lenses follow.
The obvious difference, Reh, is that your option exists, so you get to be happy with it. The other option does not exist, so people who have their reasons for wanting it simply cannot be happy with it.

Additionally, both sample shots exemplify the main problem with using your combo for somewhat demanding applications (say, you want a nice print of a bird for your room). There is a murkiness to them, particularly in the second with the flock - not sure if it is the diffraction showing on a heavy crop or aggressive noise reduction at high ISO. This is very noticeable even below A4 size (which is how it displays on my computer).

11-27-2021, 05:35 PM   #245
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,128
QuoteOriginally posted by Serkevan Quote
The obvious difference, Reh, is that your option exists, so you get to be happy with it. The other option does not exist, so people who have their reasons for wanting it simply cannot be happy with it.

Additionally, both sample shots exemplify the main problem with using your combo for somewhat demanding applications (say, you want a nice print of a bird for your room). There is a murkiness to them, particularly in the second with the flock - not sure if it is the diffraction showing on a heavy crop or aggressive noise reduction at high ISO. This is very noticeable even below A4 size (which is how it displays on my computer).
Probably also the weather. It was, literally, a “dark and gloomy day. I felt the photo turned out well, considering what a lousy day it was.

added: I just checked my camera: with a shutter speed of 1/750 and aperture of 9.5, all the photos that day called for ISO 6400-12000.
My recollection is that I cropped each photo roughly 50% linearly.
Those are large birds, but they keep us about 200 feet away to avoid spooking them.

Last edited by reh321; 11-27-2021 at 05:45 PM.
11-27-2021, 06:31 PM   #246
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 346
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
My recollection is that I cropped each photo roughly 50% linearly.
Those are large birds, but they keep us about 200 feet away to avoid spooking them.
This (being too far and cropping) is where lies the IQ loss, and even a K1 + 150-450 would not do much better at this distance.

But if you're happy with this result, it's much better to stay at this distance rather than getting closer and spook them, as you did.

And if you want to improve the result, building a hide, getting a good book and be patient is the way to go before considering upgrading the gear . To shoot a bird of the size of a sparrow with a 300mm on an APSC body, you need to be at ~3m of it to get the best IQ. That's a distance most birds do not accept (in Europe, at least) if you're not it a hide.
11-27-2021, 08:14 PM - 3 Likes   #247
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 766
QuoteOriginally posted by timautin Quote
That's an APS-C only, f/8, poor IQ, high vignetting and slow focusing lens. Pretty far from even the worst/cheapest 150-600 available, while both much heavier and much more expensive...

Sorry, but when mounted on the K3-III, your description of the IQ, vignetting, and focus speed for the DFA150-450mm and 1.4X teleconverter compared to a cheap 150-600 is just wrong. However, if Pentax provided a lens with 600mm of reach without the teleconverter, I would be very interested in that lens.

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3 Mark III  Photo 
11-27-2021, 08:31 PM   #248
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,128
QuoteOriginally posted by timautin Quote
This (being too far and cropping) is where lies the IQ loss, and even a K1 + 150-450 would not do much better at this distance.

But if you're happy with this result, it's much better to stay at this distance rather than getting closer and spook them, as you did.

And if you want to improve the result, building a hide, getting a good book and be patient is the way to go before considering upgrading the gear . To shoot a bird of the size of a sparrow with a 300mm on an APSC body, you need to be at ~3m of it to get the best IQ. That's a distance most birds do not accept (in Europe, at least) if you're not it a hide.
I took that picture at a state-run 'wildlife refuge' where people go every Spring and Fall to see migrating cranes.
The first time we went, in 1992, the Whooping Cranes were a novelty. They were on the edge of extinction, so Feds had placed Whooping Crane eggs in the nests of Sandhill Cranes.
The dumb birds raised all the young the same, and over time a new flock of Whooping Cranes was formed.
Now, neither species is exactly special, but both state and federal governments still watch over them all.
I guess I should have also recorded the signage. By order of the state government, this observation post - a mile walk from the parking lot - is as close as we are allowed to come to them.
Going any closer would be in violation of both state and federal statute, so you can be certain that none of us was going any further, and at my age, I wouldn't want to lug a heavier kit.
11-28-2021, 03:47 AM - 1 Like   #249
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
I think the point is that people who do a lot of wildlife photography want longer lenses -- ones that go to 600mm, if possible. Putting teleconverters on lenses that are f6.3 (the DA 55-300 PLM) or f5.6 (150-450) produces serious limitations with regard to the quality of the photos. You are just going to end up pushing you iso up pretty high and having softening due to the optics being pushed too hard. Teleconverters work better with high quality lenses with faster apertures.

Unfortunately, I doubt Pentax will release a 150-650 lens, unless they get Tamron to rebadge their lens for them. Maybe that would be an option, although maybe it would drive down sales of their own DFA 150-450. They certainly could make money on a Tamron with a 1600 dollar price and that would probably satisfy some people (although many would complain that it is more expensive than the Tamron in other mounts).
11-28-2021, 07:45 AM   #250
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 346
QuoteOriginally posted by tmlawes Quote
Sorry, but when mounted on the K3-III, your description of the IQ, vignetting, and focus speed for the DFA150-450mm and 1.4X teleconverter compared to a cheap 150-600 is just wrong. However, if Pentax provided a lens with 600mm of reach without the teleconverter, I would be very interested in that lens.
Well I have the K3 (first of the name), 150-450 and DA x1.4. The quality I get with this setup is I think similar to the picture you posted, but I'm unable to evaluate the IQ on a 900*720 picture. My results were not, in my opinion, worth a 2500€ lens, so I after a few weeks of trying it and being disappointed, I removed the TC and never used it again. Same on my DA* 300. The IQ loss is extremely close than when cropping, but when cropping you do not slow down your AF, you still have a F/5.6 lens, you don't carry the (small) extra weight, and you spare 400$ (well in my case I didn't since I didn't succeed to sell it, but you get the point ^^).

I uploaded 4 full res samples here, comparing 2 shots taken using the K5 + DA* 300 + TC vs 2 shots taken using the K3 + 150-450. I selected shots very representative of the IQ I get with both combos. To compensate the sensor resolution advantage of the 150-450 (mounted on the K3) I selected shots where the lightning conditions were unfavorable for the zoom (I don't think I've ever used the TC on the K3, nor the 150-450 on the K5).

I think the comparisons are fair, yet in both cases the 150-450 is way ahead the 300 + TC. And the 300 being very slightly sharper, and much faster (f/4 vs 5.6), than the 150-450, comparing the 150-450 vs itself + the TC is much worse (I didn't find a shot using this combo in my photos, I don't think I ever kept a single one).

If you are happy with the results you get, all good. I wasn't with my TC. Maybe your copy is better than mine. Anyway I've now switched to the K1, so the TC is no longer an option. If Pentax releases a FF TC, I don't think I'll be in the game unless I can rent it for long enough. But I don't expect to be happy with an f/8 lens anyway.

QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I took that picture at a state-run 'wildlife refuge' where people go every Spring and Fall to see migrating cranes.
The first time we went, in 1992, the Whooping Cranes were a novelty. They were on the edge of extinction, so Feds had placed Whooping Crane eggs in the nests of Sandhill Cranes.
The dumb birds raised all the young the same, and over time a new flock of Whooping Cranes was formed.
Now, neither species is exactly special, but both state and federal governments still watch over them all.
I guess I should have also recorded the signage. By order of the state government, this observation post - a mile walk from the parking lot - is as close as we are allowed to come to them.
Going any closer would be in violation of both state and federal statute, so you can be certain that none of us was going any further, and at my age, I wouldn't want to lug a heavier kit.
In this case, there's not much more to do than what you did
I added in the zip above a photo taken ages ago using my K10d + Sigma 70-300. Both your KP and 55-300 are much better, so that's at least the IQ you can get without spending a penny, just by getting close enough.

QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I think the point is that people who do a lot of wildlife photography want longer lenses -- ones that go to 600mm, if possible. Putting teleconverters on lenses that are f6.3 (the DA 55-300 PLM) or f5.6 (150-450) produces serious limitations with regard to the quality of the photos. You are just going to end up pushing you iso up pretty high and having softening due to the optics being pushed too hard. Teleconverters work better with high quality lenses with faster apertures.
+1. There's no long f/2.8 lens in the current lineup that would, maybe, be well suited for TC use, and the current TC is not usable on the K1s.

Last edited by timautin; 11-28-2021 at 09:02 AM.
11-28-2021, 07:48 AM - 5 Likes   #251
Forum Member
Slavek's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 66
QuoteOriginally posted by timautin Quote
The IQ of the 150-450 is much, much better than DA* 300 + DA 1.4, and you get a bit more reach. On the downside it's heavier and a bit more expensive, but totally worth it
QuoteOriginally posted by Mikesul Quote
I agree with timautin. I tried to substitute the 300 + 1.4 a few years ago but it was clearly inferior to the 150-450 in both speed and iq.
Yes just a little bit more reach. But still not enough. I am not sure whether the IQ if 300+1.4 is significantly worse than 150-450. The images from the 150-450 did not sell the lens for me. Bokeh is definitely better for DA*300. And sharpness? DA*300 is very sharp lens with outstanding IQ from wide-open – one of Pentax’s best in my opinion. The DA 1.4 TC is not worsening IQ of any of my lenses (at least those I was trying to attach to it like DA*300, 100 Macro, FA77 etc.) at least not in APSC image circle (an APSC bodies). Yes, outside that circle the IQ is dropping with heavy vignetting in corners. But that does not bother me with DA*300 as the reach of 420 mm is not enough even from the hide. Which means that I count on cropping in PP anyway. Usually at least to the APSC-size crop from K-1 photos.

These are taken this spring with K-1 + DA*300 + DA 1.4 TC and the IQ is great (they are all cropped to some extent)







You do not need long lens to get closer to the animals - for great shots you need to be physically close anyway. The turbulences in the atmosphere due to differences in temperature will degrade the IQ significantly with increasing distance between you and the object. So for wild animals you need to hide yourself and wait for them to get closer. But with small animals you need the long lenses even when they are close - simply because they are tiny :-)

QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I think the point is that people who do a lot of wildlife photography want longer lenses -- ones that go to 600mm, if possible. Putting teleconverters on lenses that are f6.3 (the DA 55-300 PLM) or f5.6 (150-450) produces serious limitations with regard to the quality of the photos. You are just going to end up pushing you iso up pretty high and having softening due to the optics being pushed too hard. Teleconverters work better with high quality lenses with faster apertures.

Unfortunately, I doubt Pentax will release a 150-650 lens, unless they get Tamron to rebadge their lens for them. Maybe that would be an option, although maybe it would drive down sales of their own DFA 150-450. They certainly could make money on a Tamron with a 1600 dollar price and that would probably satisfy some people (although many would complain that it is more expensive than the Tamron in other mounts).
Exactly. TC are good but they won't save the day. The best shots of wildlife are not taken during high noon. I am hoping for rebadging Tamron 150-600 for a long time. They made 70-210 even though they have their genuine 70-200, anyway. And it seems they do not care about it. 150-450 is out long enough for most of the people to buy it if they wanted it. Now they can release longer consumer-oriented 150-600 lens. Yes, it will be much more expensive than original Tamron even if its rebadged. But that is the same for e.g. 15-30 and people are buying the lens...
11-28-2021, 08:31 AM - 3 Likes   #252
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 346
QuoteOriginally posted by Slavek Quote
The images from the 150-450 did not sell the lens for me. Bokeh is definitely better for DA*300. And sharpness?
Sharpness wise, I've spent a lot of time comparing the 2, and despite being nitpicky, I'm unable to tell which lens took which shot, even when looking at 100% on a 4K monitor. The 300 may be overall very slightly sharper, but not always, and never by a noticeable margin. Yet the 150-450 is much more versatile. I'll never try to sell the 300 as I love it, but I never used it since I bought the 150-450.

Now it looks like it's bokeh o' clock :





























I'm satisfied with it.

QuoteOriginally posted by Slavek Quote
These are taken this spring with K-1 + DA*300 + DA 1.4 TC and the IQ is great (they are all cropped to some extent)
Yes, that's I think the same IQ I get. I'd say it's good, but not great. It's I think much better to spend 4000€/$ for the K1 + 150-450 than 3500€/$ for K1 + DA*300 + TC.

QuoteOriginally posted by Slavek Quote
Exactly. TC are good but they won't save the day. The best shots of wildlife are not taken during high noon.
Exactly. An f/8 lens is useless in many situations. f/5.6 is already regularly limiting, I'm glad the 150-450 is f/4.5 until 270 mm.

QuoteOriginally posted by Slavek Quote
I am hoping for rebadging Tamron 150-600 for a long time. They made 70-210 even though they have their genuine 70-200, anyway. And it seems they do not care about it. 150-450 is out long enough for most of the people to buy it if they wanted it. Now they can release longer consumer-oriented 150-600 lens. Yes, it will be much more expensive than original Tamron even if its rebadged. But that is the same for e.g. 15-30 and people are buying the lens...
+1, people who wanted and could afford the 150-450 have likely already bought it anyway. Seeing the latest patents, it seems like they are at least thinking of doing their own rather than a rebadge (if we're very lucky, they'll do both, but I doubt it).
11-28-2021, 08:35 AM - 1 Like   #253
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2020
Posts: 535
you guys are making me have wet dreams just thinking about this hahah
11-28-2021, 11:10 AM   #254
Forum Member
Slavek's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 66
QuoteOriginally posted by timautin Quote
Yes, that's I think the same IQ I get. I'd say it's good, but not great. It's I think much better to spend 4000€/$ for the K1 + 150-450 than 3500€/$ for K1 + DA*300 + TC.

+1, people who wanted and could afford the 150-450 have likely already bought it anyway. Seeing the latest patents, it seems like they are at least thinking of doing their own rather than a rebadge (if we're very lucky, they'll do both, but I doubt it).
DA*300 was second lens I bought after K-7+kit lens and 35 Macro Ltd - it never let me down since then :-) I also purchased DA 1.4 TC just as it was released. So I own both of them quite some time. For me, its spending more than 2400 USD for a 150-450 with no significant benefit. If I buy 150-450, I buy it for the long end. 420 vs 450 is not a big deal. (Same for 150-600 - I do not need versatility of zoom lens I need the lens not for 400 mm, not for 500 mm but for the 600 .)

Difference in IQ is most likely not that large. It is possible that the images I have seen throughout the tests are affected by compression and blurred by slight movement. So that might be the reason why test shots were never convincing enough to buy the lens. I found out, that if I want sharp images of e.g. birds with K-1 on 420 mm on a tripod during twilight, I need not only to switch off SR and use remote, but I need to switch on electronic shutter and shoot in LV. Without that it was always slightly unsharp when viewed maximally enlarged
11-28-2021, 02:48 PM   #255
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 346
QuoteOriginally posted by dneira29 Quote
you guys are making me have wet dreams just thinking about this hahah


QuoteOriginally posted by Slavek Quote
Difference in IQ is most likely not that large. It is possible that the images I have seen throughout the tests are affected by compression and blurred by slight movement. So that might be the reason why test shots were never convincing enough to buy the lens.
Yes, the difference is not visible a compressed image. Did you download my full res samples? If you're okay with that IQ loss, then indeed, it's not worth spending $2000+ for the zoom. Otherwise... What are you waiting for ??
As a side note, before I purchased the 150-450 I thought that, like you, I didn't need the ability to unzoom. The DFA has changed my mind since then, especially since I starting to shoot more mammals than birds. A deer is pretty often too close even at 300.

QuoteOriginally posted by Slavek Quote
I found out, that if I want sharp images of e.g. birds with K-1 on 420 mm on a tripod during twilight, I need not only to switch off SR and use remote, but I need to switch on electronic shutter and shoot in LV. Without that it was always slightly unsharp when viewed maximally enlarged
Thanks for the tip, I may give it a try with the electronic shutter. But to do so you need to disable the burst, that's not always an option. I would have been mad to miss the 1st photo of my previous post because I disabled burst shoot in order to test ES to very slightly improve the boring 2nd shot
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!
560mm, 600mm, camera, da, da 55-300 plm, da560, diameter, front, image, kg, length, lens, lenses, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, plm, post, pound, price, range, shutter, subject, sync, telephoto lens design, tripod, weight
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New half mirror OVF&EVF Hybrid Viewfinder patent OoKU Pentax News and Rumors 45 01-08-2021 12:43 PM
Is the D FA* 50/1.4 a Pentax/ Ricoh design or a Tokina design? Wheatfield Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 60 06-28-2020 03:15 PM
ricoh files patent on 2 Q lens designs and on 4/3 design! shaolen Pentax News and Rumors 20 08-21-2014 12:03 AM
Fuji files a new patent for sensor design...... Eric Auer Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 1 01-30-2014 03:43 AM
FA Limited lens series won the 2010 Good Design Long Life Design Award Patriot Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 26 11-29-2010 06:16 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:31 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