[jsherman999]

D4 + 500 4/5



From ---> Ed Winkats (link)


.

[tittermary]

I have shot extensively the D7100 vs D800 and I can flat out tell you from experience the images produced on the D800 are noticeably better than the D7100 (using the same lens). OTOH, if I put a killer lens on the D7100 and then put an ordinary lens on the D800 the less-capable camera suddenly can compete and in some cases surpass the D800. It has nothing to do with pixels. It has to do with SYSTEMS of which the sensor and the lens are just two key parts. In my case, I believe the Nikkor AF-S 80-400mm to be a less capable lens than the Pentax 60-250mm which would explain in my system comparison how the K-3 was "comparable". It has to be noted that the K-3 sensor by itself is *NOT* comparable to the D800. But as a system with the absolute best lens attached the K-3 can indeed produce similar IQ. Another lens that I expect to produce similar results will be the forthcoming Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. Crop sensor cameras suddenly have a lot of high-quality glass to choose from.

M

put any 300-500mm lens on the d800 and I will put the Da*300 on a k3 on par or better. This is why I added the k3 to my tool chest and I can carry it around. I have been saying this for a few months now and people just don't get it.

[tittermary]

Hand held no tripod, this would have been tough to do with a d800 and 500mm lens.

[MJSfoto1956]

The Nikon shot has camera shake/motion blur/ or whatever you want to call it. The k-3/DA*60-250 combo is definitely winning in these two shots.

It is possible there is some minor camera shake going on here with the Nikon -- one thing that became colossally clear to me during this test was that the the D800 suffered from significant mirror slap. The K-3 is almost silent in comparison. I believe this has to do with the handheld "keeper" ratio I was seeing: about 90% for the Pentax and 67% for the Nikon. Now, clearly if you always shoot mirror up (recommended by Nikon btw) then your results might be different. Again, I was not interested in such things -- I wanted to see if the two systems could compete "in the real world" with real-life situations and I often shoot handheld outdoors (but never at these tele lengths). If I were to purchase the Nikkor AF-S 80-400, rest assured I would be quite gun-shy about using it handheld in anything but the brightest light.

[MJSfoto1956]

Hand held no tripod, this would have been tough to do with a d800 and 500mm lens.

Nice one! I agree whole-heartedly with your observations. Heck, I noticed this behavior even with a 300mm lens and the D800.

Michael

[MJSfoto1956]

Discounting the angular size differential between the sensors the higher pixel pitch of the K-3 should make it record more blur due to the extra magnification at 100%.

except that this is on a tripod. I would say that the K-3 owing to its near total lack of mirror slap does not show any such "blur" in any of the images I took. I might also add that the Nikkor would at time "chatter" when attempting to find focus. Very annoying to me. The K-3 + 60-250mm was a much nicer shooting experience.

Michae

[Rondec]

Interesting comparison. I wonder if you have any thoughts about shake reduction in the camera body verus the VR on the lens of the Nikkor. It has always been said that for longer focal length, in lens is better, but I wonder by how much?

[normhead]

D4 + 500 4/5



From ---> Ed Winkats (link)


.

You have expensive tastes.

[MJSfoto1956]

Interesting comparison. I wonder if you have any thoughts about shake reduction in the camera body verus the VR on the lens of the Nikkor. It has always been said that for longer focal length, in lens is better, but I wonder by how much?

The discussion is moot and I find it tedious: analogous to Mac vs PC or Nikon vs Canon. The proof should be in the pudding: if you get great results with X then X is great. And if you also get great results with Y then Y is also great. The key is always in the engineering details of which there are thousands of minor options for any manufacturer to choose from (and sometimes their hands are tied due to patent infringement). Unfortunately for us photographers, as consumers the only way we can *really* tell is to do our own testing. And I have no doubt that the results will be slightly different for every possible lens + body combination. Which is why I always recommend people rent their gear before purchasing. Thank God for www.borrowlenses.com and LensRentals.com. We have wonderful resources available to us these days!

Michael

[dosdan]

Michael, you've said the K-3 and DA* 60-250/F4 is a contender for your "travel kit". What proportion of telephoto shots do you take while travelling? I find most of my travel shots are at normal FLs or WA. Are there Pentax or Sigma lenses that interest you in this FL area? What do you currently use on the D800 in this FL range?

Dan.

[MJSfoto1956]

Michael, you've said the K-3 and DA* 60-250/F4 is a contender for your "travel kit". What proportion of telephoto shots do you take while travelling? I find most of my travel shots are at normal FLs or WA. Are there Pentax or Sigma lenses that interest you in this FL area? What do you currently use on the D800 in this FL range?

I have been looking for a decent tele setup for about 8 years now. About once per year I rent some tele lens and or tele lens + body just to see if there is something that I might imagine myself actually using. Nothing has turned me on until the K-3 + 60-250mm. The only tele lenses I actually own and use are the classic Nikkor 180mm f/2.8 (a great lens, btw) and the Nikkor 70-300mm which, while consumer-grade, if you know how to use it can produce some decent shots with the D800. Last summer I rented a D7100 and used that together with my 70-300mm and also with my D800 + 24-120mm. I found I really liked traveling with a two-body system where I would rarely need to switch lenses. However, I found the D7100 not to my liking and worse, the combination of that and the 70-300mm was less than stellar. The K-3 has it all over the D7100. It is what the D400 should be (a body I doubt we will ever see from Nikon, too bad).

Here's a link to a recent shot taken with the Nikkor AF-S 80-400mm @ 400mm, representing a compressed "look" that I happen to like:

Snow Walker | Flickr - Photo Sharing!



To answer your question: I believe that the number of tele travel shots I take would rise substantially if I had a system I actually liked. Currently tele represents only about 10% of my imagery. Like you I tend to shoot wide. But I found with the K-3 I was "seeing" things I typically would ignore. Here is a recent shot taken with the Pentax K-3 + 60-250mm:

All sizes | Frozen Trees | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[jsherman999]

You have expensive tastes.

I would never spend that much, just being wistful. That guy has some incredible images, but something tells me the equipment is only a small part of it there.

[jsherman999]

... The only tele lenses I actually own and use are the classic Nikkor 180mm f/2.8 (a great lens, btw)

^^ My favorite Nikon lens!

And the K3 + DA 60-250 or DA* 300 does seem like a great telephoto option. It would be very cool if we had a smallish Limited or DA* 135 f/2.8 for travel.

[bossa]

except that this is on a tripod. I would say that the K-3 owing to its near total lack of mirror slap does not show any such "blur" in any of the images I took. I might also add that the Nikkor would at time "chatter" when attempting to find focus. Very annoying to me. The K-3 + 60-250mm was a much nicer shooting experience.

Michae

I have a couple of D800E's and I find that if I don't lock up the mirror when it is ON the tripod it is more prone to blur. Soft hands absorb vibrations and rigid tripods probably reflect those vibrations back into the camera to some degree.

[bossa]

Today I tried a AF-S Nikkor 200-400 F4 VRII and the weight was fine until I tried holding it up to my eye for more than 3 or 4 shots. You definitely need a Monopod with something like that. I train with weights and I still felt like my shoulder was going to pop after 5 or 6 shots; I have been complaining about my AF-S 300 F4 lately but after reattaching it to the camera it felt weightless in comparison.

I'm seriously considering a D7100 (AU$889 at eGlobal) and keeping my 300 or selling it and buying a DA*300 and K-3 for the win. Ricoh need to get their fingers out of their collective arse and release the TC, although I'm not sure if it will really be of any use on a 24MP camera anyway.

My original intent in buying a D800E was to just grab 3 primes for landscape and portrait work but after a few SDM issues (where my DA*50-135 and DA*55 were away on holiday in Japan for 4 months) I got rid of everything Pentax bar the DA*200 and K-5.

This thread has made me appreciate that the DA*60-250 and DA*300 on a K-3 can get close to, or outperform, something costing 8+ grand from Nikon.