Originally posted by radman Hi nomadkng,
Great story to drive home your point...If the k-5iis is such a step down in AF,,,maybe I should just forget about the k100D or even k20D for sports (most of what I do) shooting.
In regards to swapping lenses, I have not been able to convince these highschoolers to stop (or even slow down) for me when I am photographing them at soccer, field hockey, etc
WRT using the 50-150,,,well I have been trying to figure out how to get longer than 200 (maybe the pentax HD 1.4x) because the fields are so large (over 100 yards).
Thanks
And this is where it get's even more dangerous for your pocket book...
The quest for a long lens suitable for action will take you deep into the realm of car prices lenses. See the 300mm+ plus lens thread.
A 1.4x TC will turn your lens into a 98-280 f4. But will that really make that much of a difference? well one stop is iso 1600-3200 or 1/1000 to 1/2000th. That one stop makes a big difference sometimes.
At 350 a TC is probably cheaper alternative to the Sigma 100-300 at around 800-1000, if you can find one, but even that may not be enough for full field length shots and your focus lock will suffer just a bit. Not a lot, but it might be a 10% increase in missed focus. Can you live with that increase in failure rates?
Most sports pros have 300 f2.8 lenses (or 400 f4 but not available in k-mount). They start at 3500. A 500 f4.5 is a 5k lens. Long and fast is the antithesis of cheap.
It might be a case, until you truly have the funds to invest in the right equipment, stick with what you have and target specific improvements in gear, rather than settling. I had the 100-300 f4 for years and loved the lens. I tried various TC's and was ok with the combo with the Pentax 1.4. However I knew I was "settling" and wasn't thrilled. This year I managed to pick up a 500 f4.5 and the difference in results is night and day.