[richandfleur]

@richandfleur

Up for an adventure... ??
https://sugru.com/great-for/photography

https://sugru.com/gallery/get-a-steadier-grip-on-your-camera

Ha, maybe later

[zkarj]

I keep hearing about the lightness and compactness of mirrorless cameras. Perhaps one day I will buckle. But not for a while yet. Too many other hobbies chewing up readies.

But I do wonder, whether a mirrorless system would be better or worse for getting the fairly hefty zoom that I desire for aviation and birding. I'm rocking 450mm equivalent these days and could really use something 600 or more. I'm still eyeing up the Pentax 1.4x teleconverter. Might consider that for Christmas if our dollar would just hoist itself up a bit.

But would the mirrorless world make that quest any easier/harder?

[NZ_Ross]

But would the mirrorless world make that quest any easier/harder?

Only in that you could buy the Tamron 150-600 for Sony A mount, and then mount it on a Sony FF mirrorless using their adaptor, and you are in business. Or of course use a Nikon or Canon DSLR - depending on which Tamron you brought.

The Tamron is basically the same weight as the new Pentax 150-450, but under half the price. So if you had the dollars, the Pentax FF plus 1.4x TC gets you out to 600mm (or on its own on APSC), but then so does the Tamron and a Sony FF body.

Lugging a 2kg lens is going to require at a minimum a monopod, but probably a tripod and fancy head if you are shooting for a while (aircraft) - so looking at the kit you are going to lug - the differences in DSLR or mirrorless body weight are going to be a moot point.

Focus speed, accuracy and continuous shooting ability are going to be much more important.

In the Pentax world I reckon the FA*250-600 would be the trick for aircraft and BIF - I have linked to the one for sale on PF Marketplace right now. The $ might be a bit scary though. I see there is also a Pentax A*600mm for sale on the PF Marketplace - the dollars are a lot more reasonable.

Still the 250-600 would be very cool for aviation and birding

[richandfleur]

The mirror less reduced weight discussion does rather fall apart when you stick a sizeable lens on it.

If supported by a tripod etc then it's ok but handheld the grips tend to be the first things to go to save weight/size , at the expense of handling.

Only dropping sensor size will gove you more 'zoomage' for a given lens. FF does require quite massive lenses for far off work, compared to APS-C land.

Focus wise mirror less systems have come a long way with on sensor phase detection points, right across the sensor frame too. Birding is always demanding though, so I'd want to try that myself before diving in.

[Transit]

Update on the K-S1 grip.
For me I don't particularly like it. ....

it sure looks chopped off, that flat surface is just asking for the sugru
and that would take care of the front leds too

[FruitLooPs]

Purchased a bigma off TM the other day, still doing some focus testing but so far seems pretty cool - won't need the dumbells anymore thats for sure

As a result i've chucked my 135-400mm on TM if anyones interested, I got it from the marketplace here a few years back and it's proven to be a pretty good one.

[Transit]

Purchased a bigma off TM the other day....

nice score

[Kiwizinho]

If there was no water there would be no South Island - which would defeat the purpose of sending all the politicians to Wellington. It would ruin a perfectly good plan we have running down here

Highly recommend this if you have an hour or so in Palmerston North:

http://www.temanawa.co.nz/event/308239/

NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC PRESENTS: 50 GREATEST PHOTOGRAPHS

Saw it at Queen's Birthday Weekend in Upper Hutt while I was visiting my little bro. Well worth a look.

---------- Post added 09-05-15 at 10:06 AM ----------

Well have done it now. Hit the Buy Now button after getting the price reduced to $360 for a new K-S1


You might notice some similarities between the warehouses/premises of these two businesses:
About Us
Ian R. Little Ltd

That's a pretty good price for a K-S1. I paid more than that for a new K-50 a few months back, and am more than happy with it.
The K-S2 looks quite interesting to me, especially for video as it has an external mic socket. I have a pair of ageing Canon HV-30 mini DV tape based camcorders, that eventually I'd like to replace, and if I can do stills and video in a single camera it would be a bonus.
The video quality on the K-50 already looks way crisper with a good lens, and much better dynamic range than the HV-30s, although battery life is a bit of an issue. If I want to do scenic stuff and just mix in a backing music track and voiceover, then the lack of external mike doesn't matter, but otherwise the shotgun mike I have for the HV-30s provides vastly superior audio.

[zkarj]

Lugging a 2kg lens is going to require at a minimum a monopod, but probably a tripod and fancy head if you are shooting for a while (aircraft) - so looking at the kit you are going to lug - the differences in DSLR or mirrorless body weight are going to be a moot point.

The mirror less reduced weight discussion does rather fall apart when you stick a sizeable lens on it.

If supported by a tripod etc then it's ok but handheld the grips tend to be the first things to go to save weight/size , at the expense of handling.

Thanks for the comments guys. I'm not sure about this weight thing. Or, at least, I'm not sure I could ever be convinced to use a tripod for aircraft.

Especially for fast movers, using my body as the pivot point is a part of my shooting technique. Feet planted a little way apart and parallel to the flight path, I can swing easily through 180º+ without losing my tracking. Admittedly I only have a basic tripod but my efforts in translating my movements through a tripod when using a live view camera (such as the small video camera I had for a while) have been less than successful and I cannot imagine coping at all with an OVF or an EVF pretending to be one. In the eye-up-to-the-camera situation, I'd need to be running around the tripod while keeping my head still, and in the live view case, I have to translate head/eye -> screen -> subject. This is why I'm still heavily in the SLR camp. So long as I have a comfortable grip on the camera then all I need to do is look at the subject.

I am reminded of some official air show videos I have seen in years past where I reckon a tripod must have been used because the videographer was unable to keep aircraft steady in the frame even with a simple crowd pass. If I had the money I'd look at one of the new on-the-shoulder cameras. I shot some great footage back in the 80s (unfortunately lost in a house move I think) with a big Panasonic full-sized VHS camcorder, at an Ohakea air show. I admit I had a sore back at the end of the day, but the Skyhawks were, for the most part, centre frame – including for the low-inbound-to-vertical-flare-ejecting bit that topped out at many thousand feet directly overhead. The only real issue I remember with it was... the EVF! (OK, they've probably improved a little in 30 years.)

My body is my temple tripod.

---------- Post added 09-05-2015 at 03:50 PM ----------

The remembered videographers in question, and the homepage promo video bears out my issue.

Historical Aviation Film Unit

[NZ_Ross]

Thanks for the comments guys. I'm not sure about this weight thing. Or, at least, I'm not sure I could ever be convinced to use a tripod for aircraft.

K3 or K5 with DA 55-300 = approx 1.3kg. K3 or K5 with a big 2kg zoom lens (out to 600mm) = approx 2.8kg or just over double the weight - I reckon you would notice that lugging and lifting it at an airshow all day. Also the ability to handhold a 2kg lens whilst panning prompted the tripod/monopod comments. Something you would have to try I guess.

I have watched Youtube videos of BIF guys who are using big 600mm Canon primes. They are using big heavy duty carbon fibre tripods and gimbal heads to achieve high quality photos.

I have just factored all that when I have considered running 600mm glass (which I haven't gone to yet - although with the M*300 and AF1.7 gets me out past 600mm on APSC)

[richandfleur]

Yeah distance work does suit APS-C much more, given the extra 'reach'.

I do like the mirrorless ability to track across the whole frame, not just in the middle of it. One day they'll put those sensors in DSLR's and offer this option in live view. In fact I'm surprised no DSLR manufacturer is calling Live View 'Mirrorless Mode' yet...

[Class A]

FF does require quite massive lenses for far off work, compared to APS-C land.

A smaller sensor does not create more "reach" but higher pixel-pitch does.

A 36MP FF camera is just as good for far off work than a 16MP APS-C camera. Simply crop the FF image to APS-C dimensions and you get the same magnification.

[MarkJerling]

Thanks for the comments guys. I'm not sure about this weight thing. Or, at least, I'm not sure I could ever be convinced to use a tripod for aircraft.

You need a Steadycam!

[NZ_Ross]

The DA 20-40mm Limited I brought off the PF Marketplace some weeks ago arrived this morning, a few minutes after I had got to work (typical). I unpacked it at my lunch break and made a few images, and then again this evening walking along Caroline Bay (it was freezing).

I am very happy with this copy, which is essentially in 'as new' condition, and nice and sharp. The lens is about the same size as an FA31, nice and light in weight, and has that DA Limited feel to it. The zoom ring has a very nice feel and action - very smooth. The AF on the K3 is quiet, quick and decisive. The lens hood is very small - feels more like an ornament than a hood, but all up very happy. It is a quality lens that balances well on the K3.

I am also happy that it has turned up before I head overseas again next week, as my intention is for the DA20-40 to be my walk around lens while I am travelling.

A few images I made today with the lens. With the flax, have a look at 100% at the spiders webs at the tip of the flax.

[MarkJerling]

Neat sunrise here, a few days ago.