[Clothears]

It is what it is, Clothears, a consumer zoom and you've outgrown it. I still carry it from time to time when hiking because it's small and is better than nothing. :-)

Hmmm, mumble mumble.

Well, we'll take it to Queens and to Wimbledon again this year, but this time with the K-S1 rather than the K100D Super (which it did OK on). I guess the better resolution is showing up the weak sisters. That's also why I was pleased that the kit lens (from the K100D) did a good job on the K-S1.

[mtngal]

Some recent pictures - I've been carrying the camera around almost every day, but haven't looked for opportunities to use it. Here's a couple from a 4 mile hike (total distance - not a long hike) with a friend of mine at the end of May:



As you can see, a beautiful blue sky. A little later we were standing at about the highest spot in the general vicinity, the highest point in Los Padres National Forest. It doesn't take long for the weather to change when you are at high altitudes:



By the time we were almost back to the trailhead, it looked like this:



The following weekend I took the time to visit one of my all-time favorite places in the world, to buy my lifetime senior pass (main reason) but also to take a walk with my camera.

The weather wasn't the greatest, it was hazy so no brilliant blue skies and I started off around noon when the light was very flat. But how can one complain when the scenery is so awesome? I hiked the Panorama Trail down to Illilouette Falls (not in the picture) and the foot bridge across the river.



Returning to the trailhead in the afternoon, the light was more dramatic for a few minutes.



It was such a pleasure to not have to worry about heavy gear. I took only the K-S1 and a few Limiteds, the FA31 being the heaviest lens, the 100 WR Macro being the longest. I'm still delighted with the camera and it still performs brilliantly. It's one of the best mistakes I've made when I accidentally ordered this camera.

[jimr-pdx]

It's one of the best mistakes I've made when I accidentally ordered this camera.

Finer words never spoken.. ?
I'm awaiting a white copy; color not my fave but the price was

[gaweidert]

mtngal,

The photos from Yosemite were awesome. I have never seen any of the park from that angle before. The closest I have ever come to that particular park was when I flew over it on a flight into San Jose. I got my senior pass a few years ago. Been a real cost saver for me on my trips out west. This camera has held my interest since introduction. The shots that I have seen you post on this forum just have a quality to them that I find very compelling. You have a very good eye.

[jimr-pdx]

mtngal,

The photos from Yosemite were awesome. I have never seen any of the park from that angle before.

I agree, and I've not been to Glacier Point either. In 2002 I came down the Muir Trail by those waterfalls, but never caught this area. I'd love to loop from GP south over Red Peak Pass and down to the Valley.. some day, white K-s1 in hand

---------- Post added 07-11-15 at 11:27 ----------

I understand. I would have a hard time letting an A*300 go - but then, I consider LBA to be an unappreciated art form. I enjoy having lenses of different character and exploring their natures, even if some sit on the shelf for months or years between shoots - so long as I don't "love them to death" through unintentional neglect.

I'm still getting my head fully 'round the 100-300/4.7-5.8's strengths and weaknesses, but so far, if Pentax would put its optics in a "modern" WR tube similar to the DA 55-300, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. That and the 18-135, with a small prime for dim/indoors work, would be my compact 3-lens "day at the zoo" kit. Pentax has an odd habit of working my wishlist...

I kept switching between 55-300 and the Sigma 100-300. Focus is much faster, images good if a bit low on contrast.. but f/6.7 above 250mm was the deal breaker. The Pentax variant has some appeal, but so does dropping below 100mm - so I think I'm finally satisfied that the 55-300 is right for me.

[mtngal]

Finer words never spoken.. ?
I'm awaiting a white copy; color not my fave but the price was

I wanted the blue, really liked the looks of it. But once I actually saw the white one in the box I was delighted. Only problem with the white one is that it led into a spending spree where I bought 4 silver lenses between Black Friday and the after Christmas sales. It looks very classy with the silver limiteds.

If I eventually decide to replace the K3 with a K-S2, I'll get a white one.

[Bagga_Txips]

All I can say about the K-S1 is that it is far more likely to go everywhere with me, and it may be coincidental but since I bought it a few months ago I have appeared on flickr Explore 8 times, before that, never.

[mtngal]

The weather was really nice yesterday, and my afternoon meeting was cancelled, so I played hooky. Back when KEH had their holiday Pentax sale, an FA 100-300 f/4.7 slipped into my cart. It didn't cost much, it's there just in case I ever need an AF-FF zoom, and need I say more than "LBA"? I'd been waiting for a chance to try it out on the K-S1.

Ever notice that in reviews, "cheap build" = plastic = light weight, and "good build quality" = metal = heavy? Makes me think of Jurassic park: "Are they heavy? Then they're expensive". While all plastic, my 100-300 seems sturdy enough, and it's 10% lighter than the 55-300 (which is already light enough to handle fairly well on the K-S1). I found an old Takumar 58mm tele hood for it. Beautifully machined, with the K-S1's faster AF motor, if I don't mount the hood snugly, it can unscrew itself!

You've mentioned the 100-300 f4.7 a number of times and I've always been impressed with the pictures you've posted using it. I've been sort-of eyeing it for a while, when I see one for sale somewhere, based on your experience with it. This evening there was a KEH email saying they were offering 15% off of Pentax gear. So I wandered over there to see if they had one for sale, which they did (in EX+ condition, no less). I got paid today. So it is now on its way to me. Anyone ever told you that you are a bad influence? I'm doing virtually no photography at the moment because I had cataract surgery last week. And I already have the 55-300 (as well as the A300 and DA300). But since I have the white K-S1 and really like silver lenses on it, and since that 10% weight savings is significant for me, I gave up trying to talk myself out of it and bought it.

Did anyone ever tell you that you are a BAD influence?!!? You definitely are. Is this a case of LBA? Sigh.

[THoog]

You've mentioned the 100-300 f4.7 a number of times and I've always been impressed with the pictures you've posted using it. I've been sort-of eyeing it for a while, when I see one for sale somewhere, based on your experience with it. This evening there was a KEH email saying they were offering 15% off of Pentax gear. So I wandered over there to see if they had one for sale, which they did (in EX+ condition, no less). I got paid today. So it is now on its way to me. Anyone ever told you that you are a bad influence? I'm doing virtually no photography at the moment because I had cataract surgery last week. And I already have the 55-300 (as well as the A300 and DA300). But since I have the white K-S1 and really like silver lenses on it, and since that 10% weight savings is significant for me, I gave up trying to talk myself out of it and bought it.

Did anyone ever tell you that you are a BAD influence?!!? You definitely are. Is this a case of LBA? Sigh.

LOL! I dunno, in stock AND on sale on pay day? Clearly, this was meant to be! I hope you enjoy the four-seven as much as I have. I'm sure it's going to look sharp on that white K-S1!

PS: For a hood, I can recommend the Takumar metal one meant for the 135/2.5 & 200/4 - I think I've seen at least one picture by another PF member of the same lens with the same hood. For something a few grams lighter, I've experimented with the plastic 55-300 hood, a filter ring with bayonet lugs, and a tiny piece of tape. Of course, there's always the classic rubber hood.

[mtngal]

One more from my weekend get-away the end of May. Instead of Yosemite, this is of Bass Lake, where I was staying. Normally the spot where I'm standing is covered with water - I have never seen the reservoir so low in spring (or winter, for that matter).



One evening I looked out the window and thought the sunset was pretty. I didn't feel like walking to a better viewpoint, so I took this from the 2nd floor balcony.

LOL! I dunno, in stock AND on sale on pay day? Clearly, this was meant to be! I hope you enjoy the four-seven as much as I have. I'm sure it's going to look sharp on that white K-S1!

Yes, it must have been meant to be. The lens arrived today, so I took a quick couple of pictures with it before it got too dark. No beautiful sunset to photograph this time, and not much time. So the grapevine growing on my front porch had to do.





This last one was taken at ISO 5000. The K-S1 files clean up nicely.



I'm really impressed with this combination. It is noticeably lighter than the DA55-300 though it's a bit longer when down to its smallest size. I love how it balances on the K-S1, it's very comfortable for me to use (though I may have some trouble with camera shake - I'm out of practice shooting with a long lens). I haven't shot with the DA in a while partly because I've never felt really comfortable with it. It is capable of taking good pictures sometimes but other times I feel like something is missing or it just misses what I want. My first impression of the FA100-300 f4.7 is that I'm going to get along with it much, much better. Tomorrow I'll take both lenses to work and spend some time at lunch shooting with them both. I'm hopeless when it comes to comparison shots - I'd rather just walk around and take pictures of opportunity with both lenses. The fact it is as light and as well balanced with the K-S1 is a huge plus for me.

The one time I took some comparison shots with lenses of totally different classes, I ended up pretty much giving up on the lower class lens. It was a comparison between the A*300 and DA55-300 and it took me a long time to get over the fact the DA55-300 doesn't come close to the quality of the A*300, to remember that I bought the zoom because of it's size and weight - that I wanted a lighter camera bag for hiking (it didn't help that the first copy of the lens I had was decentered). So I don't think I'm going to do any other comparison between the FA zoom and anything other than the DA55-300 - I don't want to do a comparison with either the A*300 or the DA*300 - I don't want to make the same mistake.

This is really the first time I've tried to take pictures since my cataract surgery. It was strange as my eyes aren't the same at the moment. If any of my pictures show something odd I can't see at the moment, let me know.

[THoog]

This is really the first time I've tried to take pictures since my cataract surgery. It was strange as my eyes aren't the same at the moment. If any of my pictures show something odd I can't see at the moment, let me know.

They look fine to me - there's something that definitely feels the same as my F4.7 - I guess that's the lens' "character". I hope your first impressions are lasting!

I had multiple sinus surgeries a few years back, and they had to make some hefty design changes - but only on one side. (If you've every heard of someone getting a "window" put in so their sinus drains better - first I got French Doors, and then knocked the wall out.) Now when the weather gets my sinuses going, my eyes don't match. Will I have them do something to the other side, so they DO match? No way!

[mtngal]

They look fine to me - there's something that definitely feels the same as my F4.7 - I guess that's the lens' "character". I hope your first impressions are lasting!

I had multiple sinus surgeries a few years back, and they had to make some hefty design changes - but only on one side. (If you've every heard of someone getting a "window" put in so their sinus drains better - first I got French Doors, and then knocked the wall out.) Now when the weather gets my sinuses going, my eyes don't match. Will I have them do something to the other side, so they DO match? No way!

That type of thing sounds far, far worse than cataract surgery, which was a piece of cake for me. No problems or issues so far.

I've had a bit more time to play with the 4-7. The few pictures I've taken with both the 100-300 and 55-300 looked very, very similar - probably because I was so out of practice and the faults were more mine than the equipment. At first I thought the 100-300 might be back-focusing some, but now that I've practiced some with it, I don't think so. I haven't exactly been putting the lens through it's paces, more just getting used to shooting with it.

A couple taken with it and the K-S1:

Sharpness looks very good (when I don't have camera shake). And OOF bokeh isn't bad at all, not much different than the 55-300 I have.



There's a certain amount of CA, but not more than the 55-300. Considering this is an older lens, I'm not at all unhappy. Could an HD version of the 55-300 do better? Perhaps, but I don't want to buy one to find out. Besides, I use Lightroom and it will fix far worse CA with a click of a button. I don't get concerned about CA.



Walked around to the side of my house, and spotted this:



Do you think my grapevine has gotten out of hand? Guess that's my next task for today!

And guess what one of my tasks for tomorrow is going to be...



The more I use the K-S1 and 100-300 combination, the more comfortable I am with it. It balances well and I'm not struggling with the weight. I have to keep my shutter speeds higher than many people probably would, but at least I can manage it.

I will post a picture of the combination after I figure out how to photograph it. I took one but didn't like how it came out. It's going to take a tripod to get a small enough aperture and/or flash under the lighting conditions I was using (or both!). And the K3 and DA*16-50 is sure a heavy combination, compared to the S1 and 100-300. No question which I can handle better (sigh - I do love the 16-50).

[mtngal]

Well, the car didn't get washed this weekend, the house didn't get cleaned up much and I made the decision to not buy the DA70 right now. Maybe in 6 months or next year, but right now it makes more sense to do what I did do today - go take pictures. This time I decided to do more than just walk around the neighborhood with the K-S1 and FA100-300 f4.7, I went to our local county park.

I took this first one for a "beat the summer heat" challenge on a different board. Thought it looked a good way to do that - go fishing under a huge old oak tree.



And the prize could be:



A comment for those who don't know - taking pictures of fish underwater with a pair of polarized sunglasses on but no circular polarizer on your camera lens will lead to a photo that's completely different than what you saw! I liked this because of the ripples, which I didn't notice when I took it.

I went looking for additional occupants of the park, and found this strange fellow - is he an Ent from Lord of the Rings? And they say trees don't have faces or expressions. The big "Oh."



The oak had help getting that face, and this is one of his helpers:



These are called acorn woodpeckers, and you can see why, looking at the tree. I'm not much of a birder, but I've shot these pretty woodpeckers before, though the last time was with the K5, DA300 and 1.7AFA. I was happy with the results I got with the 100-300 - it might not get as close as the 300 with TC, but at least I can shoot comfortably with the K-S1 and 100-300, which I'm no longer able to do with the K3. I missed the focus sometimes, but I know I get better the more I shoot a new lens.

There were other noisy occupants of the park. I haven't been to the park in probably 2 years, and I don't remember the park having as big a population of these ground squirrels as they do now.



The K-S1 does really well with this lens, and I'm able to manage the combination without a problem.

Finally, another topic I saw on a different board was vivid color. I thought this was appropriate (taken last night with the DA40, not the 100-300).



It turned out to be an interesting exposure problem, to have a little detail surrounding the lights but not having the lights in the lamp blow out to white - it took a fair amount of trial and error, both adjusting the brightness of the lights and the exposure settings on the camera.

Have you ever notice how things lead into other things, ones that are not apparently related? Apple's Health app on the iPhone and these lights are related - just don't ask me how, it's a long chain of events and discoveries. They are going to be great fun to include in photos - gee, maybe I'll actually learn something about still life photography, something I have little experience with.

[jimr-pdx]

I liked Sigma's 100.300 as an alternative, light and fast focus but f6.7 at tele was a downer. I sought the FA a time or ..five but the 55-300 has convinced me to stop looking around. It's the heaviest lens I plan to use with the K.s1 unless it is attached to something with a tripod collar.

[THoog]

at least I can shoot comfortably with the K-S1 and 100-300

...and that's what really matters. I know we're supposed to suffer for our art, but it should be more "bug bites and blisters getting the shot you want", not "the camera is actually painful to use".

I made the decision to not buy the DA70 right now. Maybe in 6 months or next year, but right now it makes more sense to do what I did do today - go take pictures.

Good Influence THoog: Not getting the DA 70 (for now) is the right decision. When it comes to gear, just shooting pictures is almost always better than buying stuff.
Bad Influence THoog: (comments comparing the compact-but-capable F 35-70 to the DA 70 have been removed by Good Influence THoog)