[NZ_Ross]

From what I've heard, Otago is not all drunkenness and debauchery, however to maintain the reputation, those to do engage in such activities apparently are quite happy to take it upon themselves to not only do their own part, but also act on behalf of those who would rather refrain.

That is about it - in a nutshell

[85Civic]

Hey guys!

I'm planning on moving to Japan in Spring so I'll be selling quite a bit of gear, and thought I'd see if you guys were interested before I posted them onto the marketplace and trademe

Lenses
Pentax 10-17mm f3.5-4.5 fisheye
Pentax 21mm f3.2 Limited
Sigma 24mm f1.8 'Macro'
Pentax 35mm f2.4
Pentax 100mm f2.8 WR Macro
Sigma 135-400mm f4.5-5.6

DSLR
Pentax K100D

Probably a few other small things as well ... just figure it's the perfect excuse to downsize. But of course I'll be staying with Pentax for quite a while ^_^

[zkarj]

What are people's thoughts between the following options for increasing reach over my DA 55-300 f/4-5.6?

1.4x HD PENTAX-DA AF Rear Converter AW – yielding a 77-420 f/5.6-8 (USD$450)
Sigma APO 50-500 f4-6.3 EX DG HSM OS (NZD$1850)
Pentax HD PENTAX D FA 150-450mm f/4.5-5.6 DC AW (USD$1950)

Obviously the TC is way cheaper but "only" goes to 420mm (630 equiv). Can't find it now but I thought I read somewhere the focussing of the 55-300 can suffer a little, and it can be temperamental on its own. The aperture reduction shouldn't be a biggie as I tend to shoot f/11 for sharpness anyway.

For 2.5x that cost the Sigma wins the reach race with a whopping 750 equivalent. Reviews suggest is it quite capable. As far as I can tell it's not limiting to lens or camera function (as some Sigma products are - their TC seems very limited).

In the middle of the reach battle, the Pentax 450 seems to review VERY well, but it's another grand over the Sigma. Is the performance 50% better than the Sigma? And is it worth 4x as much as the TC for an extra 30mm reach (and better performance)?

Aside from "you get what you pay for" any thoughts on weighing any option over another considering any other factors? I think most of you know my prey include wild birds and metal birds, both of which can be fast movers at times.

If money were no object I'd almost certainly go for the Pentax 450 (one reviewer even said it performs well with the 1.4 TC! 950 equivalent would need a sturdy tripod!!) To put it another way, which would you go for and why?

[85Civic]

1.4x HD PENTAX-DA AF Rear Converter AW – yielding a 77-420 f/5.6-8 (USD$450)
Sigma APO 50-500 f4-6.3 EX DG HSM OS (NZD$1850)
Pentax HD PENTAX D FA 150-450mm f/4.5-5.6 DC AW (USD$1950)

Have you considered the other Sigma superzooms like the 150-something (think it's 150-450 or 500) -- I hear people like that more then the 50-500 for Image quality since it's not trying to do everything

If you wanna go the real budget end of things, you could take my 135-400mm off my hands but it's not all that sharp and a loud autofocuser sooo yeah what you pay is what you get

[NZ_Ross]

1.4x HD PENTAX-DA AF Rear Converter AW – yielding a 77-420 f/5.6-8 (USD$450)
Sigma APO 50-500 f4-6.3 EX DG HSM OS (NZD$1850)
Pentax HD PENTAX D FA 150-450mm f/4.5-5.6 DC AW (USD$1950)

I have had the same set of questions when thinking about photographing birds in flight.

One of the questions you need to answer is are you planning to photograph handheld or only on a tripod (or monopod). The reason for the question - look at the relative weights of the lenses/TC combinations

Pentax HD 55-300, 450g; HD 1.4x TC, 126g; Total 576g
Sigma APO 50-500, 1970g
Pentax HD 150-450, 2000g
and for comparison, if money actually was no object (they sell for about USD $7,000 when they come up on the Marketplace)
Pentax FA* 250-600 f5.6 5400g

There is no easy or right answer to the question. A lot of bird photographers are using long prime lenses - for example the Pentax HD 560mm f5.6 is 3040g and again about USD $7,000, or the Sigma 500mm f4.5, 3100g, USD $5,000

I think the answer lies in what you are looking for - handheld or tripod, zoom or prime, high image quality or medium image quality, autofocus or manual focus (which would open up another whole range of possibilities)

Have fun thinking about it

And yes, I also agree - you generally get what you pay for....

[Kiwi645hauler]

What are people's thoughts between the following options for increasing reach over my DA 55-300 f/4-5.6?

1.4x HD PENTAX-DA AF Rear Converter AW – yielding a 77-420 f/5.6-8 (USD$450)
Sigma APO 50-500 f4-6.3 EX DG HSM OS (NZD$1850)
Pentax HD PENTAX D FA 150-450mm f/4.5-5.6 DC AW (USD$1950)

Obviously the TC is way cheaper but "only" goes to 420mm (630 equiv). Can't find it now but I thought I read somewhere the focussing of the 55-300 can suffer a little, and it can be temperamental on its own. The aperture reduction shouldn't be a biggie as I tend to shoot f/11 for sharpness anyway.

For 2.5x that cost the Sigma wins the reach race with a whopping 750 equivalent. Reviews suggest is it quite capable. As far as I can tell it's not limiting to lens or camera function (as some Sigma products are - their TC seems very limited).

In the middle of the reach battle, the Pentax 450 seems to review VERY well, but it's another grand over the Sigma. Is the performance 50% better than the Sigma? And is it worth 4x as much as the TC for an extra 30mm reach (and better performance)?

Aside from "you get what you pay for" any thoughts on weighing any option over another considering any other factors? I think most of you know my prey include wild birds and metal birds, both of which can be fast movers at times.

If money were no object I'd almost certainly go for the Pentax 450 (one reviewer even said it performs well with the 1.4 TC! 950 equivalent would need a sturdy tripod!!) To put it another way, which would you go for and why?

the 50-500 is about the only one of the long focal length Sigmas on Pentax mount these days, the Art/Sport/Contemporary lenses dont seem to be available in Pentax mount these days the only other one is the Sigma 150-500mm APO EX DG OS HSM and they are $1250 NZ

[Kiwizinho]

Hey guys!

I'm planning on moving to Japan in Spring so I'll be selling quite a bit of gear, and thought I'd see if you guys were interested before I posted them onto the marketplace and trademe

Lenses

Pentax 100mm f2.8 WR Macro
Sigma 135-400mm f4.5-5.6

I might be interested in one or other of these. I can probably only afford one, and my preference is leaning towards the 100mm macro, as IQ is likely to be better, and 100mm will double up as a useful portrait lens.
While I like the idea of the reach of 400mm for birding, there's a higher possibility the 100mm could at least partly pay for itself. My 50mm FA 1.4 already partially paid for itself doing some product shots for a web site I was working on, and I've been considering something in the 90-105mm macro range for a bit, dependent on actually having some money.
There are a couple of possible candidates on Trademe at the moment, but PM me with a price and I'll let you know if I'm interested.

[Clarkey]

What are people's thoughts between the following options for increasing reach over my DA 55-300 f/4-5.6?

1.4x HD PENTAX-DA AF Rear Converter AW – yielding a 77-420 f/5.6-8 (USD$450)
Sigma APO 50-500 f4-6.3 EX DG HSM OS (NZD$1850)
Pentax HD PENTAX D FA 150-450mm f/4.5-5.6 DC AW (USD$1950)

Obviously the TC is way cheaper but "only" goes to 420mm (630 equiv). Can't find it now but I thought I read somewhere the focussing of the 55-300 can suffer a little, and it can be temperamental on its own. The aperture reduction shouldn't be a biggie as I tend to shoot f/11 for sharpness anyway.

For 2.5x that cost the Sigma wins the reach race with a whopping 750 equivalent. Reviews suggest is it quite capable. As far as I can tell it's not limiting to lens or camera function (as some Sigma products are - their TC seems very limited).

In the middle of the reach battle, the Pentax 450 seems to review VERY well, but it's another grand over the Sigma. Is the performance 50% better than the Sigma? And is it worth 4x as much as the TC for an extra 30mm reach (and better performance)?

Aside from "you get what you pay for" any thoughts on weighing any option over another considering any other factors? I think most of you know my prey include wild birds and metal birds, both of which can be fast movers at times.

If money were no object I'd almost certainly go for the Pentax 450 (one reviewer even said it performs well with the 1.4 TC! 950 equivalent would need a sturdy tripod!!) To put it another way, which would you go for and why?

The HD 1.4 converter is good. I have it on the back of the 60-250mm, and it does fairly well.
The 55-300 AF will slow down (further - and it's slow already) with it on due to the amount of light getting in. However, if you intend using in daylight it should work (and improve contrast). If you have a 55-300 variant with quickshift, you can make do with that for BIF. Obviously, YMMV.

Another consideration is to get the DA 300 and 1.4 TC.

Ross' comments are also good - depends what you want it for, and how much you want to carry.

Here's hoping we also get the Tammy 150-600 in the next year, or so.

[NZ_Ross]

Here's hoping we also get the Tammy 150-600 in the next year, or so.

Now that would be a very nice and affordable option .

[Clarkey]

Now that would be a very nice and affordable option .

And the Nikon folks are wringing their hands over whether to get that or the 200-500mm. Poor souls.

[zkarj]

Thanks for the thoughts everyone.

Have you considered the other Sigma superzooms like the 150-something (think it's 150-450 or 500) -- I hear people like that more then the 50-500 for Image quality since it's not trying to do everything

I wasn't aware of that one. Is it discontinued? I used B&H's excellent filters and all I could find in Pentax mount that went to 400 or above were the two I listed.

If you wanna go the real budget end of things, you could take my 135-400mm off my hands but it's not all that sharp and a loud autofocuser sooo yeah what you pay is what you get

Well, it was seeing that that got me thinking again! But I want to make a decent leap beyond 300 because I only want to do it once. That's why the easy, cheap option of the TC isn't so easy as it's only 420 when I know there are 450 and 500 options out there (and more for serious coin).

I think the answer lies in what you are looking for - handheld or tripod, zoom or prime, high image quality or medium image quality, autofocus or manual focus (which would open up another whole range of possibilities)

Good questions.

Almost certainly handheld as I don't believe a tripod will work (for me certainly) for many of my shooting situations. The manual lists a loaded K-5 at 740g so I'm currently used to (and mostly don't notice) what amounts to 1190g. The heaviest option would be 2740g so 2.3x times the weight or +1500g. I'm sure I'd notice it but I'm not convinced it will be a huge problem as I don't hold the camera up for a long time, but constantly let the camera dangle on my shoulder strap. Well, I guess my shoulder might complain, but I'd be less worried about my arms holding it up. In birding situations I may be able to afford the time and space for a tripod or even a monopod in stalking situations. As a rudimentary experience, I just tried holding up the (actually 1235g with hood and cap) K-5 + 55-300 combo with one hand and apart from stability issues it does not feel super heavy. As I mentioned before, with two hands in my normal shooting position I hardly notice the weight.

I'm a big fan of zoom because most of my subjects will resolutely choose their distance from me and I compose with the zoom ring because of this. There are also the times when my proximity allows me the choice with an aircraft to get the whole thing or go in close for a detail shot.

Definitely autofocus. My manual focusing is at the very best proven to be consistently just off the mark even in static situations, let alone fast moving.

As for image quality, I'm pretty happy with what the 55-300 is producing at f/11 these days. I used to be unhappy with it and then I got this iMac 5K with 218ppi screen and realise it's pretty darned good. Not pin sharp and sometimes a bit soft but generally very good if I don't muck it up.

The more I think about the TC the more I think it's low price is the only feature that redeems it over the other two. While IQ is reported "good" it sounds like it will be harder to capture focus in many of my common situations which will be annoying. The leap on that front between the K10D and K-5 has been great and I still get misses.

So it's really down to the Sigma vs Pentax. It sounds like the Pentax is top notch in all facets, though it leaves 50mm of reach on the table (above I said jumping from 300-400 was insignificant!). And considerable $$$ out of pocket. So it comes down to just how good the Sigma is and I don't have a clear read on that yet other than "not as good" as the Sigma 15-450 (or similar) which in turn suggests "not as good" as the Pentax.

I'd make the decision (it's definitely in the future still) on purely budgetary grounds (can I stomach the expensive one) but would really like to know if the Sigma would disappoint. I guess it's pretty much impossible to rent Pentax-mount glass in these parts (Welly).

[richandfleur]

Quick timelapse over two mornings whilst camping this last weekend.
GoPro Hero4 Silver, 5s interval, protune on, tripod mount.


Then took some photos with the Pentax's

You Tube

You Tube

[85Civic]

I wasn't aware of that one. Is it discontinued? I used B&H's excellent filters and all I could find in Pentax mount that went to 400 or above were the two I listed.

I guess they're just Canikon mounts then :/

I'd also check PentaxForums' list of lenses in Pentax mount, since I've found a few I wouldn't have known about otherwise.
For things around infinity 400mm feels a lot further then 300, but that could be because I was only used to 200mm before getting that lens ... but yeah in saying that I've got a friend with a 150-600 and he seems to be able to get creepy close to anything

[Transit]

My photo collection is a mess. There are backups of backups spread over 4 drives...
I have tried opening all the windows at once to compare but I need more monitors ...
Is there some help for those such as I ?
anything but Adobe

Embarrassed of Wongas
or Whongas
not pronounced Fongas though ok

[NZ_Ross]

I'm planning on moving to Japan in Spring

Congratulations on that - it sounds like an adventure. I hope it all goes really well for you . We will expect a photo now and then to prove you are still there.

---------- Post added 03-05-16 at 10:42 PM ----------

My photo collection is a mess. There are backups of backups spread over 4 drives...
I have tried opening all the windows at once to compare but I need more monitors ...
Is there some help for those such as I ?

Something that recognises and removes duplicates I would imagine....Aperture used to do it well, but I am assuming you are not planning to spend too much money on software, and nor are you using a Mac.

---------- Post added 03-05-16 at 10:53 PM ----------

I'd make the decision (it's definitely in the future still) on purely budgetary grounds (can I stomach the expensive one) but would really like to know if the Sigma would disappoint. I guess it's pretty much impossible to rent Pentax-mount glass in these parts (Welly).

Very interesting comment from a new Australian forum member eaglesf in his introduction about the Zeiss Exakta 100-500mm he is using for aviation photography. You might want to have a look and correspond with him.

Cheers

Ross