Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-17-2014, 07:16 AM   #46
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,089
QuoteOriginally posted by Shanti Quote
...
My question was if you take the shot in FF 36MP & crop,would that be better than an APS uncropped one, say using a 300mm lens on both cameras.
What you will notice far more than the any image quality difference is the 3-D tracking ability with grouped focus points on the D810 over the K5II. I sometimes shoot mine at 1.5 crop for action/reach and more FPS. I don't even think about the IQ so I guess you, once again, have to get out the scanning electron microscope to notice differences that otherwise probably can't be seen.

10-17-2014, 07:24 AM   #47
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,558
I have an FA 50 1.7. I have an A-50 2. The A-50 was cheap, but I never use it. It does make a nice body cap for my ME. I hear this over an over, it just never makes any sense to me. I don't want a lot of lenses, I want the lenses I use. My A-400 was $500 and I see them all the time for less than that.
10-17-2014, 05:08 PM   #48
Site Supporter
Shanti's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 903
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
What you will notice far more than the any image quality difference is the 3-D tracking ability with grouped focus points on the D810 over the K5II. I sometimes shoot mine at 1.5 crop for action/reach and more FPS. I don't even think about the IQ so I guess you, once again, have to get out the scanning electron microscope to notice differences that otherwise probably can't be seen.
Does the K3 have better AF/Tracking than K5II? Or is the 810 AF much better for birding with the 3D tracking

---------- Post added 10-18-14 at 02:15 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by bossa Quote
No. My recommendation is to stick with what you have and wait to see how the new 150-420 zoom works out (obviously I don't know what the exact range is there). But a K-3 will allow further cropping due to the extra pixel density: For example, a D7100 has an "extra" crop mode of 1.3x, which, when considered with the already 1.5x crop of the format, works out to around 2x and gives a 15MP image. The K-3 could do likewise apart from not having the dedicated crop mode shown in the VF. [edit: combine that 2x with a TC and a 300mm becomes a 840mm as per FOV]

Your DA*300 and TC are equivalent to the FOV of a 630mm lens on FF and so far only expensive 600mm lenses ($10,000) work well wide open. IMO the Tamron 150-600 is not good enough for serious work as it needs to be stopped down to f/8-9 to get reasonable results, and then of course you're trying to compensate for slow shutter speeds by boosting ISO.

There's no cheap and easy way around a fast Super Tele (f/4) that's sharp wide open.
Yes I know it can get very $$ ,wonder if the new Sigma sports 150-600 will be better than the Tamron (should be as price is almost 2x)
Also its hard to know when/if Pentax will release the new zoom...a few month wait is fine but 1yr or more is too long for me

---------- Post added 10-18-14 at 02:16 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by bossa Quote
No. My recommendation is to stick with what you have and wait to see how the new 150-420 zoom works out (obviously I don't know what the exact range is there). But a K-3 will allow further cropping due to the extra pixel density: For example, a D7100 has an "extra" crop mode of 1.3x, which, when considered with the already 1.5x crop of the format, works out to around 2x and gives a 15MP image. The K-3 could do likewise apart from not having the dedicated crop mode shown in the VF. [edit: combine that 2x with a TC and a 300mm becomes a 840mm as per FOV]

Your DA*300 and TC are equivalent to the FOV of a 630mm lens on FF and so far only expensive 600mm lenses ($10,000) work well wide open. IMO the Tamron 150-600 is not good enough for serious work as it needs to be stopped down to f/8-9 to get reasonable results, and then of course you're trying to compensate for slow shutter speeds by boosting ISO.

There's no cheap and easy way around a fast Super Tele (f/4) that's sharp wide open.
Yes I know it can get very $$ ,wonder if the new Sigma sports 150-600 will be better than the Tamron (should be as price is almost 2x)
Also its hard to know when/if Pentax will release the new zoom...a few months wait is fine but 1yr or more is too long for me
10-17-2014, 06:03 PM   #49
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,089
QuoteOriginally posted by Shanti Quote
Does the K3 have better AF/Tracking than K5II? Or is the 810 AF much better for birding with the 3D tracking[COLOR="Silver"]
I can't say about the K3 vs K5II since I haven't had an opportunity compare them. But I think you'll find other user's first-hand experience on that subject in other threads. And as far as the D810 goes it has a good focusing system. How good depends a lot - if not mostly - on the user too. I mean, it takes some practice to learn and use all the AF modes effectively for various shooting situations. And I'd think anyone naturally good at it could do it on a host of other cameras too.

10-17-2014, 07:46 PM   #50
Pentaxian
Miguel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Near Seattle
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,726
QuoteOriginally posted by Shanti Quote
Yes I know it can get very $$ ,wonder if the new Sigma sports 150-600 will be better than the Tamron (should be as price is almost 2x) Also its hard to know when/if Pentax will release the new zoom...a few months wait is fine but 1yr or more is too long for me
Hard to say about the Sigma, but it's notably heavier than the Tamron, which for BIFs matters for some folks, including me. The Tamron is handholdable, but the fatigue sets in over time. These lenses are as much about convenience as they are image quality---that focal range is so wide that there are compromises inherently, but for my work (which is "serious" whatever the bleep that means) it meets my requirements.

I have little patience for alleged new lenses that could be vaporware. Even waiting six months means that you are missing out on migration seasons and in my case, sports seasons.

My question for you, OP, is what kind of bird photography do you practice? Some folks aim at birdfeeders and declare victory; others mount a long lens on a tripod shooting at a static defined limb or nest out there; a lot of folks go to controlled demos of birds of prey at zoos or recovery centers and shoot away at predictable targets; and finally some shooters track large and erratic small songbirds, hoping to freeze something in flight. Have any shots online you can point to that would help me get a better idea of your requirements?
Thanks.

M
10-18-2014, 12:28 AM   #51
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,545
QuoteOriginally posted by Stavri Quote
To me the only appeal to going Canon or Nikon are the older more affordable fast primes you can get on the used market (something that Pentax system lacks), and some of the 3rd party choices which are not available for Pentax (like the Sigma 120-300mm f2.8) Buying new, most recent and expensive lenses will not be a prudent choice (It will make the switch very expensive and in my view unjustified)
I have a Sigma 120-300 Sports for my D800, but to be honest, I wish I'd just kept my AF-S 300 F4 or bought a DA*300 for my K-5 because it is just so damned heavy. Also, focus is so critical at f/2.8 that I find myself stopping down to get more DOF anyway, especially for birds in trees. The DOF at f/2.8 is pretty thin and it's a lottery getting the exact focus you need when there are many leaves and branches around the subject.

Reality rarely turns out like you fantasies and it can cost a lot of cash to find that out.

---------- Post added 18-10-14 at 06:03 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
What you will notice far more than the any image quality difference is the 3-D tracking ability with grouped focus points on the D810 over the K5II. I sometimes shoot mine at 1.5 crop for action/reach and more FPS. I don't even think about the IQ so I guess you, once again, have to get out the scanning electron microscope to notice differences that otherwise probably can't be seen.
I've been using my D800e on my 300mm and just leaving it on there but I'll give it go on my D810. It can be a pretty scary exercise fitting a camera to a large lens.. I'm getting too old for this really.. where's my iPhone?
10-18-2014, 10:13 AM   #52
Site Supporter
Shanti's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 903
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Miguel Quote
Hard to say about the Sigma, but it's notably heavier than the Tamron, which for BIFs matters for some folks, including me. The Tamron is handholdable, but the fatigue sets in over time. These lenses are as much about convenience as they are image quality---that focal range is so wide that there are compromises inherently, but for my work (which is "serious" whatever the bleep that means) it meets my requirements.

I have little patience for alleged new lenses that could be vaporware. Even waiting six months means that you are missing out on migration seasons and in my case, sports seasons.

My question for you, OP, is what kind of bird photography do you practice? Some folks aim at birdfeeders and declare victory; others mount a long lens on a tripod shooting at a static defined limb or nest out there; a lot of folks go to controlled demos of birds of prey at zoos or recovery centers and shoot away at predictable targets; and finally some shooters track large and erratic small songbirds, hoping to freeze something in flight. Have any shots online you can point to that would help me get a better idea of your requirements?
Thanks.

M
HI here are some on picasa,maybe you can see more as open to public. https://picasaweb.google.com/shantimusic2/GreyHeron?noredirect=1
I like birdfeeder shots,swallows in flight,swans herons,buzzards,prey birds,nests..pretty much anything I can find out in the nature..only controlled place is feeders. The hardest are the big birds as can't get close enough..therefore longer lens topic here..Buzzards are my biggest challenge now
10-20-2014, 05:52 PM   #53
Loyal Site Supporter
WPRESTO's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,767
I have both a K3, used with DA300 and Bigma 50-500 (and a mound of shorter FL optics), and a D7100 purchased specifically to get the 150-600 Tamron (disgusted that neither it nor the Sigma 150-600 is or will be offered in K-mount). The lens took 5 months to be delivered. V-A-V D7100 vs K3: AF of the Nikon seems much quicker and on both zoom lens I have (Tamron 150-600 & Nikon 18-140) extremely quiet, almost inaudible. The D7100 button positions are different so they seem poorly placed because of familiarity with the Pentax arrangement (K10, K20, K5 and now K3). For example. ISO button is to left of screen instead of atop behind the shutter release, so changing ISO (and other things) is a two hand rather than a two finger operation. The Nikon is palpably larger, but not bulky/massive, and the grip is a bit less comfortable, but that may be because of long familiarity with Pentax ergonomics. One thing that has annoyed me on the Nikon is a very light-touch memory card door. I find my right hand occasionally pulling it open as I lift the camera from a gadget bag. Is the latch weak and destined to early failure like the doors on the first version AF360 flash? Actually, I like the very secure twist-lock on my K20 best. I haven't used the Tammy enough for meaningful comparison to the Bigma (1st version), but my impression is that at the same focal length, the Tamron has a slight edge in IQ, and it reaches a real 600mm while the Bigma's max is actually closer to 420mm (disappointing). At max focal length (420mm actual for Bigma and 600mm for Tamron) the IQ seems to be a dead heat, which gives advantage to T because it's providing significantly more focal length. On the other hand, when in Kenya with the Bigma, it was very handy at times to be able to pull back to 50mm without changing lenses. Zooming the Tammy is more comfortable and has a lighter, smoother touch than the Bigma. The lens hoods of both big zooms are tooth-gnashing fussy to reverse and twist into place. They should have slide-forward hoods - so should the DA60-250 & DA300 - VASTLY more convenient. Almost all of Pentax A-series telephotos had slide forward hoods. Why on Earth did they abandon this user-friendly feature??? If they can design it onto a 35mm macro, they can certainly fit one to a 300mm tele.

10-20-2014, 06:22 PM   #54
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,558
I've had so little luck with IQ on long zooms, I'm not sure I'd have been interested in either of these zooms. My experience with the Sigma 120-400 pretty much soured me on them.
10-20-2014, 07:26 PM   #55
Site Supporter
Shanti's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 903
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by WPRESTO Quote
I have both a K3, used with DA300 and Bigma 50-500 (and a mound of shorter FL optics), and a D7100 purchased specifically to get the 150-600 Tamron (disgusted that neither it nor the Sigma 150-600 is or will be .
That was what I was thinking,just to get it for the Tamron or Sigma,& maybe a D3300 or 5300 is good enough with AF? or I thought of the D750 or 810 & use in crop mode,but maybe no real advantage. Hate to have to buy another APS,a FF would be more useful I think but would prefer a Pentax as have the glass... good to know the Tamron is sharp at a 'real' 600, & I imagine the Sigma sports will aslo be spot on....
10-20-2014, 08:08 PM   #56
Loyal Site Supporter
WPRESTO's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,767
QuoteOriginally posted by Shanti Quote
That was what I was thinking,just to get it for the Tamron or Sigma,& maybe a D3300 or 5300 is good enough with AF? or I thought of the D750 or 810 & use in crop mode,but maybe no real advantage. Hate to have to buy another APS,a FF would be more useful I think but would prefer a Pentax as have the glass... good to know the Tamron is sharp at a 'real' 600, & I imagine the Sigma sports will aslo be spot on....
I think the 5300 and 7100 share the basic features, sensor & I think basic AF (maybe 7100 has more AF spots), with the 7100 adding electronic bells & whistles, WiFi & better movie maybe. Try GOOGLING Fred Miranda's website. He's all Nikon and posts comparative comments on bodies & lenses. I debated 5300 vs 7100 because IQ is supposed to be identical, but 7100 was state-of for Nikon small sensor, and many promote it as the best small sensor body available. Also, at the time there was a big discount when packaged with the 18-140mm. In retrospect, the 5300 would probably have served as well at lower cost
10-21-2014, 07:27 AM   #57
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,558
SO compared to the A*600 how is the Tamron 150-600? I'm guessing with camera and body it looks to be about the same price, for better IQ. At least, I know my A-400 is quite a lot better than the Sigma 120-400 I tried out, and it's not even an A*.

Last edited by normhead; 10-21-2014 at 09:50 AM.
10-21-2014, 08:10 AM   #58
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,838
QuoteOriginally posted by WPRESTO Quote
I think the 5300 and 7100 share the basic features, sensor & I think basic AF (maybe 7100 has more AF spots), with the 7100 adding electronic bells & whistles, WiFi & better movie maybe. Try GOOGLING Fred Miranda's website. He's all Nikon and posts comparative comments on bodies & lenses. I debated 5300 vs 7100 because IQ is supposed to be identical, but 7100 was state-of for Nikon small sensor, and many promote it as the best small sensor body available. Also, at the time there was a big discount when packaged with the 18-140mm. In retrospect, the 5300 would probably have served as well at lower cost
The 5300 has a Pentamirror rather than Pentaprism. It also lacks a screw drive and doesn't have the AI linkage, so no older lenses. If all you're going to do is use the newest lenses then it probably doesn't matter.
10-21-2014, 10:34 AM   #59
Loyal Site Supporter
WPRESTO's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,767
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
SO compared to the A*600 how is the Tamron 150-600? I'm guessing with camera and body it looks to be about the same price, for better IQ. At least, I know my A-400 is quite a lot better than the Sigma 120-400 I tried out, and it's not even an A*.
There is an SMCA 600 f5.6 presently in the for sale thread for $2400. It is a fine lens and certainly superior to the 150-600 Tamron @ 600mm. But it is manual focus and significantly bigger/heavier. For a superior lens there is the very rare 600mm f4.0 AF Pentax, but it's a monster and it doesn't focus very close (need extension tubes for passerine birds). The Sigma 500 f4.5 is also superior, has AF, and is still available new, but it costs more than the Tamron plus D7100, and it's much heavier. Fundamentally, big long tele zooms are less expensive, ligher & more compact and much more versatile. SFL lenses of 500~600mm are big, long & heavy, do not focus as closely, and generally are at least triple or more the cost. A Tamron 150-600mm plus a 5300 Nikon body will run about $1800. The 500mm Sigma is about $5000; the 560mm Pentax is just under $8000 (ouch, ouch, ouch).
For a bargain long tele, a good choice, if one can be found used, is the Tamron 400 f4, if you can also get the "A" (second) style adaptall mount. The Tamron works quite well with a Pentax 1.4X long tele extender to provide a 560mm f5.6, it has internal focusing, the minimum focus distance is decent, and used it generally goes for under $800 - IF you can find one. BTW, I have a 400mm f4 that was recently cleaned. One thing I've never liked is the massive, clumsy reverse & bayonet lens hood, but again, I think that any/all zoom or SFL lenses of 200mm or more should have slide forward hoods. VASTLY more convenient.
10-21-2014, 10:37 AM   #60
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,838
QuoteOriginally posted by WPRESTO Quote
The 500mm Sigma is about $5000; the 560mm Pentax is just under $8000 (ouch, ouch, ouch).
The 560 is starting to show up on eBay for around $6000.
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!
150-600mm lens ...n/a, 2x, advantage, bird, birds, crop, d7100, dof, dslr, f/2.8, focus, fov, image, k-3, k3, k3 or nikon, k5ii, mode, nikon, pentax, pentax k-3, sigma, tamron, tc, tele, wonder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K3 vs Nikon d7100 mickyd Pentax DSLR Discussion 39 12-26-2014 06:25 PM
For Sale - Sold: Nikon D7100 w/ 18-105mm Lens (764 shutter count), Nikon 10-24mm, Nikon 35mm 1.8 Mlcinema Sold Items 4 08-02-2013 06:15 AM
Nikon D7100 Sol Invictus Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 112 05-07-2013 08:41 PM
Nikon D7100 coming? yusuf Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 5 02-16-2013 06:23 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:58 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