[normhead]

Screwdrive AF was reliable, unlike the DA* 16–50’s SDM. They have also clearly demonstrated that corner sharpness wide open was able to be significantly improved.

For a very long time, lower weight and less complicated formulas was more important than edge sharpness. Camera companiess realizing they'd "been there and done that", now focus on heavier better corrected glass. In some ways and in some cases the new glass produces more desirable images, but in some cases modern corner sharpness is un-necessary. Personally I still enjoy a lot of DA 18-135 images with corner sharpness that are poor on the edges. At least now folks have more choices. Heavy new glass with great bokeh and sharper corners and edges, or older, more compact glass, that for many set ups is to the task, and much lighter to carry.

In this image, the corners are all in bokeh. It may have actually looked better with softer edges. It depends on what you're going for.

---

Last edited by normhead; 07-20-2021 at 08:27 AM.

[suzyq]

I've only used my K5 with my 150-500.

When I bought it new, in 2011, it was the top of the line for Pentax...magnesium body alloy shell, water resistant, stainless steel frame I believe. It's been a good camera (touch wood), almost 10 years old. Initially I had some trouble with it freezing and it was under warranty. I sent it in to Pentax Canada (I'm a Canuck) and they repaired it well and I've had no issues since then...and we're talking a decade.

I also have a K10D (bought new in 2007) and it was also the top of the line then. No issues and last time I checked , a few years ago, I had more than 60,000 shutter actuations on it. My K-1 bought new in 2017 had a funny loose sound when I shook it. Sent it back to Pentax Canada, they repaired it and all has been fine. It was top of the line too.

I've been happy with my Pentax equipment, and I use it regularly.

I've generally been happy with Pentax, and I've had one (Pentax S1a) which I bought new in 1969. Over 50 years.

As far as my Sigma 150-500, I like it. I shoot pix of birds, but mostly big birds, such as American White Pelicans (I'm near where they breed), Owls....Great Grey, Great Horned, Northern Hawk , Snowy White, Barred, etc.

I've got some pretty good pix of these birds in flight , perched and sitting on rocks (Pelicans) and I find the Sigma gets some real sharp pix. It is a heavy combo, the Sigma and the K5...but I'm big guy, 6' 3", 245 lbs. so I may not notice the weight as much as a smaller person.

I use certain settings...usually set the ISO 400-1600, mostly 800. I use aperture preferred, use an F stop of between F 9 to F 11...as the depth of field of a super telephoto is narrow and birds can move out of that range fairly easily. My shutter speed is over 1000th of a second, I subscribe to the practice of if I'm shooting a 500 mm lens I use about 1/1000th or faster. I want clarity in my pix and these settings seem to work for me. I use the Sigma only during the daylight hours, as it is not a fast lens, like an F 2.8.

I take a lot of pix and I practiced a lot at a bird feeder that attracted a lot of Chickadees..small, fast songbirds. I figured when I could get a sharp pics of these little fast flyers, then a pelican or an owl would be a piece of cake.

Not ever pix is perfect, but I'm happy with the number of keepers following these methods. Also I use the Pentax Shake reduction, not the Sigma and I usually use continuous auto focus and always try to aim for the eye of the subject, If I get the eye in focus, I find the rest of the subject is usually clear.

Hope this is of help to you.

Les

Thank you Les for all the tips. I did practice at the feeder shooting from indoors through the window and did get some decent photos of hummingbirds. Bigger birds for me are water fowl and not really big enough. I’m a Canuck too and have lots of lakes near by. Recently I’ve found places to shoot pelicans so I’ll make a day to spend time waiting for those magnificent birds to sail by. Interesting how you use the Pentax Shake system. I read to turn it off.
I will try your suggestions. Much appreciated. Best wishes, sue

[lesmore49]

Thank you Les for all the tips. I did practice at the feeder shooting from indoors through the window and did get some decent photos of hummingbirds. Bigger birds for me are water fowl and not really big enough. I’m a Canuck too and have lots of lakes near by. Recently I’ve found places to shoot pelicans so I’ll make a day to spend time waiting for those magnificent birds to sail by. Interesting how you use the Pentax Shake system. I read to turn it off.
I will try your suggestions. Much appreciated. Best wishes, sue

Your most welcome Sue. I should add, it took a fair amount of practice to get me to the point where I was satisfied with my images. But it was worth it, to me, in the end.

Les

[hatsofe]

Hi All,

It's been a long time since I posted anything on here but do come along and read the posts and look at all the amazing pictures every now and then.

The reason for the title of the post is that I just don't get the philosophy behind Pentax when they release a camera.

Just before the K1 was released I got info from the South African distributor that the 150-450mm was about to be launched and I thought at the time, fantastic, if they are creating that kind of lens along with the 70-200 it must mean that the K1 will be Pentax's answer to the various sports bodies that were out at the time. Then when they put the camera out, it turned out to be a strictly landscape type camera not suited to fast action.

Now fast forward to 2021 and they have just released the awesome K3iii which is undoubtedly meant to be a sports camera. This time, the lenses that are being released are anything but sports lenses!

This is why I just don't understand their intentions. Surely when you release a camera body and lenses you should release a system. I would have thought at the very least they would update the 150-450 or do a 200-600 sports lens?

Has anyone else felt this frustration with the Pentax eco-system?

Modern Pentax optics (and other accessories) for wildlife photography are nearly non-existent. The 150-450mm is very good, but 450mm doesn't provide enough rich in 60% of the cases that I've been using it in last 3 years ,since I bought it. I tried to couple it with the modern 1.4x Pentax teleconverter ( after reading an article in Pentax forums that claimed that such a combination can provide good results , if the zoom was within the range 150-400mm). I was very disappointed; the converter considerably reduced the resolution pretty much across the entire zoom range, and increased the chromatic aberration and glare around bright objects. Until recently,there was another telephoto option from a house of Pentax : 560mm. It looks like that it was quite overpriced for the quality it could provide (I found some reviews but never tried it by myself) but in any case it , apparently was discontinued about two months ago. I noticed that some pentaxians who were interested in wildlife used Pentax DA 300/4 combined with 1.4x modern converter. I see it as really a forced solution , that somehow filled the void in Pentax optics. The image quality of the pictures were not impressive at all, and the lens reach is very "modest'. As someone who shoots wildlife almost exclusively , I need good optics in 400-600mm range , and a professional quality 1.5x teleconverter. It doesn't seem coming any time soon , or maybe at all.

---

Last edited by hatsofe; 07-20-2021 at 03:08 PM.

[Difficult Choice]

...If you got the money, how much would you be willing to wait for a lens release?

Exactly!

[normhead]

Modern Pentax optics (and other accessories) for wildlife photography are nearly non-existent. The 150-450mm is very good, but 450mm doesn't provide enough rich in 60% of the cases that I've been using it in last 3 years ,since I bought it. I tried to couple it with the modern 1.4x Pentax teleconverter ( after reading an article in Pentax forums that claimed that such a combination can provide good results , if the zoom was within the range 150-400mm). I was very disappointed; the converter considerably reduced the resolution pretty much across the entire zoom range, and increased the chromatic aberration and glare around bright objects. Until recently,there was another telephoto option from a house of Pentax : 560mm. It looks like that it was quite overpriced for the quality it could provide (I found some reviews but never tried it by myself) but in any case it , apparently was discontinued about two months ago. I noticed that some pentaxians who were interested in wildlife used Pentax DA 300/4 combined with 1.4x modern converter. I see it as really a forced solution , that somehow filled the void in Pentax optics. The image quality of the pictures were not impressive at all, and the lens reach is very "modest'. As someone who shoots wildlife almost exclusively , I need good optics in 400-600mm range , and a professional quality 1.5x teleconverter. It doesn't seem coming any time soon , or maybe at all.

I'm not seeing any images.
So I'm not willing to comment as to how good or bad your images might be, or why they might be that way.

But, look at the images in this thread...
300mm plus Lens Club: discuss your long lenses - Page 1941 - PentaxForums.com

I guess that's not good enough for you?
The serious guys seem to be able to track down older long glass.

I personally tracked down a Tamron 300 2.8 which I use with the F 1.7x AF adapter to give me 510mm or on my K-3, 750 equivalent, or with the Tarmon 2x to give me 600mm for my K-1,but many of these are taken with shorter lenses.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/149541448@N08/albums/72157683751426530

But I have many images taken with the DA*60-250 and 1.4 TC, or even the DA*200.





For wildlife, I tend to use even shorter lenses.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/149541448@N08/albums/72157685900262555

Your complaints aren't resonating.
Wildlife is more about skill in stalking and perserverence getting to good shooting locations than it is about lenses. If you hear about good shooting location, you go. That's the key. Sometimes they don't last for more than few hours.

This image taken with my DA*60-250 at 88mm.


Taken with a DA*60-250 at 250mm


A lot of people seem to be under the impression all you need is a long lens. Where I live there are not open spaces that are conducive to longer lenses. I'm guessing a high percentage of my images were taken at less than 500mm.

[GordonZA]

Wow, came back to a lot of posts with some great answers and thoughts, and pics too!

Hopefully Ricoh has plans to replace both the 560mm (now removed from the lens roadmap) and update the 150-450!

Long live Pentax! Lol

[hatsofe]

Dear normhead, not everybody has a luxury to watch an animal or a bird from few metres away from it ! When I lived in Toronto and used to go to Tommy Thompson park, or Bronte creek, or Killarney (or Algonquin ) , I often managed with 55-300/4.5-5.8 on K-500 or K 5iis. There are lot more birds and animals in Eastern Canada, even in rural areas than where I live now. And all the flying, running and creeping beasts are very well tamed, polite and friendly in Canada (like everyone else ). I remember shooting a moose near Cheticamp, Cape Breton while standing almost next to it.
It's not the case where I am now. The wildlife is scarce and very cautious (less naive,maybe?). The closest distance that I usually can get to a bird (let's say in size of red-winged blackbird ) is about 7-10 meters before it flies away or gets deeper into the branches. Any attempt to magnify an area with the bird (on crop sensor produced image) , while the bird looks like a dot in the full image leads to ridiculous results.
The only solution I can see is having a high quality tele zoom 400-600mm or prime 500mm or 600mm , with professional grade full frame 1.5x teleconverter. Would also be nice to have micro extension tubes (with all the KAF contacts on them !!!) .
You can see my pictures here:
Hatsofe B | Flickr
I like Pentax cameras very much. Unfortunately , Ricoh doesn't invest much in Pentax brand development and keeps it on a low flame.

[Pål Jensen]

Modern Pentax optics (and other accessories) for wildlife photography are nearly non-existent. The 150-450mm is very good, but 450mm doesn't provide enough rich in 60% of the cases that I've been using it in last 3 years ,since I bought it..

You "never" get enough reach for wildlife. The 150-450 give you on APS the same angle of view as a 693mm on FF; a very long lens in anyones book. You need a 800mm lens or longer to make significant more reach when comparing to the standards we were used to in the film days. We are talking then of lenses that are hard to use and very expensive. There is no real solution other than getting closer to the subject.......

[bdery]

I have the K-3iii and 55-300 PLM. Focus is almost instantaneous. If I wanted to shoot sports, this seems like it would do the trick. The high-ISO performance of the K-3iii really negates the need for large aperture to a great extent. The upcoming 16-50 PLM seems to be the other end of the instant focus duo you’d need.

In truth, for AF-S Pentax is not truly lagging behind others. Not in the lead, but really between 0.3 and 0.4 seconds to lock focus, who cares? It's the same ballpark.

For AF-C, Pentax has bene lagging for years, that's simple truth. From what I see of the K-3 iii it is closing the gap, and will probably be good enough for many, but there's still a difference. And mirrorless cameras, with their combination of phase and contrast AF, have an advantage here. One that COULD be included in a DSLR, but hasn't so far.

IMO, Ricoh has just now (last couple of years) gotten the Pentax brand on the path they envisioned when they got the dumpster fire that Hoya created.

That is an accurate way to put it.

[normhead]

The only solution I can see is a high quality tele zoom 400-600mm or prime 500mm or 600mm , with professional grade full frame 1.5x teleconverter. Would also be nice to have micro extension tubes (with all the KAF contacts on them !!!) .

Those lenses are available second hand. If you'd gone through the thread I posted, you'd know many people use them successfully. Most of the 150-600 zooms don't give you better image quality than the 150-450 and I've seen images taken with the 150-450 and 1.4TC that were acceptable. It's a weird discussion. I keep saying , quit complaining, get after it. You keep coming up with reasons why you can't. Yet, if you go through the 300 plus club, you'll see images from people who did just get after it. There's the FA* 250-600, that comes up once or twice year and usually sells for $8k. Just have your dollars ready when the next one comes up for sale. But you're not going to like the weight.

Or get a SIgma 150-600 and a cheaper Canon or Nikon body. If you're going to spend that kind of money, what's another $1000 for a new body to go with the lens. I know you want this to be about Pentax, but it's sounding like your decision making process may be a little indecisive. Without further comment, I'd just say, if it were me in your shoes, I'd have it done by now and be out shooting.

[DonV]

Dear normhead, not everybody has a luxury to watch an animal or a bird from few metres away from it ! When I lived in Toronto and used to go to Tommy Thompson park, or Bronte creek, or Killarney (or Algonquin ) , I often managed with 55-300/4.5-5.8 on K-500 or K 5iis. There are lot more birds and animals in Eastern Canada, even in rural areas than where I live now. And all the flying, running and creeping beasts are very well tamed, polite and friendly in Canada (like everyone else ). I remember shooting a moose near Cheticamp, Cape Breton while standing almost next to it.
It's not the case where I am now. The wildlife is scarce and very cautious (less naive,maybe?). The closest distance that I usually can get to a bird (let's say in size of red-winged blackbird ) is about 7-10 meters before it flies away or gets deeper into the branches. Any attempt to magnify a cropped area (on crop sensor produced image) , while the bird looks like a dot in the full image leads to ridiculous results.
The only solution I can see is a high quality tele zoom 400-600mm or prime 500mm or 600mm , with professional grade full frame 1.5x teleconverter. Would also be nice to have micro extension tubes (with all the KAF contacts on them !!!) .

I agree, I just bought the Pentax 645 600mm * lens to use with my 645D with a 2x converter or alone; I'll also give it some use on my KP via the Pentax adapter.
Focusing is a challenge, but the "reach" is pretty darn good.

You can see my pictures here:
Hatsofe B | Flickr

I like Pentax cameras very much. Unfortunately , Ricoh doesn't invest much in Pentax brand development and keeps it on a low flame.

You can see my pictures here:
Hatsofe B | Flickr

Great pictures in the album. Thanks for the link!

[hatsofe]

Those lenses are available second hand. If you'd gone through the thread I posted, you'd know many people use them successfully. Most of the 150-600 zooms don't give you better image quality than the 150-450 and I've seen images taken with the 150-450 and 1.4TC that were acceptable. It's a weird discussion. I keep saying , quit complaining, get after it. You keep coming up with reasons why you can't. Yet, if you go through the 300 plus club, you'll see images from people who did just get after it. There's the FA* 250-600, that comes up once or twice year and usually sells for $8k. Just have your dollars ready when the next one comes up for sale. But you're not going to like the weight.

Or get a SIgma 150-600 and a cheaper Canon or Nikon body. If you're going to spend that kind of money, what's another $1000 for a new body to go with the lens. I know you want this to be about Pentax, but it's sounding like your decision making process may be a little indecisive. Without further comment, I'd just say, if it were me in your shoes, I'd have it done by now and be out shooting.

Old film era optics rarely meet modern image quality standards, which such lenses were never designed to meet. In terms of resolution or dynamic range even a low sensitivity good quality 35mm film was not even close to 7-8 megapixel APS-C sensor circa 2007 models, not to mention the later stuff. I shot my first film in 1978 and developed my first digital image in 2004. I'm quite familiar with old tele optics...
Name "Sigma" was removed from from my photographic vocabulary after I acquired two lenses produced by this lovely company in Henry's and sold back to them at 40% loss a month later...
Thankfully there is Tamron (even when it's called Pentax) and Pentax (of unknown origin). It seems that no one else is making any optics for Pentax any longer .
I'm not complaining; I realize that a post in Pentaxforums makes no waves in Ricoh's court...

---------- Post added 07-21-21 at 11:30 AM ----------

Great pictures in the album. Thanks for the link!

You welcome!
I bought Pentax A 645 300/4, Pentax A 645 2x teleconverter and an adapter 645 to K mount. I built a pistol grip for it with remote control incorporated in the handle. This contraption works pretty good if there is enough light, because it kills about 3 stops and the max aperture I get on fully open is about f9...

[normhead]

Name "Sigma" was removed from from my photographic vocabulary after I acquired two lenses produced by this lovely company in Henry's and sold back to them at 40% loss a month later...

Ha ha, I returned two Sigma 120-400s to Henry's but I test new lenses throughly, the day they arrive. I ended up with my DA*60-250 and a TC. But their 70 macro and 24 macro and 8-16 are three of my favourite lenses.

Old film era optics rarely meet modern image quality standards, which such lenses were never designed to meet.

You can tell if they do meet current standards by the price. A number of years ago, my secondhand $80 FA 35-80 plastic wonder won a lens poll here on the forum for its rendering. It's as "old film era" as it gets. Personally, I wouldn't be writing off old glass, just because it's old. Look at RichardL's FA* 250-600 images or anyone's, (I believe weevil has one as well). I doubt you'll be finding it doesn't meet the needs of modern sensors. Check out Ducatigaz's 600mm images on the 300 plus thread. You can't say all legacy glass doesn't meet modern standards any more than you can say all of it does. I assume if they are good enough for Getty Images, they'd be good enough for you.

It's interesting because the focal length you want 600, 800 1200, are the lenses where legacy glass is strongest, just because they were such high quality glass when manufactured.

[DonV]

I bought Pentax A 645 300/4, Pentax A 645 2x teleconverter and an adapter 645 to K mount. I built a pistol grip for it with remote control incorporated in the handle. This contraption works pretty good if there is enough light, because it kills about 3 stops and the max aperture I get on fully open is about f9...

I'd like to see a picture of that "contraption", I've thought about doing the same for either my 645 300mm* or 645 400mm; they both perform quite well with the 2x converter.