[GUB]

I did something radically different from usual today. Normally I shoot everything RAW, and more landscapes and natural history, but my Brazilian nephew wanted to run in a race, and I noticed the local news media photographers were just sticking around on the flat ground near the start and finish, and it was a hill race! I knew the course, and a few shortcuts to get me ahead of the runners without having to actually run the race (although I did need to run a bit).
I decided to photograph as many runners as possible, because it looked like no one else was. My K-70 is still in Christchurch so the K-50 had to come out again, but I set it to 8Mpixel high quality jpeg, and portrait profile, as I didn't want to fill my hard drive up with heaps of 20MByte raw files. The photos came out well.
You can see most of them here: King and Queen of the Withers 2020 (warning contains ads to help pay for hosting)

All images where shot with Tamron 70-200 2.8. I think my K-50 might be starting to develop aperture issues, as a few times lately it's taken black photos even with flash and supposedly wide open. It's intermittent, and only started happening since I got the K-70 which has resulted in the K-50 sitting in the cupboard most of the time, whereas previously it would generally get at least weekly use.
I have the RAW/Fx button assigned to depth of field preview, and activating this a couple of times and taking a few photos, everything comes right again, so it seems like lack of use contributes to the problem. I think I might make a habit of taking it out weekly and photographing something, even if it's rubbish and I delete it afterwards. It's certainly a cheap way to avoid a potentially unpleasant problem if it works.

Good on you for taking the effort to get a unique perspective.

Time and time again I have used a bit of sweat to get a point of difference and it works - people are so lazy!
The sand dune shot at Te Paki above is an example - people by the 1000s were down the bottom with a few taking the effort to slide down the bottom section on body boards. After climbing 150 metres vertical in soft sand it was down to me, my wife, and my sisters and one other couple. Needless to say my K-1 was the only full frame up there and likely to be the only one up there for months.

[GUB]

Did a test shot to show how bad my 55-300 is. Interestingly it is almost on par at f11.
But not very good considering how old and cheap the other zooms are.
The old primes can far more than hold their own.
My pick would be the Tair photosniper Bear in mind I have missed focus a little in its first shot.

That is why I have a fore and aft lenscap -- to show misses.
The caps are at 30 metres (100 x focal length) if anyone wants to compare.
Here is links to the lenses
Tokina 100-300mm F5.6-6.8-7 AF Lens Reviews - Tokina Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database
No review for the 35 - 300!!
Vivitar (Tokina 37xxxx) Soligor auto Telephoto 300mm f5.5 and f5.6, T4/TX and fixed mount Lens Reviews - Vivitar Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database
Tokyo Koki tele-Tokina ( soligor et al) 300mm f5.5 Lens Reviews - Tokina Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database
TAIR-3S 300mm F4.5 - Fotosniper 12 ensemble Lens Reviews - Russian and Zenitar Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database
Takumar 300mm F4 (model 2) Reviews - M42 Screwmount Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
Of course Pete's 300* would blow them all out of the water!

[richandfleur]

Thanks for all the info on the 300's available.
Genuinely annoyed at how expensive it is to go long on APS-C, especially with any quality and AF capability.

---------- Post added 01-13-20 at 01:54 PM ----------

That's nice to know about Lightroom. Maybe they respond to customer feedback? I filled out one of the pop-up surveys when Lightroom loads about whether I'd recommend it to friends, and one thing I commented on was that since LR went subscription only, I was cautious about using it for archiving images, as if (or when), I become defunct, I was worried about no one being able to access my images with my edits applied.

I'm lucky enough to have access to the full adobe suite via my work, but even then Lightroom on subscription is pretty much the same as Lightroom standalone. Once you export your final image, that's then a normal file you keep outside of Lightroom. You would need an active subscription to access the editing stage, but it's doubtful anyone else would do that? At all times you keep your own source image and then the final exported image.

---------- Post added 01-13-20 at 01:57 PM ----------

I travelled with the family this last week and left the Pentax at home, a first for me. I picked up a small mirrorless Canon M100 with kit lens over Christmas sales and took that instead. No viewfinder, just one large rear tilting touch screen. Will review the images later on the computer, but basically I loved using it. Found faces and tracked them well plus adjusted the exposure to ensure the face was properly lit. Could easily switch between stills and video as required, and tracked by simply selecting the area on the rear screen. First exposure to mirrorless was very good, and APS-C sized sensor behind it all too. Not sure if it's the one I'd go with long term, but the user experience was very good.

[GUB]

quality and AF capability.

Yes you pretty well have to be using a prime to combine these two. Guess my pick if I wanted to get serious about bird photog would be a F 300 or later coupled with a high megapickle apsc like the K3 etc. I tend to use my K-1 like a 15mp apsc for macro and telephoto.
AF would be a heck of a bonus with birding but things like fly pasts I think with a bit of fore-planning I could get by with MF.

[Kiwizinho]

Genuinely annoyed at how expensive it is to go long on APS-C, especially with any quality and AF capability.
---------- Post added 01-13-20 at 01:54 PM ----------

Once you go beyond 200mm, things seem to get decidedly expensive. On any system I think. It's one case where a phone doesn't really cut it.

I'm lucky enough to have access to the full adobe suite via my work, but even then Lightroom on subscription is pretty much the same as Lightroom standalone. Once you export your final image, that's then a normal file you keep outside of Lightroom. You would need an active subscription to access the editing stage, but it's doubtful anyone else would do that? At all times you keep your own source image and then the final exported image.[COLOR="Silver"]

I'm thinking in terms of edits that have been made but not exported. I know I don't always export full resolution images, or export watermarked ones for use online with the idea I can always go back and export full resolution ones at some later stage, but if I were to have an encounter with a proverbial bus, that might leave things awkward if an active subscription is required to export images, and I suspect I'm not the only one this might apply to.

---------- Post added 01-14-20 at 09:56 AM ----------

Yes you pretty well have to be using a prime to combine these two. Guess my pick if I wanted to get serious about bird photog would be a F 300 or later coupled with a high megapickle apsc like the K3 etc. I tend to use my K-1 like a 15mp apsc for macro and telephoto.
AF would be a heck of a bonus with birding but things like fly pasts I think with a bit of fore-planning I could get by with MF.

A MF lens might not be so bad. The catch in focus function which I think doesn't work with AF lenses unless they have a MF switch on the lens itself, might actually be more useful than AF.
I haven't tried it, so don't know for sure.
The one thing I've found is that small birds are hard even at 500mm on APS-C, so you probably just about need some sort of hide to get really good bird photos.
The other thing I've found about birding, is that at the distance you need to photograph them to get a decent image, regardless of lens speed, you need to stop down quite a bit to get any DOF, so a fast lens isn't necessary if you have a body that can handle high ISO, but sharpness is with a small subject.

[GUB]

The other thing I've found about birding, is that at the distance you need to photograph them to get a decent image, regardless of lens speed, you need to stop down quite a bit to get any DOF, so a fast lens isn't necessary if you have a body that can handle high ISO, but sharpness is with a small subject.

But small birds seem to "vibrate" - something that image stabilisation doesn't help with so you need high shutter speed too.

[Kiwizinho]

But small birds seem to "vibrate" - something that image stabilisation doesn't help with so you need high shutter speed too.

Small birds seem to offer the perfect combination to push camera gear to its limits. You need DOF, and high shutter speed, which means high ISO.

FF would help with this, but then it loses out on the crop factor of APS-C so you need longer lenses.

I have a huge amount of respect for people who manage to capture good bird images.

[zkarj]

You gotta admit tho that it is pretty sad that you have to stop down that much to get a sharp image.

Indeed. But then I've lived with that limitation for most of the lifetime of that lens (and the non-WR I had before it) so I'm used to it. The KP's ISO reach is mega-helpful and now I can pull maximum sharpness and tame a good deal of noise in post it's even more helpful. And in good light, it's not a big deal. Check out the detail in this shot.

I picked up a small mirrorless Canon M100 with kit lens over Christmas sales and took that instead. No viewfinder, just one large rear tilting touch screen.

How did you find using it out in the sun, and wearing sunglasses? That's where I struggle with both my (brighter than any previous model) iPhone and using LV on the KP. In fact on the KP, the 'outdoor bright' mode or whatever it's called is one of the options I have on my function dial.

Yes you pretty well have to be using a prime to combine these two. Guess my pick if I wanted to get serious about bird photog would be a F 300 or later coupled with a high megapickle apsc like the K3 etc.

The KP is 24 and yes, for birding a 300 prime would probably be very good as it's unlikely they're going to overflow the frame. Well... usually. But for my aircraft stuff I use the whole range of 55-300 often because I can often get close but they also go a long way away quickly. My foray on Friday to capture the Airbus A350 (the largest we see at Wellington) showed me that 55mm was barely able to fit it in as it passed me, yet for some angles I would like to get 300 isn't nearly enough. Not to mention smaller aircraft at some distance.

A MF lens might not be so bad. The catch in focus function which I think doesn't work with AF lenses unless they have a MF switch on the lens itself, might actually be more useful than AF.

The trouble with capture in focus is either the subject or the lens would have to be moving. My best bird shots are when I've managed to press the shutter in a moment of stillness! As for regular MF, I'd need a feature like exposure compensation or aperture bracketing – focus compensation/bracketing. My experience with the Cosina and its split-screen focusing was I was always not quite in focus.

[richandfleur]

Check out the detail in this shot

Nice!!

How did you find using it out in the sun, and wearing sunglasses?
Sucks really bad. Popped sunglasses up when I turned the camera in portrait as the polarisation blocked it completely.
Didn't investigate the bright screen mode, but should have/will do.

[GUB]

Anyone want one? Tamron AF SP 90 f2.8 macro 1:1 lens for Pentax camera | Trade Me

[richandfleur]

Anyone want one? Tamron AF SP 90 f2.8 macro 1:1 lens for Pentax camera | Trade Me

I have one of those. Best lens I own really.

Out of interest, when I did the lens calibration on my lenses a while back - this was the only one to be spot on already on both cameras.

[GUB]

I have one of those. Best lens I own really.

They have a good reputation. Had a look at BayEEE and the TM one may be a tad expensive.

[zkarj]

Phew! Site is back.

Sucks really bad. Popped sunglasses up when I turned the camera in portrait as the polarisation blocked it completely.

I remember when iPhones used to have that problem, which was a while ago. Shows what level of sophistication they're going for I guess.

Anyone want one?

Aaaaghhh. Tempting...

They have a good reputation. Had a look at BayEEE and the TM one may be a tad expensive.

Phew! Temptation fought. Also, no DxO module for it on Pentax.

One of the items I had on my list for Singapore last year was to visit one of the big second hand camera places but I didn't get there in the end. Next time, maybe.

---------- Post added 01-16-2020 at 08:29 AM ----------

Oops! My bad. There is a module.

[Kiwizinho]

I have one of those. Best lens I own really.

Out of interest, when I did the lens calibration on my lenses a while back - this was the only one to be spot on already on both cameras.

I have a slightly different model (maybe older?). It's a stunning portrait lens. I have the Pentax D FA 100 2.8 now as well, which is more useful as a macro lens, but that 10mm difference seems to be quite significant when it comes to portraits, which is why I haven't sold the Tamron.

[pixelsaurus]

I have one of those. Best lens I own really.

I have the original: the Tamron 90mm f/2.5 although it is only 1:2. To get 1:1 the 2x teleconverter is required. I bought both nearly 40 years ago and have never been tempted to dispose of them.