[kayasaman]

Note that the D500 does not have native shake reduction, unlike your Pentax. If you don't have a steady hand with the five-axis, five-shutter-step camera shake compensation on your K1 you won't get any steadier results from the Nikons you're looking at. You'll be keeping the cameras on tripod in all likelihood.

However, the lenses themselves have shake reduction (does Nikon call this VR? Vibration Reduction maybe?) but even using a tripod, I have been looking at that today. It's doable, I have a 3-way Gitzo head of which today I kept the pan knob unlocked and only adjusted the up/down tilt or simply kept it loose.

I find that I can definitely keep track of subjects this way. Though just a few moments ago I got into the frustrating part of frame rate limitation and small buffer size.

However, I did catch one bluetit hovering, so hopefully it will be in focus... cross fingers - just looking at my test shots now

[gatorguy]

However, the lenses themselves have shake reduction

No, not all, particularly with 3rd party lenses. Just be sure the one you're intending to buy does.

[kayasaman]

Ok, here we go: _IMG3293-1.jpg - Google Drive

---------- Post added 05-21-22 at 12:05 PM ----------

No, not all, particularly with 3rd party lenses. Just be sure the one you're intending to buy does.

Hmm....

I am considering the Sigma or Tamron 150-600. The Tamron is said to have better AF performance according to reviews that I've read however, Sigma has teleconverters for their lenses at 1.4x and 2x. If my understanding is correct... the 600mm top end on the D500 would be 900mm (600 x 1.5). Add a 2x TC on to that and you have 1800mm. This will also be useful for my astro imaging with tracking mount and Bahtinov mask for focus.


Just taken off Sigma's website:

High action-capture performance that enables any photographer with high demands to get the exact shots they want
Accelerometer enables panning photography both in vertical and horizontal position
The OS (Optical Stabilizer) function using an accelerometer has been incorporated to ensure high accuracy. OS Mode 1 is suitable for general photography, and Mode 2 is ideal for panning shooting for motor sports etc. With Mode 2, the accelerometer works effectively to minimize blur while shooting by detecting whether the camera is positioned vertically or horizontally.

it seems that this lens does have stabilization built in.

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

it seems that this lens does have stabilization built in.

As for IS in the sigma 150-600 I find it a huge improvement over the earlier sigma's like the 120-400 ,120-300 2.8 2nd version, 150-500, 50-500, and 150 2.8 macro.
The 120-300 2.8 sport is better but only slightly, Nikon 200-400 VRII F4 is better for sure but in some ways the sigma 150-600 is better, for video it has the ability to be fine tuned with the dock under the second functions options , It also I feel does a better job at panning while using IS than the nikon 200-400.













[url=https://photos.smugmug.com/Photogallery-current/i-fHG9h3Q/0/fb8437ce/O/_1618556%20cr1.jpg][/url



If you are looking to do any work like this I feel the that the Sigma sport is a better option than the nikn 200-400.

I find In lens IS better for camera's paired with longer FL, and I also find it beneficial for use with tripods, yes for the very best work using the tripod I like to use the cable release with mirror lockup but for the most part I can get away with just using the shutter button and IS

The 150-600's in tamron and sigma sit kind of in a unique category form an function they hit rather high in the cost to reach ratio with out very little impact to IQ, yes for sure the more expensive lenses like the 200-400, 500 , and the 600 are sharper but are they anywhere near the difference cost this is something you can only answer. For me yes my 200-400 is sharper but I really need to be shooting using the very best of technique to see any really huge improvments.

There is also how does this lens falls with regard to low light and when it is paired on a FF body. If we look at what it does in relation to a cropped body its acts like a 100-400 F3.4-4.5

---

Last edited by Ian Stuart Forsyth; 05-21-2022 at 09:39 PM.

[kayasaman]

As for IS in the sigma 150-600 I find it a huge improvement over the earlier sigma's like the 120-400 ,120-300 2.8 2nd version, 150-500, 50-500, and 150 2.8 macro.
The 120-300 2.8 sport is better but only slightly, Nikon 200-400 VRII F4 is better for sure but in some ways the sigma 150-600 is better, for video it has the ability to be fine tuned with the dock under the second functions options , It also I feel does a better job at panning while using IS than the nikon 200-400.













[url=https://photos.smugmug.com/Photogallery-current/i-fHG9h3Q/0/fb8437ce/O/_1618556%20cr1.jpg][/url



If you are looking to do any work like this I feel the that the Sigma sport is a better option than the nikn 200-400.

I find In lens IS better for camera's paired with longer FL, and I also find it beneficial for use with tripods, yes for the very best work using the tripod I like to use the cable release with mirror lockup but for the most part I can get away with just using the shutter button and IS

The 150-600's in tamron and sigma sit kind of in a unique category form an function they hit rather high in the cost to reach ratio with out very little impact to IQ, yes for sure the more expensive lenses like the 200-400, 500 , and the 600 are sharper but are they anywhere near the difference cost this is something you can only answer. For me yes my 200-400 is sharper but I really need to be shooting using the very best of technique to see any really huge improvments.

There is also how does this lens falls with regard to low light and when it is paired on a FF body. If we look at what it does in relation to a cropped body its acts like a 100-400 F3.4-4.5

Thanks so much Ian for all the detailed explanations. Right now as you can probably tell, I'm trying to get used to and understand my camera. It just doesn't feel good by any means to have only a few out of 500 shots in focus and looking reasonably sharp.

Your examples using the Nikon body and paired lenses are really inspirational.


I think at this point that it will be well worth investing in a D500. I also have a lens which I think is a 50mm on an old FM and a Speedlight (with TTL) which should also work with the body.


Really as long as it increases the in-focus image count then I will be so happy! That's mainly what I'm looking for, coupled with higher FPS rate and larger frame buffer. I think the D500 is rated at 20s buffer size which should help while waiting for birds in particular.

[gatorguy]

I think at this point that it will be well worth investing in a D500.

The biggest issue with your current setup is your *300 lens seems to need better fine focus adjustment. It's a great lens for birding, and especially so with the 1.4TC, proven out in the field.

But in any event, as you've decided to try the Nikon route I think the D500 will be the wise choice from that brand for your birding. It's a fine selection. You'll be better off using the K1 as a landscape or slower-paced camera where it is a better all-arounder than the D500, but that Nikon is very well-regarded for action. I would take Ian's advice on the lens to pair it with, he's very knowledgeable on the glass available for it.

[kayasaman]

The biggest issue with your current setup is your *300 lens seems to need better fine focus adjustment. It's a great lens for birding, and especially so with the 1.4TC, proven out in the field.

But in any event, as you've decided to try the Nikon route I think the D500 will be the wise choice from that brand for your birding. It's a fine selection. You'll be better off using the K1 as a landscape or slower-paced camera where it is a better all-arounder than the D500, but that Nikon is very well-regarded for action. I would take Ian's advice on the lens to pair it with, he's very knowledgeable on the glass available for it.

I can try to readjust the fine AF, though I did test with all possible values and the extreme end at -10 did the best. I didn't use the "high contrast subject and live view technique" so I'm going to look at that too.

The K1 ii's imaging capability is simply amazing, it's just let down by speed (though as already mentioned previously that the camera was never intended to be a high performance camera for action photography.) I also love the interface too, with the dedicated dials and no need to use the menu system for most things.


Partly my issues might stem from the 300mm not being long enough for the AF to get a good lock. Yep a TC may help indeed...

Earlier, two squirrels were playing around in the backyard so I got some more shots in. Some are fine and some are a little out. The 4.4fps (as stated in the manual unless I misunderstood) burst speed in large RAW format didn't keep up with their jumping around and backflips etc... the 12fps of the K3 iii would have really been a great addition here but my concern with the K3 iii really is how good is the AF and is frame buffer size competitive with the Nikon D500.

The Nikon system also offers more variety of lenses and I have an old 1980s 50mm that came together with the FM camera that my folks bought when I was just hatched.


Weighing up the Pros and Cons, I think the D500 will be the better option in the long run.


I even checked out the Z6 ii which actually has two processors instead of a single one. The limitation with the mirrorless system seems to be in 3D tracking and not much variety of lenses; additionally if used with the DSLR lens lineup the performance drops dramatically according to the sources that I've been reading. Otherwise it also would have been a strong contender.

---------- Post added 05-22-22 at 04:23 AM ----------

Here's another test shot. I increased the AF fine tune from -10 to -5.

This should have been a simple enough image for the AF to lock on to:

_IMG3541.jpg - Google Drive

shutter was 1/1000 and f/22 with auto iso set to 51200 and AF points where set to full 33 Auto. My intention to use f/22 was to give me a larger DoF for the test.

High ISO aside, to me that looks blurred and no where near as sharp as what Ian is presenting. Maybe -10 setting isn't enough for the AF fine tune??


I even tried against an unpainted brick wall. First manually focus in live view with x16 magnification. Read where the distance gauge on the lense is. Then use AF in Auto 33 point mode with different fine tune settings. The lighting is fairly consistent right now, and AF fluctuated quite a bit. Camera is locked on a solid tripod too and I even used the 2 second shutter release delay to fend off any vibrations.

What I did find is that if I repeatedly press the shutter halfway to readjust the focus, eventually after a few attempts it will get there but still a little bit too much hit and miss.


I guess if the focus would just nail it each time, things wouldn't be so bad. Many other K1 ii users have also reported the hit and miss variation in frames which I asked about specifically in the K1 part of the forum.

[KiloHotelphoto]

The K1 is a great camera but its FPS and auto focus are not the best for small quick moving birds, your FA 300 probably doesn't have the fastest motors in it either.

The D500 and a Tamron or Sigma 150-600 will be a huge increase in performance for you but if you think you will get more series with wildlife I would highly suggest looking into a mirrorless body that has animal eye AF, if you are going to spend money better to do it once.

I don't know about the Nikon FTZ adaptor but reviews say it's just as good as Canons and Canons EF to RF works perfectly and when I had EF glass it worked better on the RF bodies then on the EF bodies. So you could still get a Tamron with a DSLR mount and use it on a mirrorless body and not have to spend as much for a native mount lens.

[reh321]

The K1 is a great camera but its FPS and auto focus are not the best for small quick moving birds, your FA 300 probably doesn't have the fastest motors in it either.

The D500 and a Tamron or Sigma 150-600 will be a huge increase in performance for you but if you think you will get more series with wildlife I would highly suggest looking into a mirrorless body that has animal eye AF, if you are going to spend money better to do it once.

I don't know about the Nikon FTZ adaptor but reviews say it's just as good as Canons and Canons EF to RF works perfectly and when I had EF glass it worked better on the RF bodies then on the EF bodies. So you could still get a Tamron with a DSLR mount and use it on a mirrorless body and not have to spend as much for a native mount lens.

The Pentax K-3iii already has “eye focus”.
I keep hoping that will be included in other camera bodies,
but, of course, Pentax doesn’t share their plans for the future with us.

[kayasaman]

The K1 is a great camera but its FPS and auto focus are not the best for small quick moving birds, your FA 300 probably doesn't have the fastest motors in it either.

The D500 and a Tamron or Sigma 150-600 will be a huge increase in performance for you but if you think you will get more series with wildlife I would highly suggest looking into a mirrorless body that has animal eye AF, if you are going to spend money better to do it once.

I don't know about the Nikon FTZ adaptor but reviews say it's just as good as Canons and Canons EF to RF works perfectly and when I had EF glass it worked better on the RF bodies then on the EF bodies. So you could still get a Tamron with a DSLR mount and use it on a mirrorless body and not have to spend as much for a native mount lens.

This is definitely an option. As mentioned above, I did check out the Z6 ii. If the concerns or reservations I have over the mirrorless are actually false positives then it maybe a good avenue to explore.

I know one friend who has a cropped Canon mirrorless that takes amazing images, though of course that is after PP.


Just checked the Nikon website and had a look at the cropped sensor models Zfc and Z50. I don't think they feature the animal eye AF mode. For ultimate speed it would need to either be the Z6 ii or Z9 (which is definitely out of my price range).


My 300mm doesn't have any motors inside as it's a screwdrive lens. It's the version produced from 1991 - 2003 (I think the end date is correct). It's not the DA300 lens but FA*300. For sure focusing time is slow but the accuracy seems a little off.

---------- Post added 05-22-22 at 06:06 AM ----------

The Pentax K-3iii already has “eye focus”.
I keep hoping that will be included in other camera bodies,
but, of course, Pentax doesn’t share their plans for the future with us.

Is this for people or wildlife? I really should check the manual for this model too.

Also do you know how large the frame buffer is?? Can it shoot continuously for 20s or so like the Nikons and then empty the frame buffer quickly enough that it doesn't lock the camera?

My K1 is really poor with that part!!


If everything else checks, then it's only a question of lenses and being limited to only a few telephoto models which need TC's to extend their reach further beyond 675mm.

[KiloHotelphoto]

The Canon APSC mirrorless line now is the M mount and that is a dead system, they are supposedly announcing the RF crop bodies Tuesday.

The Pentax K-3iii already has “eye focus”.

I would love to see a video of how this performs, I don't think it is anywhere as good as the Canon and Sony otherwise they would've made a bigger deal about it instead of pushing the new OVF.

I just looked at a couple videos on YouTube with the K3 III eye AF, not sure I would call it that it's bad.

[reh321]

Is this for people or wildlife? I really should check the manual for this model too.

Also do you know how large the frame buffer is??

Some members showed some really cool bird pictures here when it first came out.
I haven’t seen much since then - I guess it was just a thought worth looking in to …..
I don’t have the cash myself to purchase one.

[gatorguy]

Some members showed some really cool bird pictures here when it first came out.
I haven’t seen much since then - I guess it was just a thought worth looking in to …..
I don’t have the cash myself to purchase one.

I've posted several series in BiF, K3III photos, and the 300mm Plus club. Lateral bursts are a cakewalk with the K3III, and anything moving on a predictable path, such as a bike or car on a road, should be equally as consistent as the Nikon's mentioned. The challenges are when a water surface is moving as fast as the bird you're trying to shoot flying just at the surface or swimming slowly on top, and sometimes when the BiF is quicky flying directly away which seems to be more inconsistent than when flying towards me (now that I've better understood the hold feature)

But the OP will be more comfortable with the longer history of good AF reported on the D500. The K3III is only now a year old, and it's taken a couple of firmware updates to get the AF to this level. Just as long too for us to understand the system and able to explain it to others.

I'd agree with the OP having chosen a D500, since he has more confidence in it as the right choice for him after a fair amount of research. Being happy with with your gear means you're more likely to work with it. I hope he takes the time to post a few photos from it. We're all photographers.

[kayasaman]

I've posted several series in BiF, K3III photos, and the 300mm Plus club. Lateral bursts are a cakewalk with the K3III, and anything moving on a predictable path, such as a bike or car on a road, should be equally as consistent as the Nikon's mentioned. The challenges are when a water surface is moving as fast as the bird you're trying to shoot flying just at the surface or swimming slowly on top, and sometimes when the BiF is quicky flying directly away which seems to be more inconsistent than when flying towards me (now that I've better understood the hold feature)

But the OP will be more comfortable with the longer history of good AF reported on the D500. The K3III is only now a year old, and it's taken a couple of firmware updates to get the AF to this level. Just as long too for us to understand the system and able to explain it to others.

I'd agree with the OP having chosen a D500, since he has more confidence in it as the right choice for him after a fair amount of research. Being happy with with your gear means you're more likely to work with it. I hope he takes the time to post a few photos from it. We're all photographers.

That's a really kind response! Thank you

I definitely will post good images once I have them


For now, you're welcome to check out my astro folder:

Astro


Like I mentioned, I primarily bought the K1 for astro, landscape and macro photography. I'll have to dig out my macro stuff and online it somewhere as I have many successful images.


In terms of astro I do plan on going for a GOTO mount at somepoint in the future and a dedicated monochrome CCD camera:

RST-135 - Rainbow Astro

C3 Series CMOS Cameras


That should improve on the 3 hours it has taken me each session to locate the M31 (Andromeda galaxy) and 1400 light polluted shots from my K1.

Actual image is here after reprocessing using the PixInsight trial license:

Astro

---------- Post added 05-22-22 at 11:26 AM ----------

Sure 300mm came out a little short but the focus ended up being much better on this image.EXIF is f/5.6 shutter 1/1000 iso 100 (auto) I also used -2.00EV exposure compensation so that I could control the dynamic range of the sky and not blow it out.

_IMG3652.jpg - Google Drive

Hopefully with better AF and longer reach I will be able to churn out more images like this!

Additionally, it has been tweaked slightly in RawTherapee as an FYI.

[surfar]

The D500 and a Tamron or Sigma 150-600 will be a huge increase in performance for you but if you think you will get more series with wildlife I would highly suggest looking into a mirrorless body that has animal eye AF, if you are going to spend money better to do it once.

I think the D500 will be the better option in the long run.

I'll go with Kilo.The reason is Nikon tech is old, the new M/L options just keep getting better and BETTER.

In a couple of days the M/L replacement of the 7dmk2 is being revealed...the R7

30fps is 3 times faster than a d500.Three times the chance to get that amazing action shot.

Its also got video miles ahead of the Nikon which could be of interest now or in the future.

The 150-600 Sigma Sport which Ian mentioned works fine with the standard Canon adapter.Its a huge heavy lens that I shoot off a monopod mainly.

Also a week after the Canon comes,a highly advanced Fuji arrives.The XH2s.

Both these M/L bodies dwarf the D500 in performance at a not much more cost(new).Used doesn't enter the equation the Nikon will be cheaper.

Both the Canon and Fuji have eye AF tracking for animals birds insects, you name it they track it.Both have substantially more resolution too.

For the price a Nikon D500 will do the job at a certain level, the new bodies coming will do it a lot better.

Btw, the Sigma adapts to Fuji quite well by Fringer but no WR.The Canon is WR.

Also,with the Xh2s( with 40fps) announcement comes a native Fuji 150-600 which will take their 1.4 and 2x TCs.

Have fun considering whats available.