[richandfleur]

I think these discussions are worth consideration. If you buy a DSLR with interchangeable lenses, but stick with the stock budget lenses, then you may well have been better off with an all in one, with a better quality/matched fixed lens.


As 'basic' camera specs improve, the need for a DSLR specifically moves wider out into the fringes. You'll benefit for low light performance, (try using a cellphone in anything other than medium to bright lighting levels), more control over depth of field etc, but on a good bright overcast day a quality bridge camera may give you better quality all in focus images. Adding good quality big zooms to DSLR's is expensive, often costing more for the lens than a bridge camera itself. Going to FF with the larger image circle ups this again.


If you're like me, with limited funds at the moment, you start to question if I'm in the right game and getting the best images I can for the money I have to play with.


It's hard to find a bad camera these days.
I prefer an optical viewfinder, so aren't going anywhere soon. That said I'd like an EVF too, so I could maintain the stable stance of stills when shooting video too.

---

Last edited by richandfleur; 03-01-2017 at 04:39 PM.

[Transit]

I won't lie I was pretty shocked today with the results of the ....

That doesn't sound right f11 is best sharpness but mine is pretty blinking good wide open
maybe try focus tuning it to that camera? Are you using a hood?

[following.eric]

I'd been starting to lust after the K-1, but if the KP lives up to its hype, it might be a more affordable option.

The k1 would be nice but if you already have a nice collection of apsc lenses then kp makes more sense. I've already decide that when I sell my car and head to can Nada in June I'll put that towards the kp. Since my k50 is showing signs of aperture failure it's time to upgrade. And would like to upgrade to current so I'll be set for the next three years plus

---------- Post added 03-01-17 at 05:02 PM ----------

That doesn't sound right f11 is best sharpness but mine is pretty blinking good wide open
maybe try focus tuning it to that camera? Are you using a hood?

I got one of those AF focus cards. Doo they work with telephoto lens? And how would I got about testing it.
No hood. Need to order one. Tests to come

[Transit]

Just did a couple of 55-300 shots distance 40 feet
downsizing has munted them

300mm @f 5.8


and @f11



and this was a big crop from the other end of the field
f8


and this was from the ground and cropped
f9

---

Last edited by Transit; 03-01-2017 at 05:37 PM.

[awa355]

Any short comings from my 55-300 DA is most likely down to my ability rather than the lens.
Yesterday I bought a new Sony HX400V. Ever since selling the P610 bridge camera I have missed the reach of that lens. Will give it a thrashing this weekend. The jpegs from the nikonp610 leave the K50 jpegs for dead. With the long reach of the super lens I have no need to crop in as I do now with the K50.

[Kiwi645hauler]

The big thing with the bridge cameras using that tine 1" or smaller sensor is that those lenses say f3.5 or whatever, but if comparing to a DSLR with an APS-C sensor, that f3.5 aperture is actually nearly f11 equivalent, thats a massive reason why most of the compacts look pretty good no matter what, the apertures are actually pretty small so the depth of fields are much greater for a given f number

---------- Post added 03-01-17 at 09:05 PM ----------

Just a quick post, I had my Pentax 645 out last week, and was using Lomo 400ASA film, took some pics around the Warehouse precinct here in Dunedin that council are keen on re-purposing and restoring these amazing old buildings some of which are near on 100 years old. This is one of my pics, a couple of old buidings that have been restored/re-purposed, and a new retail strip-mall. The film was developed at home, using ilford LC-29 and hand processed in a Paterson tank

[following.eric]

Finally got the 300mm pics on lightroom to inspect. Results were all over the place. I was trying to cover a large distance. But after seeing some of the airplane shots, which I would think are farther I'm surprised by the results. Hopefully my copy is not bad. Will need to really test it and play with it.
Looks like the faster the shutter speed the better the results turned out and the smaller aperture seemed to help.

At 300mm on APS-C what would be a minimal hand help speed? I have read with long zooms you need a faster shutter because the light travelling through the lens can move slightly.
I'll attach to different shots I got.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[NZ_Ross]

Just a quick post, I had my Pentax 645 out last week, and was using Lomo 400ASA film

Nice image Hayden. I have just also got the roll of Lomo 400ASA film back today. I also got few images that I am happy with. I really like the grain and tones of that film. How are you scanning it for digital - do you scan the negatives, or are you scanning the print?

[NZ_Ross]

Finally got the 300mm pics on lightroom to inspect. Results were all over the place. I was trying to cover a large distance. But after seeing some of the airplane shots, which I would think are farther I'm surprised by the results. Hopefully my copy is not bad. Will need to really test it and play with it.
Looks like the faster the shutter speed the better the results turned out and the smaller aperture seemed to help.

I have added below some 55-300 images from the past few years. K5 and DA 55-300, K3 and HD DA 55-300, as I brought the K3 the same day as the HD DA 55-300. The only other thought I had with your images Eric, was did you have the SR on? I always have mine on unless on a tripod.

Another thought would be to see if you need to adjust the lens to your camera.

[Transit]

Finally got the 300mm pics on lightroom to inspect. Results were all over the place. I was trying to cover a large distance. But after seeing some of the airplane shots, which I would think are farther I'm surprised by the results. Hopefully my copy is not bad. Will need to really test it and play with it.
Looks like the faster the shutter speed the better the results turned out and the smaller aperture seemed to help.

At 300mm on APS-C what would be a minimal hand help speed? I have read with long zooms you need a faster shutter because the light travelling through the lens can move slightly.
I'll attach to different shots I got.

At airshows where I'm trying to preserve prop blur
I tend to use 1/320 but as you observe going to 1/640 is sharper
I wonder if you have got some heat haze because of the distance
it does tend to add up and give you the sort of foggy look you get there.
But definitely try fiddling with autofocus fine tuning

---------- Post added 2nd Mar 2017 at 06:28 PM ----------

Fantastic colours there Ross!
That second shot I find quite scary
it's like there is something coming in that mist in the distance

[NZ_Ross]

Fantastic colours there Ross!
That second shot I find quite scary
it's like there is something coming in that mist in the distance

Thanks Pete, that one and the last one were both when I was on the boat up at Tokelau. They were some of the last images I ever took with my K5, as it died very shortly after I got back from Tokelau. I was quite happy it didn't die when I was up there

[following.eric]

At airshows where I'm trying to preserve prop blur
I tend to use 1/320 but as you observe going to 1/640 is sharper
I wonder if you have got some heat haze because of the distance
it does tend to add up and give you the sort of foggy look you get there.
But definitely try fiddling with autofocus fine tuning

---------- Post added 2nd Mar 2017 at 06:28 PM ----------

Fantastic colours there Ross!
That second shot I find quite scary
it's like there is something coming in that mist in the distance

Ya could be, it was late afternoon and it was hot in the valley. only reason I got thinking something was off was because my girlfriends sony point and shoot was producing better photos. Just ran out and did some test shots at f11 aperture priority mode. Considering the cat was moving it did well at 300mm. Some of the shots at 120mm f11 are tact sharp. Had motion blur but I think thats AF problems trying to track the cat moving around towards me. The farthest thing with detail was the gondola. And at f11 hand held it did much better even at 1/400.

I think I'll just have to practice and figure out where this lens sits to produce quality. I'll look into how to use a focus adjustment card and maybe test that on the weekend to see if it needs an adjustment

[zkarj]

Given that I've already been in a situation with the K-50 where the low light performance wasn't adequate (and I did have a fast prime on at the time), there's no way I'd downgrade to a P&S/Bridge camera.

The K-5 has amazing light gathering capabilities with a high usable ISO range, which is just as well when trying to capture this after sunset. 36mm (and cropped, I normally would have gone longer), f/4.5, 1/160, ISO 4000! I had to tame the noise quite a bit, but by leaving some in for an "authentic" feel, I didn't have too much trouble with detail.

Finally got the 300mm pics on lightroom to inspect. Results were all over the place. I was trying to cover a large distance. But after seeing some of the airplane shots, which I would think are farther I'm surprised by the results. Hopefully my copy is not bad. Will need to really test it and play with it.
Looks like the faster the shutter speed the better the results turned out and the smaller aperture seemed to help.

That first image looks like both very challenging light (a huge dynamic range required for sunlight and shadow) and some motion blur. I do find if I let my shutter speed down too much I get softer images in general, but then I am usually shooting moving subjects.

[following.eric]

I have added below some 55-300 images from the past few years. K5 and DA 55-300, K3 and HD DA 55-300, as I brought the K3 the same day as the HD DA 55-300. The only other thought I had with your images Eric, was did you have the SR on? I always have mine on unless on a tripod.

Another thought would be to see if you need to adjust the lens to your camera.

SR was on. f11 seems to be much better.

I love the fourth picture. Where was that beach? looks like Indonesia or somewhere like that

[NZ_Ross]

SR was on. f11 seems to be much better.

That is good. Once we did the investigation here on 55-300 IQ and I realised f11 was the sweet spot, and started using it, I was much happier with my images. If you use TAv mode you can set the aperture and the shutter speeds that you want, then let the ISO float to cover the difference.

I love the fourth picture. Where was that beach? looks like Indonesia or somewhere like that

That image is from the Tokelau Islands. The have a series of small Motu (Islands) around a lagoon with a coral reef on the ocean side. So the wave is breaking on the reef.