[UncleVanya]

Some people seem to be taking on a negative attitude towards me in their responses at this point. People seem to be taking a few negative points of mine, and instead of working through them with me, they're getting offended.


I'm also running a survey on Reddit about lenses, so far Pentax has a lens for every usage case anyone has brought up which makes me feel more at ease, except something like the Tamron 100-600 because of the quality and price difference with the 150-450. I am feeling more at ease wanting the K1 and more excited about the chance to spend long nights with it out in the mountains.

In the best circumstances people concentrate discussion on on what they hear (in their heads) they feel they can contribute something to. But in the worst they are just self-justifying through your situation.

As for the Tamron - aren't you talking about the 150-600? I can't find any 100-600 Tamron g2 lens at B&H or other places but I'm finding lots of articles on the 150-600. It does seem like a stunning lens. However the 600mm may be a bit misleading as the lens resolution charts show that it falls off a bit as you get longer than around 400mm. Canon and Nikon 100-400 lenses are often cited as better for long range shots due to the lack of image fall off but an extra 150mm even if reduced quality is nothing to scoff at.

Bear in mind the 1.5x more pixels you have on the K1 vs. the D750 will translate into bigger crops of the telephoto subjects resulting in more keepers (if they are in focus!) and more magnified images over what you would get with the D750. So assuming you shot one at 600mm and the other at 450mm the 450mm image cropped in may offer better resolution for a couple of reasons, 1) the lens doesn't fall in performance at 450mm, 2) the overall MP allows a deeper crop with similar resolution. But you do lose the light loving big pixels on the D750, and the improved focus capabilities.

I'm sorry I don't know much about the astro use of the K1 or the D750 but what little I have seen is that both are quite good. The D750 has larger, low light loving pixels, but an older generation sensor. The K1 offers higher resolution - which could be significant to the detail captured. This also applies to landscapes.

Honestly I feel your pain, I have a great admiration for the Nikon system, it was my first SLR and my first love in cameras. If I were in your shoes I'd do whatever is the lowest pain - and live with it waiting to see what the market holds. It is quite unclear to me what the powers that be have in store for us. (Pentax, Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus... )

---------- Post added 03-28-18 at 06:40 PM ----------

after reading more reviews the 150-600 does fall off but not as badly as the first reviewer seemed to imply. It still may provide you with not much more reach practically but certainly cheaper good quality reach.

Just wanted to update.

[MarkJerling]

perhaps Ive never set my k3ii up well for autofocus to succeed.
generally specific interesting people in crowded street scenes.

If you can't get focus with your Pentax gear you're not going to get it with other gear. I often shoot bicycle races and they move substantially faster than pedestrians. And I only have an old K5.

[normhead]

Depends on what you are shooting. If you're shooting BIF, the winner will be the one who:
- will keep the bird in the frame long enough to shoot a burst of 8-12 shots
- will have a more fast and accurate af
- will have the better technique
- will have better fps

With all due respect, I've shot birds in flight with my A-400 with a K-5.

[Greenneck]

Somewhere in your journey you found a quality comparison between the 150-600?

I didn't but I know that both the 150-600 and the p 150-450 are supposed to be pretty good quality lenses and both are far better than the Bigma 50-500 option we have. Is one better than the other, I do not know I wish someone like dxo mark had more pentax lens data. Is the tamron 150-600 at around $1000 new good enough for me definantly thats why I wish there was a k mount, the bigma probably not so much, 150-450 awfully expensive for my needs.

What exactly do you mean with "minor lens coating issue"?
Are you sure? There are several Threads about this topic. Maybe LR doesn't support everything, but why not just export it from the camera as tiff?
How do you define "digital coating"? Pentax is THE lens coating expert as inventor of smc. I'm happy with my F*, FA and FA Limited lenses (300/20/31) on the K-1. And i do look at pixels sometimes
Did you look at the Dealer Locator? Authorized Ricoh Imaging Americas Dealers
Did you look at the Pentax User Map? Worldwide Pentax User Map - PentaxForums.com
Pentax did the optical formula, so the soul of the lenses is always Pentax. The cost more because production numbers for CaNikon are higher than the one from Pentax.
DA 50mm 1.8 performs well at the K-1, used F/FA AF lenses are available in US/EU/JP. With over 100 AF lenses i can't see the point of your argument.
15MP are enough for a good print in DIN A3 / 30x40cm. Even with the DA 560mm and DA 12-24mm in APS-C mode on the K-1, the image quality does satisfy me.
Pentax coatings are at least as good as the competition. Even the 31 years old F* can compete with current lenses. Lenses from 1976 wouldn't fit to a nikon DSLR camera. Who knows if Pentax wouldn't bring a second K-mount MILC camera after the K-01? Which is of course an interesting camera. Which is available used for $200-300.

1. One of the layers of coatings seems a bit smeared see 31mm lens issue - Album on Imgur
2. I just never wanted to use it bad enough to use up to three editing programs for a single image i guess.
3. my understanding is the digital coating comes with the D seris lenses and was designed to correct issues with digital sensors such as reducing purple fringing. There was such a long and technical thread on here one day all about the fa 31 and what the technical lens concerns people see are and coatings and so much stuff...
4. Other than the dealer who used ot stock pentax stuff locally, the closes is 494 miles away that maybe stocks things
5. Never looked into that, not sure how comfortable I would be asking someone I dont know to try out their K-1 if any of them have that model
6. Does that mean the 15-30 and 24-70 may perform better/worse in terms of resolution and sharpness than their tamron cousins?
7. this is related to 3 where, yes theres tons of lenses, but I don't know of most of them and gernally feel comfortable buying newer glass. The more I look into the k1 the less I see this being an issue outside of wanting something like the tamron 150-600 for that price
8. at 15mp I'd rather just use my k3ii still if I specifcally wanted to use the crop only lenses such as my 70mm limited. I love my k3ii
9. 100% of my worry about modern lens coatings is from my disapointment in the fa 31mm i boughts performance considering it should have cost more than twice what I spent. That and my lack of expirence with a wide array of glass, low years of exprience. Its a concern I appreicate people showing me when/how its a none issue because Id honestly like to get a k1 some glass and just be happy with it.

As for the Tamron - aren't you talking about the 150-600? I can't find any 100-600 Tamron g2 lens at B&H or other places but I'm finding lots of articles on the 150-600. It does seem like a stunning lens. However the 600mm may be a bit misleading as the lens resolution charts show that it falls off a bit as you get longer than around 400mm. Canon and Nikon 100-400 lenses are often cited as better for long range shots due to the lack of image fall off but an extra 150mm even if reduced quality is nothing to scoff at.

Bear in mind the 1.5x more pixels you have on the K1 vs. the D750 will translate into bigger crops of the telephoto subjects resulting in more keepers (if they are in focus!) and more magnified images over what you would get with the D750. So assuming you shot one at 600mm and the other at 450mm the 450mm image cropped in may offer better resolution for a couple of reasons, 1) the lens doesn't fall in performance at 450mm, 2) the overall MP allows a deeper crop with similar resolution. But you do lose the light loving big pixels on the D750, and the improved focus capabilities.
If I were in your shoes I'd do whatever is the lowest pain

Yeah I meant the tamron 150-600 g2, I know that they and sigma make 4 pretty simialr focal lengths around there. I had read that the bigma 50-500 we can get falls off pretty fast but I dont remember hearing that the tamron was terrible at 600, so you very well could be right and the Pentax lens on the K1 may provide much better pictures which would make me happy. In the end, the least pain may be sticking with my k3ii and continuing to tell myself its good enough and try to be better with it.

[Dan Rentea]

With all due respect, I've shot birds in flight with my A-400 with a K-5.

And I also have seen some BIF images taken by guys who were using manual focus lenses. But they had one or two images in focus for each burst of 5-10 images (depending on the fps on their cameras and also depending on the direction of the birds in flight). My point is/was that for consistent results when comes to BIF you need more than a good tehnique.

[biz-engineer]

What I've seen on the forum certainly hasn't settled that one for me. I still wonder whether a D750 would produce better IQ than a K-1 and 150-450. The 150-600 has 33% more reach. The K-1 has 50% more pixels, I have no clue who wins that saw off.

Short answer: all zooms are in the same league as supertele primes. Zooms need good light and aren't going to deliver tack sharp images with a crop camera. The sharpest of all "consumer" super tele zooms is the Canon 100-400 II, but ... max is 400mm. For pro grade image quality, primes win, and the new long primes are very expensive.

[normhead]

And I also have seen some BIF images taken by guys who were using manual focus lenses. But they had one or two images in focus for each burst of 5-10 images (depending on the fps on their cameras and also depending on the direction of the birds in flight). My point is/was that for consistent results when comes to BIF you need more than a good tehnique.

That would definitely be the case.

However, the MF guy might still get the best image.

---

Last edited by normhead; 03-29-2018 at 06:31 AM.

[Dan Rentea]

That would definitely be the case.

However, the MF guy might still get the best image.

With some luck and with a proper technique...yes, anything is possible. But when you want/need consistency, you may end up sacrificing some resolution and go for speed and accurate af. Who goes out to shoot BIF is not that much interested in resolution, otherwise D850 or even medium format cameras would often be seen in the hands of PRO photographers instead of D5, 1Dx Mark II. And to be honest, I don't think that K1 with 150-450mm @450mm will be better in terms of IQ than D750 with Tamron 150-600mm G2 @600mm. Even if it is better, the difference would probably be to small to make a big difference anyway.

I was in Milano - Italy a few days ago to see the world championships skating final and as much as I tried to get the images that PRO photographers from Canon team were getting right next to me, my 5D Mark IV didn't had a chance against their 1Dx Mark II cameras (same lenses on both cameras, 70-200mm f2.8L). And 5D Mark IV is super good at tracking. But, the 14 fps of 1Dx Mark II with an even better af system (is more responsive) than the one from my camera made the differece. Ok, even their experience in shooting sport for a living counted also. I do have good images, maybe one even better than the ones of the guy shooting next to me, but that day I was like a hyena getting in the lion's teritory and try to steal his lunch, a dead gazzele. I barely managed to stole a quarter of a leg, but I also realised 2 things:
1. I'm still hungry after eating just a quarter of the gazzele leg
2. The lion can kill me quite easy no metter how skilled I am in battle

K1 may be the king in landscape photography, but is a hyena at most when comes to BIF or sports. As long as people understand this, they can get great results shooting BIF with Pentax cameras by improving their technique and by starting to use anything they can in their advantage.

[biz-engineer]

I don't think that K1 with 150-450mm @450mm will be better in terms of IQ than D750 with Tamron 150-600mm G2 @600mm.

By principle zooms are for framing shooting between the min and the max focal length. The pros will use a 100-200 <-> 400-500 zoom for safaris and a 500 or 600 f4 primes for birding. Most amateurs will only be able to afford the 100-200 <-> 400-500 zoom and 99% of the time will use it at its max focal length cropped for birding, which is not what those zooms are designed for.

[UncleVanya]

K1 may be the king in landscape photography, but is a hyena at most when comes to BIF or sports. As long as people understand this, they can get great results shooting BIF with Pentax cameras by improving their technique and by starting to use anything they can in their advantage.

LOL I'm sure it was unintentionally funny but the latest understanding is that Hyenas often hunt their prey on their own and have it taken by Lions - they don't just hang out waiting for scraps.

Hyena facts: is this a cowardly scavenger or an efficient hunter?

I would love for Pentax to take some kills in pro sports... But as you point out it is hard to compete in some niches with just technique and a much lower shot rate.

[Dan Rentea]

LOL I'm sure it was unintentionally funny but the latest understanding is that Hyenas often hunt their prey on their own and have it taken by Lions - they don't just hang out waiting for scraps.

Hyena facts: is this a cowardly scavenger or an efficient hunter?

I would love for Pentax to take some kills in pro sports... But as you point out it is hard to compete in some niches with just technique and a much lower shot rate.

I know that hyenas are efficient predators and that their strenght is given by the number of the members in a gang. But even in the article you provided it says that "Usually adult antelopes can escape from a single hyena...". It can escape because a single hyena doesn't have what it takes to put down the antelope. I don't think that once a lion put its claws on an antelope, the antelope has the same chances to escape as she has when she's running away from a hyena. And even if a single hyena will eventually kill the antelope, it will need a lot more time to do it than a lion. That's why I keep saying that you can take great wildlife images with any camera released in the last couple of years (we have enough examples in the 300mm+ thread), but with some cameras you need to work a little harder to get great results and you will also have trouble in getting consistent results.

[Tan68]

I know that hyenas are efficient predators and that their strenght is given by the number of the members in a gang. But even in the article you provided it says that "Usually adult antelopes can escape from a single hyena...". ....

So the Pentax users hunt in packs and one will bring the skater down...

Save

[jatrax]

I've seen threads take bizarre twists in the past. Cheese for example. But this might be a new high (low??)..............

[Dan Rentea]

I've seen threads take bizarre twists in the past.

Yes, it did took a weird twist this thread.

Back on topic. For street photography I would take a close look at Pentax KP and the Pentax 20-40mm f2.8-4 Limited. Even for landscape and night photography can be a very good option with the 11-18mm f2.8 lens attached. For street photography that involves action I would pick a friends dog and making him run while I start to play with all the Af settings available in the menu until I find the one/the ones that gives me the best results. Once you gain confidence in shooting fast action, going back shooting people on the street would become much easier.

If you want K1 (or if you are convienced that you need one), you have to invest in the new lenses also if you want to get the best results. Old lenses in my opinion are more or less for the ones that used to shoot film. Those lenses most of the time are slow to focus, have tons of chromatic aberations and they become sharp after you close down the aperture by one stop or more. Some of them have a special bokeh that some people like. But if Af speed is what you want, the best results with K1 you will get with the new lenses.

Today is hard to choose a camera because all manufacturers produce great cameras. Sony with the new A7 III has turned some heads and they deserve it because it looks like they released a very capable camera. Fuji has a few cameras to choose from also. Canon & Nikon have also mature and solid system (cameras and lenses)... As long as you find a camera that makes you grab it when you see it on the table and go out to take pictures, then the brand of the camera becomes irrelevant.

[normhead]

And to be honest, I don't think that K1 with 150-450mm @450mm will be better in terms of IQ than D750 with Tamron 150-600mm G2 @600mm. Even if it is better, the difference would probably be to small to make a big difference anyway

Yes and I doubt you're going to see a lot of difference between my k-3 images than images taken with a 5D or 750. I don't get to see many other images, but there are a couple of other photographers, Canon and Nikon shooters, I follow on facebook, and I don't see any difference at face book size between their images and my K-3 images, nor do I often see a lot of difference between my K-3 images and K-1 images in the field.

It is the times when you do see a difference the you carry the big camera for. Not all the times you don't.

I've been looking for definitive information on just that issue. I've seen common assumptions to turn out horribly wrong before.

In the world of high end photography quality is defined by small differences.

My conclusion would be stick with a K-3. Maybe not for figure skating. But then I would never watch figure skating so my feeling would be to feel sorry for everyone there. Trapped watching figure skating for two hours. 5 minutes and I'd be out of there.

But thanks for the advice If i ever want to shoot figure skating I'll rent a 1Dx. I almost did a few weeks ago, there was one second hand at a really good price from a guy upgrading to a markII. But then I realized... I'd have to buy lenses.

Here is the big question, D750 and 150-600 or K-3 (or KP) and 150-450. Now we have a contest.