Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-04-2016, 06:23 AM   #16
Veteran Member
Shanti's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 925
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
It is hard to say the answer. Shooting with full frame will give better results -- if you can get close enough where you are framing your subject tightly and don't need to crop after the fact. If you aren't close enough and have to crop to APS-C all the time, then there is no benefit and only the downside of slower frame rates.

Certainly birding isn't a huge part of what Pentax does. Their two long lenses are the 150-450 and the 560, both of which look nice. But I guess I would price both systems and think seriously about what you want. If it is only about birds, than the D500 might be the way to go.
If I use APS crop on K1 then 6 FPS or so & advantage of lower noise ..& get 15MP vs D500 20MP which I can live with..or maybe this is wrong thinking?? my last FF was OM2

03-04-2016, 06:44 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 23,703
QuoteOriginally posted by Shanti Quote
If I use APS crop on K1 then 6 FPS or so & advantage of lower noise ..& get 15MP vs D500 20MP which I can live with..or maybe this is wrong thinking?? my last FF was OM2
If you are shooting in crop mode, then you are wasting the purpose of full frame. Basically you are getting K5 quality photos and that is fine, but you might as well just buy a K5 or K5 II then.
03-04-2016, 07:07 AM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 714
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
If you are shooting in crop mode, then you are wasting the purpose of full frame. Basically you are getting K5 quality photos and that is fine, but you might as well just buy a K5 or K5 II then.
True except you get k1 auto focus with points across almost the entire crop frame. Also get better erganomics. And the bonus of full frame when you arent shooting wildlife.
03-04-2016, 07:54 AM - 2 Likes   #19
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 37,443
The D500 looks like an amazing camera. Nikon finally was forced to do what they should have done years ago. Brought their FF auto-focus and put it in a crop body. Pentax took their APS-c AF and put it in an FF body.

The being said, this is probably the best be the best body for birds ever.
QuoteQuote:
In our hands-on test we were impressed with continuous shooting. Even the sound of the shutter firing at 10 fps is somehow satisfying, and that 200 shot raw buffer is... awesome.


Did they boost the frame rate and buffer by going to a less MP sensor? 20 MP is like a K-S2, but even then, that's a compromise I hoped Pentax would make.
It looks great, is it worth switching for? You won't know until you hold it in your hot little hands. But at $2699 Canadian, it better be dam good. That's twice as much as I'd pay for a K-3II. If you have the money, go for it.

In my humble opinion, if you pay twice as much for something that's been made geared to your needs, then it's probably better than what you already own. (dude).

But, in my world of trying to squeeze the most out of every image, I'm the guy that will shoot wildlife at 100 ISO and 1/50s knowing motion blur is going to ruin 90% of my images, but in the end, when I nail it.. I've got the best image. It may have been harder to get it but, my K-3 or K-1 image if I nail it is going to be higher IQ than an D500 image. So, I'm trading on the fact that even though I might miss some images, if I get it it's going to be better.

Here


and here


And here


I got the images I wanted. And they are more MP than a D500 image. Maybe I only got 23 images in my buffer, instead of 200 and I still often end up with 800 images in a session. It's not how many you throw away, it's how many you want to keep. Maybe the D500 would have auto-focussed faster, but I'd have a 20 MP file instead of a 24, and the end result is pretty much the same, except if anything my K-3 image is better. Usually I'm only looking for 5 or 6 good images. And it's mores difference with the 36 MP K-1. If I get the shot i want with the K-1 it will leave a D750 or D500 image in the dust. I'm willing to put a bit of faith in my skill as photographer.

To me it's more pizzaz for less IQ capability.
To me, starting from scratch I might give something like a D750 or a D500 a look, but, I'm comfortable with what I have and I don't find learning new equipment to ba as enjoyable as just getting out and shooting, and that for me is the bottom line. I have places to go and stuff to take pictures of. I'll worry about getting a D500 when I retire from being retired.

I might have extra time then.

For me to consider switching there'd have to be some sessions where I came back with nothing, because the camera didn't AF or I ran out of buffer, and that just doesn't happen, even using my A-400. As long as i continue to get the images i want, the K-3 is better. And a K-1/K3 combination would be pretty much the ultimate.

The trouble with always buying the latest greatest, is next week there's a new latest greatest.


Last edited by normhead; 03-04-2016 at 08:24 AM.
03-04-2016, 08:51 AM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 714
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The D500 looks like an amazing camera. Nikon finally was forced to do what they should have done years ago. Brought their FF auto-focus and put it in a crop body. Pentax took their APS-c AF and put it in an FF body.

The being said, this is probably the best be the best body for birds ever.


Did they boost the frame rate and buffer by going to a less MP sensor? 20 MP is like a K-S2, but even then, that's a compromise I hoped Pentax would make.
It looks great, is it worth switching for? You won't know until you hold it in your hot little hands. But at $2699 Canadian, it better be dam good. That's twice as much as I'd pay for a K-3II. If you have the money, go for it.

In my humble opinion, if you pay twice as much for something that's been made geared to your needs, then it's probably better than what you already own. (dude).

But, in my world of trying to squeeze the most out of every image, I'm the guy that will shoot wildlife at 100 ISO and 1/50s knowing motion blur is going to ruin 90% of my images, but in the end, when I nail it.. I've got the best image. It may have been harder to get it but, my K-3 or K-1 image if I nail it is going to be higher IQ than an D500 image. So, I'm trading on the fact that even though I might miss some images, if I get it it's going to be better.

Here


and here


And here


I got the images I wanted. And they are more MP than a D500 image. Maybe I only got 23 images in my buffer, instead of 200 and I still often end up with 800 images in a session. It's not how many you throw away, it's how many you want to keep. Maybe the D500 would have auto-focussed faster, but I'd have a 20 MP file instead of a 24, and the end result is pretty much the same, except if anything my K-3 image is better. Usually I'm only looking for 5 or 6 good images. And it's mores difference with the 36 MP K-1. If I get the shot i want with the K-1 it will leave a D750 or D500 image in the dust. I'm willing to put a bit of faith in my skill as photographer.

To me it's more pizzaz for less IQ capability.
To me, starting from scratch I might give something like a D750 or a D500 a look, but, I'm comfortable with what I have and I don't find learning new equipment to ba as enjoyable as just getting out and shooting, and that for me is the bottom line. I have places to go and stuff to take pictures of. I'll worry about getting a D500 when I retire from being retired.

I might have extra time then.

For me to consider switching there'd have to be some sessions where I came back with nothing, because the camera didn't AF or I ran out of buffer, and that just doesn't happen, even using my A-400. As long as i continue to get the images i want, the K-3 is better. And a K-1/K3 combination would be pretty much the ultimate.

The trouble with always buying the latest greatest, is next week there's a new latest greatest.
There is a lot of truth to what you are sayong here.

What lens are those with btw? Cant see signatures on my phone. Fantastic shots.
03-04-2016, 08:56 AM   #21
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 9,472
QuoteOriginally posted by noelpolar Quote
Am I the only one who likes a challenge? How boring would a fast to focus, hi frame rate, hi iso camera become......give me some character anyday......unless it pays the bills.....
Great. Grab a manual focus film camera and test your skills. But I don't see how one digital camera with a Sony sensor is going to give you anymore "character" in your image than another camera with a Sony sensor in it.
03-04-2016, 09:14 AM   #22
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 37,443
QuoteOriginally posted by Venom3300 Quote
There is a lot of truth to what you are sayong here.

What lens are those with btw? Cant see signatures on my phone. Fantastic shots.
All were taken with the DA* 60-250. The bird also with the 1.4 TC.

03-04-2016, 09:54 AM - 1 Like   #23
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,780
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
You won't know until you hold it in your hot little hands.
I read the Canon 7DII AF documentation, they provide the list of lenses compatible with AF zones for tracking. In other words, you may not exactly get what the advertisement shows you if you use a slow lens mounted on your super AF camera. For fast and reliable AF, you need to buy the D500 and mount a fast (300 f2.8) and fast to focus lens on it. If you mount a Tamron 150-600 f6.3, it may work better than a K-3 solution, but you may still end-up using center points AF because peripheral points don't work at f6.3, so almost back to square #1. They demonstrate the Sigma 150-600 Sport with a 1Dx... not for nothing, they use the best AF possible so that to have this lens AF still working at 600mm/f6.3. Then if you replace the 1Dx by a cheaper body, you may have some surprises. However, IMO, the k-3 should get a firmware update from Ricoh, because I think some of the erratic AF situation could be prevented by firmware.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 03-04-2016 at 09:59 AM.
03-04-2016, 12:11 PM   #24
Veteran Member
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,354
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
But why? You did not specify any reasons why D500 has something you need. Wouldnt a K-3II and K-1 kit make more sense? Isnt WR something that is good for birding, especially if you live in certain climates? And arent 150-450mm, 300mm+1.4xTC really great?

But, you know, by all means, get that Nikon D500. Tell us how it goes
D500 is a pro body and weathersealed.
I haven't used the 150-450mm, but the 300mm I have used extensively and is not a speed demon, which is a big drawback for birds in flight.

If he mentioned anything but BIF, then the K-1 may be alright...but for BIF exclusively, it will be hard to top the D500.

Last edited by cali92rs; 03-04-2016 at 12:21 PM.
03-04-2016, 01:05 PM   #25
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,176
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
However, IMO, the k-3 should get a firmware update from Ricoh, because I think some of the erratic AF situation could be prevented by firmware.
What exactly would they be able to do?
That is a very interesting post you made there.
And, if this can be improved via firmware, what can be done to "convince" Ricoh/Pentax to do it?
03-04-2016, 01:11 PM   #26
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,780
QuoteOriginally posted by jpzk Quote
What exactly would they be able to do? That is a very interesting post you made there. And, if this can be improved via firmware, what can be done to "convince" Ricoh/Pentax to do it?
In AFS mode the camera software knows if the image is out of focus because if you set focus prio, the camera won't take the shot, but this is sofware operated so it is too slow for tracking a taget, I understand this. In AFC, a digital state machine take care of the focus, so it is faster but rigid and not very smart. However, when the image is out of focus the camera still allow to take a full sequence of out of completely blurred out of focus images, so what it does is swamp the camera processor into processing a burst of garbage images while if the camera would not trigger the shutter. I know that AFC is designed for real time tacking but it should it shouldn't be allowed to shot complete garbage, that would already improve the system, you'd certainly have a chopped FPS but a lot more keepers. For example, I used AFA to test if the camera AF would default to AFS and then hand over to the AFC engine after AF focus gap partially closed by AFS, so that predictive tracking can start in good conditions....but no... AFA is as stupid as AFC !! I suggest that AFC starts by an AFS sequence, than switched to AFC and AFC tracking is chopped into time intervals where the firmware check the AFC tracking status, if the AFC state machine lost track there is not point to continue shooting.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 03-04-2016 at 01:39 PM.
03-04-2016, 03:21 PM - 3 Likes   #27
Senior Member
Stickl's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Oulu
Posts: 271
When u can get these kind of photos with K-5 I guess you'll be able to get much better (in techinal point of view) with K-1 and that's enough - at least for me. Photos taken by me with K-5 (II) and 60-250/4. So it's pretty easy to say what I'd choose - K-1 over D500 anyday, even for birding (with newer lenses like 150-450 or 70-200 plus K-1's AFC you will have much better setup than mine K-5 and 60-250/4)


































03-04-2016, 05:23 PM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 9,472
QuoteOriginally posted by Stickl Quote
...I'd choose - K-1 over D500 anyday, even for birding...
Nice photos. But to be clear. Are you saying you have shot a D500 so you know it would not be your choice over a K-1 which I take you have never held in your hands?

Or you have no experience with a D500 or related camera and it is your investment in the Pentax brand that sways your opinion and hence your recommendation for what is best for the OP?

The slow, lack-luster auto focus that's in the K-5 is something perhaps may think its okay because you either get by or have not experience better. But once you experience much faster, snappier and better hit rate, it's hard to go back. Just saying. No doubt the K-1 will be much improved in that department and maybe you'll experience the same when you get it.

Last edited by tuco; 03-04-2016 at 05:31 PM.
03-04-2016, 07:24 PM   #29
Veteran Member
Shanti's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 925
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
If you are shooting in crop mode, then you are wasting the purpose of full frame. Basically you are getting K5 quality photos and that is fine, but you might as well just buy a K5 or K5 II then.
What I meant is I get a better sensor/high ISO/low noise & if I want crop I still have the same qualities & hopefully a better AF I have K3II,K5II.would be nice to have 1 all around camera that's all!!

---------- Post added 03-05-16 at 03:28 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
D500 is a pro body and weathersealed.
I haven't used the 150-450mm, but the 300mm I have used extensively and is not a speed demon, which is a big drawback for birds in flight.

If he mentioned anything but BIF, then the K-1 may be alright...but for BIF exclusively, it will be hard to top the D500.
I have the 150'-450 & DA300..true not speed demons,but as the 150-450 is made for FF,I hope the AF is faster/more accurate with the K1..so therefore I am in doubt..problem is NO place to try a K1 here

the large buffer with D500 & 10FPS is very tempting,but again No place to try that one either..so must rely on web reviews

---------- Post added 03-05-16 at 03:33 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
I read the Canon 7DII AF documentation, they provide the list of lenses compatible with AF zones for tracking. In other words, you may not exactly get what the advertisement shows you if you use a slow lens mounted on your super AF camera. For fast and reliable AF, you need to buy the D500 and mount a fast (300 f2.8) and fast to focus lens on it. If you mount a Tamron 150-600 f6.3, it may work better than a K-3 solution, but you may still end-up using center points AF because peripheral points don't work at f6.3, so almost back to square #1. They demonstrate the Sigma 150-600 Sport with a 1Dx... not for nothing, they use the best AF possible so that to have this lens AF still working at 600mm/f6.3. Then if you replace the 1Dx by a cheaper body, you may have some surprises. However, IMO, the k-3 should get a firmware update from Ricoh, because I think some of the erratic AF situation could be prevented by firmware.
Not sure a 2.8 is needed,the Nikon80-400 I tried on a D3 & it ran circles around my K3II /DA 300 ,so I imagine the D500 + 80-400 would be the same

So you think K3/II FW update can improve the AF?? that would be nice!!!




This is an example where maybe the D500 would of helped??
K3II,450mm,1600 sec,F9, ISO800,single spot AF,focused on Hawk in foreground..

https://www.dropbox.com/s/51miu4z2qfgxxr0/IMGP2904ed.jpg?dl=0

Last edited by Shanti; 03-04-2016 at 07:41 PM.
03-04-2016, 10:02 PM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,913
QuoteOriginally posted by Shanti Quote
This is an example where maybe the D500 would of helped??
K3II,450mm,1600 sec,F9, ISO800,single spot AF,focused on Hawk in foreground..
Not if you were using single-spot AF and wanted AF-C tracking. 'Single-point AF', in Nikon parlance, is for stationary targets and AF-C tracking won't work well, if at all. In Nikon, for best results you would need to switch to AF-C, switch to 3D tracking (or another AF area mode), then select the focus target (AF point/AF point group) you want to track.

It's kind of like how the K-3 works.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
300mm, af, bif, body, camera, crop, da*300, dfa, dfa 140-450, f6.3, firmware, focus, glass, k-1, k-3, k1, k1. d500, k5, lens, lenses, nikon, pentax, post, spot, target, weathersealed
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
D500 vs K-3 size comparison MJSfoto1956 Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 83 08-17-2016 01:15 PM
L-Plate/L-Bracket for Pentax K3II or New K1 MichaelErlewine Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 06-02-2016 10:50 AM
Nikon D5 and D500 D1N0 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 130 02-05-2016 06:46 AM
Full moon or is it because of the pending K1? noelpolar General Talk 8 01-10-2016 01:52 PM
Nikon d500 APSC harrisonww Photographic Industry and Professionals 2 01-05-2016 03:20 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:08 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top