[oscaletrains]

I think the 50d was a mistype and the op meant 5d? Anyway, for distance use I would grab a brand new old stock Canon 7d and grip for about $600 and use its crop factor to your advantage with a nice Canon 100-400 white lens. No use spending more for a 5d really...spend it on the lens.

[texandrews]

The Canon model you are considering is ok---I have used them at work. They haven't impressed me that much, except for the video UI. They aren't bad cameras, to be sure, but I think overall the advantages of being in one ecosystem far outweigh the modest benefits you may gain in AF---I think all of that is overblown. What I think is true is that the Pentax bodies need the right mode to be set up, while the Canon's come that way OOB. Personally, I found the Canon's hunted more in low light (shooting in lower light levels in a museum).

No question the K1 series sensors are better.

I am shooting a 645Z and an upgraded K1. I was straddling Pentax with the 645Z and Sony with an A7R for a while until the K1 came out, and then traded the A7R in. I loved the A7R, but I haven't looked back at all.

[Sandy Hancock]

The wet camera and lens.... you really do not have a problem with it?

I don't go out of my way to abuse my gear, but when you're switching quickly between two bodies in a zodiac during an Antarctic blizzard, what can you do?

And between the Kp and the K3 II, why not the latter? Going by specs, the K3 II looks solid. What is it about the KP that everyone seems to like so much?

The K-3 is an excellent camera, and the bigger buffer is compelling for action shooting. My brother used my old K-3 in Africa a year or so ago: pictures HERE if you're interested.

The image quality is definitely better with the KP though, especially if you need to push the ISO with a big lens stopped down a little. Add the optional battery grip for better battery life and greatly improved ergonomics with long lenses.

[clackers]

Hi,

How do I check it? Can you pls send a link?

Wildlife in the Mara is sometimes pretty close. People say the 70-200 is for such moments. Then again, many a times, the action is far away and you need that long long lens (if you spot that action, that is :-)

Yeah, it's here, mate. The signal to noise ratio of advice on the Internet is very, very poor, I'm afraid. I always disregard the opinions of people who don't actually shoot action or wildlife. Try here with fellow Pentaxians who actually understand the system:


300mm plus Lens Club: discuss your long lenses - PentaxForums.com

[clackers]

Can I just say, too, there are some people in this thread merely parroting other's opinions about the performance of Pentax autofocus about other brands. The point about the Cameraville video posted above is that there's a lot of crap out there!

Here is objective data, prepare to be surprised …

[tduell]

Keep in mind that with Pentax 150-450mm and 1.4x TC you may loose the af. There are cameras with af points sensitive to f8 that can also track moving subjects, but those cameras are expensive.

I shoot birds with the K-3II and K-1 with the DFA 150-450 and the 1.4xTC, and rarely have any serious problems with AF.
The light levels need to be really low before AF gets a bit slower to lock on.

Cheers,
Terry

[leonine]

I think the 50d was a mistype and the op meant 5d? Anyway, for distance use I would grab a brand new old stock Canon 7d and grip for about $600 and use its crop factor to your advantage with a nice Canon 100-400 white lens. No use spending more for a 5d really...spend it on the lens.

Thank you. I meant 50D when I said that I owned 50D already. My original question was whether I should buy 5D with 100-400 or K-1 with 150-450 for my wildlife photography needs

The K-1, K-3 & KP in that order seem to be winning as of now

I am just researching on high ISO performance of the Canon 50D. As of now, the feedback is not encouraging. But if the camera holds ok to even ISO 400, I might still be tempted to use it with the 100-400 with 1.4X TC or the Tamron 150-600.

I think in decent light say 2 hours after sunrise and 1 hour before sunset, I should be able to shoot at 1/1000 sec and f/8 at ISO setting of 400. I hope I am right.

---------- Post added 08-02-19 at 12:30 AM ----------

The Canon model you are considering is ok---I have used them at work. They haven't impressed me that much, except for the video UI. They aren't bad cameras, to be sure, but I think overall the advantages of being in one ecosystem far outweigh the modest benefits you may gain in AF---I think all of that is overblown. What I think is true is that the Pentax bodies need the right mode to be set up, while the Canon's come that way OOB. Personally, I found the Canon's hunted more in low light (shooting in lower light levels in a museum).

No question the K1 series sensors are better.

I am shooting a 645Z and an upgraded K1. I was straddling Pentax with the 645Z and Sony with an A7R for a while until the K1 came out, and then traded the A7R in. I loved the A7R, but I haven't looked back at all.

Thank you @texandrews

---------- Post added 08-02-19 at 12:32 AM ----------

I don't go out of my way to abuse my gear, but when you're switching quickly between two bodies in a zodiac during an Antarctic blizzard, what can you do?



The K-3 is an excellent camera, and the bigger buffer is compelling for action shooting. My brother used my old K-3 in Africa a year or so ago: pictures HERE if you're interested.

The image quality is definitely better with the KP though, especially if you need to push the ISO with a big lens stopped down a little. Add the optional battery grip for better battery life and greatly improved ergonomics with long lenses.

Thank you Sandy

---------- Post added 08-02-19 at 12:35 AM ----------

Can I just say, too, there are some people in this thread merely parroting other's opinions about the performance of Pentax autofocus about other brands. The point about the Cameraville video posted above is that there's a lot of crap out there!

Here is objective data, prepare to be surprised …

Thanks mate for the "300mm Plus Club" link. Looks interesting.

Can you pls interpret the table you have inserted in your post? What is the first column? I am unable to correlate.

---------- Post added 08-02-19 at 12:37 AM ----------

I shoot birds with the K-3II and K-1 with the DFA 150-450 and the 1.4xTC, and rarely have any serious problems with AF.
The light levels need to be really low before AF gets a bit slower to lock on.

Cheers,
Terry

Thank you Terry

---

Last edited by leonine; 08-02-2019 at 08:05 AM.

[clackers]

So, the Leica, Pentax and Nikon were able to take fourteen pictures in AF-C while a controlled target moved at walking pace towards the camera, the others less, and the percentage number is how sharp each pic in the sequence compared to a reference still shot.

[leonine]

So, the Leica, Pentax and Nikon were able to take fourteen pictures in AF-C while a controlled target moved at walking pace towards the camera, the others less, and the percentage number is how sharp each pic in the sequence compared to a reference still shot.

Thanks mate. You nailed it.

[normhead]

Shooting with Canon, Nikon and Sony shooters, I just don't find myself at a disadvantage for wildlife. Maybe I am, who knows, but I know aI get images the same as they do and most of the time the limitation for my camera is me. I have never once come back from a shooting session and said "I need one of those cameras."





People who read too much, and don't get out much drink the marketing cool aid and proclaim the wonders of everyone else's AF. And for a few BiF shooters they may actually be true. and as far as I can tell only wedding shooters like eye tracking, as it requires pre-shoot set up. The exaggerated claims of certain web sites don't apply very often.

[savoche]

So whatever I could do with the 50D, it would be in broad daylight as the lens would be stopped down to f/8 or so for decent results and that would give a shutter of about 1/500 at base ISO. But broad daylight is also the time by which most mammals are lazy. They get into action mostly at times when the daylight isn't broad.

You also will not get your best images in broad daylight. Not only because the predators will tend to be asleep in the shade, but also because the light will be harsh. My top tip is to get up early, leave camp as early as they will allow you to. A lot of my best sightings have been in that first hour after sunrise. Yes, you might have to get up at 5, but you don't want to miss the best part of the day.

Just around sunset can be good too, but in most parks you have to be back in camp before sunset - which means you will have to leave that pack of lions behind just as they are getting ready to move! I believe night drives are not allowed in the Mara - at least it wasn't. Some parks and reserves in Southern Africa do allow it, as do most private concessions.

Anyway, don't be surprised if you have to raise your ISO to 6,400 (or above) for some of those early morning/late afternoon shots. With long lenses and animals on the move you will want to keep your shutter speed up.

[normhead]

You also will not get your best images in broad daylight. Not only because the predators will tend to be asleep in the shade, but also because the light will be harsh. My top tip is to get up early, leave camp as early as they will allow you to. A lot of my best sightings have been in that first hour after sunrise. Yes, you might have to get up at 5, but you don't want to miss the best part of the day.

Just around sunset can be good too, but in most parks you have to be back in camp before sunset - which means you will have to leave that pack of lions behind just as they are getting ready to move! I believe night drives are not allowed in the Mara - at least it wasn't. Some parks and reserves in Southern Africa do allow it, as do most private concessions.

Anyway, don't be surprised if you have to raise your ISO to 6,400 (or above) for some of those early morning/late afternoon shots. With long lenses and animals on the move you will want to keep your shutter speed up.

A Tammy or Sigma 300 2.8 is a wonderful thing. With the 1.4 TC in your pocket giving you extra length if you need it, ( 420 ƒ4, 630mm ƒ4 equivalent on FF ) you can do almost anything. But honestly, for my wildlife shooting, I've done a lot with the DA* 60-250, also with the 1.4 TC in my pocket or on the camera. I even have some images taken with my DA 18-135.


DA* 60-250 notice, this is shot at 88mm.


K-3 and Tamron 300 2.8 with 1.7x AF adapter. 520mm ƒ4.5


DA* 200 2.8


ƒ2.8 - ƒ4 definitely have their advantages.

And claiming Pentax AF won't be up for the job is nonsense.


Above: One rare moment with a moving target, three shots, two keepers, nailed it. With "slow Pentax AF and a slow focussing DA*60-250.

There is a huge amount of BS on the internet. The funny thing is, it doesn't matter how many times you prove people wrong, they just keep repeating the nonsense.

Or as Bart Simpson would say "Eat my shorts."


It may well be, more expensive cameras may be better, for some purposes. The chance that you actually will encounter one of those events that requires better than Pentax AF is a lot less likely than some people make out. But if you're interested in spending 5x as much money for the 5% pentax can't handle that's probably about $2000 for each percentage increase (because your not getting 100% with any system,) go for it. It's your money.

Buying a better system with more AF points etc can be a thing. Saying you have to go that route is nonsense.

[leonine]

You also will not get your best images in broad daylight. Not only because the predators will tend to be asleep in the shade, but also because the light will be harsh. My top tip is to get up early, leave camp as early as they will allow you to. A lot of my best sightings have been in that first hour after sunrise. Yes, you might have to get up at 5, but you don't want to miss the best part of the day.

Just around sunset can be good too, but in most parks you have to be back in camp before sunset - which means you will have to leave that pack of lions behind just as they are getting ready to move! I believe night drives are not allowed in the Mara - at least it wasn't. Some parks and reserves in Southern Africa do allow it, as do most private concessions.

Anyway, don't be surprised if you have to raise your ISO to 6,400 (or above) for some of those early morning/late afternoon shots. With long lenses and animals on the move you will want to keep your shutter speed up.

Thank you @savoche for your important tips.

In effect, if I need to factor in making images at ISO 6400, for the times when the animals are active in low light, is more likely, that rules out the poor old Canon 50D. It just can't manage beyond 400 ISO as i am learning. Despite the age, it has other good things about it like a good frame rate etc. In broad daylight, it might still save the day.

It looks like i should forget about the 50D. Maybe i could give it to my son to start learning photography.

---------- Post added 08-02-19 at 08:48 AM ----------

A Tammy or Sigma 300 2.8 is a wonderful thing. With the 1.4 TC in your pocket giving you extra length if you need it, ( 420 ƒ4, 630mm ƒ4 equivalent on FF ) you can do almost anything. But honestly, for my wildlife shooting, I've done a lot with the DA* 60-250, also with the 1.4 TC in my pocket or on the camera. I even have some images taken with my DA 18-135.


DA* 60-250 notice, this is shot at 88mm.


K-3 and Tamron 300 2.8 with 1.7x AF adapter. 520mm ƒ4.5


DA* 200 2.8


ƒ2.8 - ƒ4 definitely have their advantages.

And claiming Pentax AF won't be up for the job is nonsense.


Above: One rare moment with a moving target, three shots, two keepers, nailed it. With "slow Pentax AF and a slow focussing DA*60-250.

There is a huge amount of BS on the internet. The funny thing is, it doesn't matter who many times you prove people wrong, they just keep repeating the nonsense.

Or as Bart Simpson would say "Eat my shorts."


It may well be, more expensive cameras may be better, for some purposes. The chance that you actually will encounter one of those events that requires better than Pentax AF is a lot less likely than some people make out. But if you're interested in spending 5x as much money for the 5% pentax can't handle that's probably about $2000 for each percentage increase (because your not getting 100% with any system,) go for it. It's your money.

Buying a better system with more AF points etc can be a thing. Saying you have to go that route is nonsense.

Thank you @normhead for the detailed post. And for sharing such wonderful pictures.

I agree with you completely. The limitation is the man behind the camera in most circumstances. Second, you can't have it all (even if you have all the money) in any camera system. Third, less is more at times. Fourth, beyond all the noise, Pentax AF is good enough for me. Fifth, I am just not into high speed wildlife photography. It doesn't appeal to me that i shoot frantically and hope for some decent images. I would like to shoot less and deliberately. I can use my buffer limit on the K1/ K3 judiciously. Sixth, it is an intuitive design. I have never delved into the 645Z menu after the initial set up. The buttons and dials do it all for me. It is a more efficient and likeable way of using the camera and i don't expect the K1/ K3 to be any different. Seventh, the pixel shift feature opens great possibilities. Eighth, every single lens sort of becomes image stabilised because of the IBIS. Ninth, i can use the outstanding 645 lenses on the K1. Finally, Pentax is rationally priced.

I really wonder why i should now even think of any other camera system

I guess i have mostly made up my mind. Advice by many members has been useful. When your financial means are limited and photography is not a profession for you, it is important to be judicious in spending money. I must thank all of you who have taken your precious time in giving your comments.

I just have this one crucial question about the APS-C mode of the K1:

Does APS-C mode in K1 essentially transform it into another camera body akin to say K3, with accompanying benefits of higher buffer? (BTW, I spoke to a guy who owns the 5D and 5R. He says there is no APS-C mode in 5D but it is there in 5R).

If THE answer to this question is Yes, even if in a roundabout way, it is a game changer and then there is no motivation to think of the K3 or the KP. I will just buy the K1 and use it in APS-C mode whenever i have to.

Thank you all once again.

[normhead]

I just have this one crucial question about the APS-C mode of the K1:

Does APS-C mode in K1 essentially transform it into another camera body akin to say K3, with accompanying benefits of higher buffer? (BTW, I spoke to a guy who owns the 5D and 5R. He says there is no APS-C mode in 5D but it is there in 5R).

If THE answer to this question is Yes, even if in a roundabout way, it is a game changer and then there is no motivation to think of the K3 or the KP. I will just buy the K1 and use it in APS-C mode whenever i have to.

Thank you all once again.

For my next trip, for which I cn only take one camera body, I'm going to do exactly the same thing. K-1 and 28-105 for landscape, DA 55-300 for wildlife possibly but not always in crop made (the K-1 with the DA 55-300 can produce excellent 30 MP files in 16:9 format, the same as if it were FF.) I may take my DFA 100 macro or DA*55 1.4 space permitting, but will probably just take my DA 35 2.4 plastic fantastic for low light situations to save space and weight. I am willing to sacrifice a bit of action performance for superior landscape images.

[biz-engineer]

K-1 and 28-105 for landscape, DA 55-300 for wildlife possibly but not always in crop made (the K-1 with the DA 55-300 can produce excellent 30 MP files in 16:9 format, the same as if it were FF.) I may take my DFA 100 macro

Sounds like a very good plan. The 100 macro is compact, the 55-300 is relatively small , good enough with 1:1 crop I suppose.