[Dan Rentea]

Has zero value, I can shoot thousands of those all in perfect focus with my Pentax K1, it's very easy. I shot those with the DFA24-70 on the coast in Brittany. Pentax works well for birds in the sky, usually it's easy to the camera to focus when there is not detail in the background.

Then specify that it has zero value because it's easy to shoot BIF against sky. This is a valid argument if:
- you shoot large birds with predictable AF
- you compare shooting birds against blue sky to shooting birds against a busy background

If you like to test your af with birds against blue sky, try and catch a bee eater or a swallow at 600mm and see the difference in keeper rate between shooting large birds like seaguls or duks (which have predictable flight) and small birds with fast and unpredictable flight.

a keeper is not a keeper because the subject is in focus, if a keeper was a keeper every time a photo is in focus we would have so many keepers that we wouldn't know what to do with them.

A keeper image is (in my opinion) the best image from a burst of in focus images. Shooting BIF with slow fps cameras means that you will have a lag between shots even if those images are all in focus. This means that from a burst you may end up with no keeper image in which the wings for example are in perfect position.

Look at the image from below. Sorry for the low quality, it was downloaded from my Facebook page. The kingfisher is known as one of the most demanding birds to photograph. It's very small and extremely fast. It's hard to photograph this bird in action even from a good hide. It's the bird that made me love shooting wildlife and BIF. Now imagine the shooting conditions that I had when I took this image. I was on a small fishing boat, covered with branches, lots of boats were passing near us and the waves from those boats made our boat to move a lot. I was using a 300mm f2.8L lens with 2xTC (600mm) handheld because tripod was out of question on a moving boat. This bird was almost imposible to follow because of the waves, the size of the bird and because I couldn't see it coming from far away due to existing conditions. I knew the bird is coming to the nest from a certain direction by listening. This bird has a sound that I can recognise anytime no matter how many birds are singing in the same time. When the birds was in the frame, I got the chance to take a burst of 7 images using all the skills and techinques that I know. I had 5 images in focus, but in this one the wings and the position were the best. I had the af-c set for tracking and I customised the af for that particular shooting condition (I set the camera to ignore obstacles and to prioritize chaotic movement). Do you think that a camera with slow fps and slow tracking capabilities would have helped me to take this shot? I can assure you that even 5D Mark IV struggled to keep up with this little bird despite the complex af system and 7fps.



Or take this example from below. The images ware taken with 6D which has 4 fps. This is a burst of 2 images. See where the horse is in the second image? If I would have had a camera with 7-10fps, I would have had other images to choose from between these 2 shots. But the slow fps of my camera didn't allowed me to have the chance to select a better image. So, you may recommend K1 for BIF. I don't and I told you a few reasons.



---------- Post added 09-19-18 at 02:29 PM ----------

Well good to see Dan and Ian are here. Two guys that can help with the transition. I don't always agree with their perspective, but if you are going to switch those two will get you pointed in the right direction.

I don't want to make anyone to switch or to help with the transition. I just presented my impressions based on the fact that I really love shooting BIF. And maybe you saw that I told him that:
- for stationary subjects there is no need to switch
- K1 will provide great images with lots of details
- a faster lens than DA* 300mm may be a solution if BIF is not that important as it is to me.

---

Last edited by Dan Rentea; 09-19-2018 at 07:34 AM.

[normhead]

Do you think that a camera with slow fps and slow tracking capabilities would have helped me to take this shot?

I think Kengoh has better images, taken with a K-3 or K-1. The biggest factor to getting shots like those. Be there.

[Dan Rentea]

I think Kengoh has better images, taken with a K-3 or K-1.

I have a lot of images also with kingfisher. I have more than 3.000 images taken with this bird in the last 2 years, but it's not about my camera. And you have to take into consideration the shooting conditions. I was on a moving boat shooting handheld at 600mm.

This guy also has a lot of better images with kingfisher. Kingfisher Workshop masterclass - Dean Bricknell But:
- he uses a 1Dx
- he has his own hide and he puts fish in the pool when he has an workshop
- he uses flash from time to time when the kingfisher is diving

Ask him why he doesn't shoot those images with a 5DsR given the fact that he has the perfect conditions. He will tell you the same: 5DsR (like K1) is not designed for action.

[normhead]

Why not ask Kengoh how he manages to take award winning BiF images with his K-3 and K-1?

You might want to know his technique for getting so much clarity in his BiF images.

Do you really think only Canon can point to accomplished photographers. Or that every accomplished photographer chooses their gear?

Go here, I'm sure you'll have reason why none of them are as good as yours. But hey, others may not see it that way.

https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=Pentax%20BiF

I'm getting really tired of all this "you have to switch to do BiFs". Kengoh doesn't. Lot's of others didn't. Lets just say you and Ian felt you had to, which says as much about you as it does about the cameras.

So tell me, using that Pentax gear that "doesn't help" how did all those pictures get taken?

It would have been easier with a Canon or Nikon is an untestable argument, that you can't possibly prove, or even know for sure.

---

Last edited by normhead; 09-19-2018 at 08:14 AM.

[Dan Rentea]

Why not ask Kengoh how he manages to take ward winning images with his K-3 and K-1?

I'm more than happy to find different reasons than mine to shoot BIF or action with other cameras than the usual dedicated cameras. The one thing that people don't seem to understand is that I love photography and since we talk about BIF, I really love BIF images. I don't write here to waste time. I participate at these conversations in order to learn. If you know how we can add Kengoh to this conversation or if you have a link to his portfolio, I will thank you in advance.

[normhead]

You're in Pentax forums, and you love BiF photography, but you don't know Kengoh's work?

What do you do here?

If you really love BiF photgraphy in general and not just as a Canon shill, you'd know about this thread
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/55946-300mm-plus-lens-clu...ml#post4466908

Go though it, you'll realize the images you and Ian posted, are really nothing all that special in the Pentax world. Kengoh has posted often there, but I'm not going to hold your hand and point you to the images he's posted. Sorry, we're not that close.

Also all Gary Chalkers images are bought by Getty images, many have the Getty Images trade mark on them when posted in the thread.

I can't get him to come to this thread, but here's his flickr page.
Ken Goh | Flickr

IN closing, I'll just add, if you can't get 4 out of 10 keepers with your Pentax gear, going to another brand isn't going to help. The deference as far as I can tell based on the testimony of switchers, is for BiF the keeper rate jumps from 4 out of 10 to 7 out of 10, with many more keepers if you use faster than Pentax frame rate. But, I suggest if you're not getting 4 out of 10 with your Pentax gear, your technique is such that it's possible you won't see a lot of improvement switching. All those who've moved on successfully were producing top shelf images, before they left Pentax. And guys like Kengoh never felt the need to leave.

I'm always hesitant to recommend switching to those I don't know will actually benefit from a switch. Saying every shooter will get better results with a Canon or Nikon just doesn't work. There are a lot of crap Nikon and Canon shooters out there, just like very other brand. Switching doesn't guarantee success. The little bit of help you get from better AF and faster frame rate, is pretty meaningless to folks who need a lot of help.

It's personal choice, not a choice of necessity, as Canon and Nikon users would have you believe.

I think that pretty much condenses (and exhausts) my thoughts on the topic... I'm outta here.

[redpit]

Out of curiosity, and also because it could be of interest to the OP, how much would you say is teh difference ? Is it something like 1/10 with the Pentax while 10/10 with the D500 combo ? Or is it more like 4/10 with the K3 compared to 7/10 with the Nikon ? Said other wise, is it the difference between no pictures and a lot of them, or does it rather means a some more pictures with the D500 but still many keepers with K-3 ?

Exactly the second situation that you described. It’s about 7-8/10 from D500 and 4-5/10 from K-3ii. At the end greater % and total number from the D500 due to being faster as well. The D500 tracks clearly better but that doesn’t mean that the camera knows every time what your subject is. It’s not unkommon for example to have a frame focused on the head of a large bird and the next one at its wingtips. As I told you it’s the second part of your two questions.

[Dan Rentea]

You're in Pentax forums, and you love BiF photography, but you don't know Kengoh's work?

What do you do here?

If you really love BiF photgraphy in general and not just as a Canon shill, you'd know about this thread
The 300mm plus lens Club discuss your long lenses. - Page 1986 - PentaxForums.com

I don't know forum members names if I don't have the chance to get into discussions with them. If someone would bother to read, maybe they will see how many times I mentioned the 300mm+ thread on topics where people say you can't shoot wildlife with Pentax. But it's more fun to ignore what others have to say and keep going the same rute (not you in particular). If you also bother to read, you will see that I didn't included Canon in my eralier comments and I gave also the reason for not doing it. But again, who read what others have to say these days?

Go though it, you'll realize the images you and Ian posted, are really nothing all that special in the Pentax world. Kengoh has posted often there, but I'm not going to hold your hand and point you to the images he's posted. Sorry, we're not that close.

I have been looking at Kengoh images and he has great images. I understand also why you like his wildlife work because those images relate to your shooting style, most of the birds staying on branches.

Also all Gary Chalkers images are bought by Getty images, many have the Getty Images trade mark on them when posted in the thread.

Getty images is a stock website as far as I know. They are a bit more selective than Shutterstock or Adobe Stock. It's nice to see images posted on Getty. This means that those images are better than what you find on common stock agencies.

I can't get him to come to this thread, but here's his flickr page.
Ken Goh | Flickr

I've said above, he has great images. I do have static images and it seems that I have to make some time and edit some BIF shots to see what I like to shoot.

Static images I have tons, but I don't go out to shoot static subjects. And I don't post images often. The ones I really like are printed. I don't post in the 300mm plus thread because it's a Pentax forum and I don't want to see in such a thread images taken with Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc.

IN closing, I'll just add, if you can't get 4 out of 10 keepers with your Pentax gear, going to another brand isn't going to help. The deference as far as I can tell based on the testimony of switchers, is for BiF the keeper rate jumps from 4 out of 10 to 7 out of 10, with many more keepers if you use faster than Pentax frame rate. But, I suggest if you're not getting 4 out of 10 with your Pentax gear, your technique is such that it's possible you won't see a lot of improvement switching. All those who've moved on successfully were producing top shelf images, before they left Pentax. And guys like Kengoh never felt the need to leave.

4 out of 10 it's not the same as 7 out of ten. Not when comes to action. If 4 out of 10 would have been enough, 1Dx/D5, D500/7D Mark II would have been useless.

I'm always hesitant to recommend switching to those I don't know will actually benefit from a switch. Saying every shooter will get better results with a Canon or Nikon just doesn't work. There are a lot of crap Nikon and Canon shooters out there, just like very other brand. Switching doesn't guarantee success. The little bit of help you get from better AF and faster frame rate, is pretty meaningless to folks who need a lot of help.

It's personal choice, not a choice of necessity, as Canon and Nikon users would have you believe.

Have you ever seen me recommending Canon or Nikon for landscape or for shooting stationary subjects? Have you seen me recommend buying Canon and Nikon (or any camera from any manufacturer) before testing them? Have you seen me saying that you can't take action shots with Pentax? If I respond, I respond to people who think that K1 is an action camera and they keep thinking that their technique is the only one to blame for not getting consistency when comes to action photography. But what happens when you take a burst of 10 shots with K1 and then you see action at the nest and you can't take another burst because the buffer didn't finished to clear the buffer after the first burst? No one talks about the shortcomings of K1 for wildlife and it seems that I'm the bad guy for telling them. I can live with this as long as people read so that they can test what I say and see if they can manage to work with this shortcomings. Again, I'm talking about action and BIF which may seem to be confused with static wildlife.

[UserAccessDenied]

Some people here are taking things WAY out of context; or just misinterpreting what I'm writing altogether...
For those that are just stubborn and refuse to discuss this topic objectively, there's only so much we can do here.

- NEVER did I say BIF is my sole purpose for photography...
- I DID NOT come here for confirmation of switching systems...
- NO ONE has the perfect system
- NO ONE has perfect technique

I'm not going through 11 pages to pull out quotes - that's a waste of time. If you need to verify what I'm saying feel free to go back yourself.

However, I'll say it again.
I shoot wildlife, portraits, landscape, macro, street... My primary focus is wildlife. I have noticed a limitation in my current gear when it comes to BIF. No, this is not technique. The gear has it's limitations when it comes to BIF.

Now let's summarize the majority of responses here:
- D500 will help with BIF rate, but maybe isn't the best all around camera
- You lose some and gain some no matter what you shoot; Pentax isn't immune to this, and neither is Nikon/Canon/Sony/etc
- The K-1ii is a great camera
- The DFA 150-450 is a great lens
- The Nikon 200-500 is not so great, though some think it is just fine...
- Technique does matter; possibly more so than gear
- Gear does matter, especially GLASS!
- Wildlife photography is expensive
- Pentax AF is behind the rest (try to hold back your tears, it's true)
- Pentax has some incredible features is BIF isn't the SOLE PURPOSE (focus peaking, pixel shift, ergonomics, dynamic range, just simply personal preference/familiarity)
- One can achieve great results with almost any camera/lens with time and patience
- One can 'cheat' time and patience with a $25,000 budget


I understand the angst... You've been shooting Pentax for years and feel obligated to defend it. You feel a personal level of connection and are prepared to back up any claim with a photo you once took or a situation where your gear met your needs.
Maybe you have personally left and come back and found an anxiety away from Pentax. Perhaps you just like being a Pentaxian, nothing wrong with that!

But, when it comes to objective comparisons... It is HEALTHY to admit where your gear fails you and what potential alternatives exist.
That's why I posted this thread in the first place. Upon watching countless videos and reading numerous articles touting the D500 as the "Greatest APS-C body" I had to ask the question on page 1.
The same people who have marked these reviews of the D500 have reviewed the K-1 and K-3 and have even gone as far as saying the K-1 is the "Greatest landscape body"... There's validity there!
Does this mean I've made my decision and need confirmation?
Absolutely not!

I'm here to weigh the options and HOPEFULLY find a few lost souls with me who want answers/opinions/comments/OBJECTIVENESS!

At the end of the day, PentaxForums is an incredible resource.
No matter what I end up shooting I'm going to stay here for photo sharing, communicating technique, discussing the industry and the future of photography, entering contests when applicable, conversing with fellow peers and making friends.

To those of you that this upsets, I'm sorry...
I'm here to stay, regardless of what camera I'm going to shoot.

So please, feel free to hit that ignore button is this infuriates you.

[Dan Rentea]

To the OP, I don't watch reviews from DPReview, Tony Northrup, etc. I'm not saying that those reviews are bad or good. For me are not among the best.

I do follow from time to time Imaging Resources and when comes to Nikon cameras, I tend to read reviews from Photography life. Here is their review on D500 in case you didn't read it. Nikon D500 Review - Photography Life

[UserAccessDenied]

To the OP, I don't watch reviews from DPReview, Tony Northrup, etc. I'm not saying that those reviews are bad or good. For me are not among the best.

I do follow from time to time Imaging Resources and when comes to Nikon cameras, I tend to read reviews from Photography life. Here is their review on D500 in case you didn't read it. Nikon D500 Review - Photography Life

I actually really like Tony Northrup's content... Much more than other YouTube channels (particularly a certain afro-haired guy who's name is not to be mentioned... )
But your link confirms what the other reviews have said, it's a 'baby D5' which is a pretty remarkable achievement.

Honestly if I had the money I'd just get a D850 and stack up a 600mm F4, 30mm F2.8, various TCs and a plethora of fast wide and normal primes. Oh, and a few macros...

The point to this thread is maximizing my photographic potential on a budget. My personal improvements in photography over the last few years have exposed the holes in Pentax compared to others.
I'm ignorant to the holes that others have compared to Pentax, so the idea alone to switch systems is nerve-racking.


I appreciate everyone here spending their time and effort to help out.


I'm waiting a few weeks to meet up with Bob. Maybe he'll let me shoot his D500 to get a feel for things.
In that time we'll have Photokina (likely nothing to get excited about, but still there's a chance).

By next year I'll have made a change... Whether that be deciding on a lens change for now until the K-3ii successor comes out, or a full system swap.

I'll keep us posted so as to assist the next PF member who decides to walk this path.

[biz-engineer]

Then specify that it has zero value because it's easy to shoot BIF against sky. This is a valid argument if:

You missed the point. When photographying birds with blue sky in the background, most likely you aren't are eye level with the bird, you get the bottom view, and the bottom view isn't very nice. In addition, when you shoot birds against the sky, the bird is between the sky and you are at the ground level, that mean, unless the sun is in your back and shines on the bird, the side of the bird you are shooting is in the shadow, that's the opposite of what you should do to have the bird valued in the frame. I feel like you understand camera specs well, but you don't have any particular orientation with regards to how to compose a beautiful photograph. When the birds fly in the sky, it is not the right condition to get compelling photographs. That is why, IMO , the only good BIF photographs are when the birds are flying close to the ground level and the background is not the sky but something darker, such as brown and dark greens.

[Marcel K]

@OP many thanks for starting this thread and info you have collected. Interesting read.

[biz-engineer]

A keeper image is (in my opinion) the best image from a burst of in focus images. Shooting BIF with slow fps cameras means that you will have a lag between shots even if those images are all in focus. This means that from a burst you may end up with no keeper image in which the wings for example are in perfect position.

Again, you are an educated person and talk about the technical aspects of how camera operates, autofocus etc, not on photographic creation. And on these forum website, BTW, a lot of the discussion are by former IT engineer, scientists and engineers, and while that is the right kind of crew to discuss the technical things of cameras and lenses, this is very poor for learn the crafts of photographs.

---------- Post added 19-09-18 at 21:01 ----------

To the OP, I don't watch reviews from DPReview, Tony Northrup, etc. I'm not saying that those reviews are bad or good. For me are not among the best.

I do follow from time to time Imaging Resources and when comes to Nikon cameras, I tend to read reviews from Photography life. Here is their review on D500 in case you didn't read it. Nikon D500 Review - Photography Life

All those sites do the same, they review cameras and lenses from an engineering standpoint, none of those sites talk about how to craft a photograph.

[Culture]

NEVER, EVER, EVER and I am saying NEVER say you are switching systems on PF.
No matter how good your intentions are, PITCH forks will be raised.