Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-02-2013, 10:58 AM   #31
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,562
I'm really fond of those Y-crooks that come with hiking staffs: they're meant to steady a rifle, but can actually cradle most lenses just as well. I like these because they are quick, light, and also mean you don't have to set aside your walking stick to shoot. It's not quite as steady as a monopod of course, (especially if the stick itself is erring on the side of lightness rather than rigidity: my such pole bent and later broke after saving me from getting hurt in a spill on some ice, (The parts are now combined with a cheap aluminum tripod from a thrift store, voila: Light stand. ) ) ...but it's just a matter of a few bucks.

With my arthritis and such, I found the Y-shaped rest to be a lot better than fumbling about with things in the cold: no need for a ballhead or anything to do verticals, etc. for something more rigid I'd been just waiting for a mismatched/orphaned ski pole to turn up. I was somewhat prioritizing just having something to help me walk and take the weight of camera and heavy sleeves,but for better steadiness it's just a matter of the right pole. (One of those trek-pod monopods looks like it'd work well in that combination.

06-05-2013, 07:11 PM   #32
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
This was one example of a super zoom, because the P&S max out at about 560mm equivalent, and are no where near as good as a Q. Also, if you only want 500mm equivalent focal length, then you can put an M100/2.8 on the Q. That will cut the total weight to something like 300G.

In fact, a Q with the 5-15mm zoom plus the Q/PK adaptor plus am M100/2.8 would be a super light kit that would let you do a whole lot.

I have replaced my K10 and M42 kit with a Q plus 5-15 zoom plus an M135/3.3 as my business travel kit, where I might have a chance to capture some wild life as well
Interesting assembly of components. If it works, then great.

BTW, the P&S cameras I was thinking about are the current crop of 50x zooms or thereabout. These go to about 1200mm equivalent. If I will be limited to a small sensor, this sounds more attractive to me than carrying some large glass.
06-05-2013, 10:49 PM   #33
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,924
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
Interesting assembly of components. If it works, then great.

BTW, the P&S cameras I was thinking about are the current crop of 50x zooms or thereabout. These go to about 1200mm equivalent. If I will be limited to a small sensor, this sounds more attractive to me than carrying some large glass.
But isnthen50x optical or combined optical plus cropped image. The Nikon P&S I have is a 26x zoom and goes out to 500mm but the stabilization is no whe near as good as the Q, and the Q, with a k mount adaptor ( the Pentax one) has a shutter built in that can do 1/500 flash sync (its an iris shutter) and the normal zoom for the camera 5-15mm is pretty good also. I have yet to really test the reach as I have limited my playing to 200mm, but plan to put this on my 200-500/5.6 zoom, for an equivalent of something in the order of 2750mm. Of course this is not exactly a light lens combo at 3kilos for the lens and 6 for the tripod with gimbal
06-06-2013, 04:06 AM   #34
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Slovenia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,182
@Lowell the 50x zoom is optical all the way. IMO it's easier to get a bridge (or a Q) than a supertelephoto for a DSLR.

06-06-2013, 02:06 PM   #35
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,924
QuoteOriginally posted by Giklab Quote
@Lowell the 50x zoom is optical all the way. IMO it's easier to get a bridge (or a Q) than a supertelephoto for a DSLR.
I don't disagree.

I have a 560mm equivalent bridge, and before that a 360mm bridge. I am playing now with a Q which is in a different league all together, because when I stick a modest lens like an M135/3.5 on it, it is a pretty light weight 750mm equivalent

Actually I think my Kodak bridge camera was better than my current Nikon bridge camera, and the Q better still
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!
dslr, hike, poles, tripod
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Peru and Macchu Piccu Trekking alphanerd Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 03-25-2013 10:24 PM
DSLR with Auto Bellows A and Slide Copier grjmn Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 4 02-16-2013 11:19 AM
"Smart Guy" Trump sticks with 'birther' argument, Romney sticks with Trump jogiba General Talk 8 05-30-2012 01:09 PM
A little trekking INSANITY MRRiley General Talk 13 10-13-2010 11:08 AM
Painting with fire... and glow sticks! (4 images) hamidlmt Post Your Photos! 9 05-21-2008 08:11 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:25 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