[normhead]

One more point, these two guys are travelling companions, one with his stabilized Canon, one with his K-1 and DFA 150-450. His buddy a long time Canon user wasn't able to convince him to go Canon, and he loves his Pentax gear, which also includes a 15-30. Two friends, one Canon one Pentax, there's a lot more to this discussion than in lens stabilization. Which guy are you? Despite all the imagined advantages to Canon, your best buddy could still go ut and buy Pentax, regardless. It's just different values. Both have their strong points.

[Sandy Hancock]

It's taken me three years to finally spring on the DFA150-450. The catalyst was an upcoming trip-of-a-lifetime where wildlife shooting will be the primary goal.

Up until now I have always maintained that the DA*300 +/- teleconverter would do, and it certainly makes a beautiful image, but the convenience and range of the zoom, the faster AF, the focus limiter, the on-barrel AF buttons and the placement of the zoom and focus rings are revelations.

Forget the D500. Buy the lens

[BrianR]

Would have loved to see the D500 at lower ISO compared to the KP. I think there's something there for discussion given some content to reference.

You can select cameras to compare here, they only have the 'still-life' series for the kp, but it's at low iso settings: Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ? Digital Camera Image Comparison Page

[derekkite]

Is the K-1ii in crop mode comparable to the K-3ii?

I wouldn't mind getting my hands on the K-1ii to test it out... I like everything about that camera, except the FF.

Does the K-3II slow down continuous shots in AFC when the af button is pressed? The K1 Mark II doesn't.

Either in crop or full frame.

I shoot the K1 Mark II (for a couple weeks, K1 for two years) with the 150-450. I used my K3 for the two weeks when it was away. What I found annoying with the K3 was the usable ISO ceiling being too low. And what happened to continuous focus recycle rate. I regularly shoot iso 3200, and with the K1 got good results up to 6400 in some light conditions. With Mark II I set the ceiling to 12800. What that means is that I rarely shoot at 1/400 or lower in low light. If you shoot the K3 you know how often you have to do that. The low light capabilities of the K1 is absolutely amazing. I can take shots of things I can't see and identify what I'm looking at. Wildlife shooting is about low light conditions, even on bright days, the blighters seem to want to hide in the dark corners. The K1 opens up shooting opportunities.

Focus with the 150-450 is excellent with the Mark II. Decisive and accurate. Tracking is very good. The K1 would show focus in the viewfinder but the shot wasn't. Mark II gives you what the viewfinder shows. This is the best focus experience I have ever had with Pentax, since the K5.

I use crop mode in situations when I want a faster continuous shooting rate, or the subject is far away and I will be cropping anyways.

It is a bit heavier and larger, the files are larger.

Any body lens combination will have advantages and disadvantages.

I have two K3's that I bought shortly after they were released. I rarely use them because the K1 is much superior in every way for my shooting.

[Canid]

I would look at it from a long-term perspective.
Unless Pentax goes under, they are going to keep bringing out improved cameras. The next APSC camera they make will always be a step up... it will definitely focus faster and have a bigger buffer than your K3ii.

You like the Pentax system... and you will pay more by switching, but you'll get focus improvements several years earlier every time you upgrade. Pentax will get you there too, but you'll always be behind where you could be. So it comes down to how much you care about being on the leading edge.

[reh321]

There's a lot more people who think this or that system should improve their photgraphy than there are people who actually post better images after they upgrade.

The one thing one people never seem to want analyze is what their weaknesses are.

From last winter.... photographing Crosbills from the Algonquin Park Visitor's Centre deck.

If in lens stabilization is so great, why are all these people using tripods?



Algonquin Park, Mew Lake, waiting for the Pine martins to come.


The point being these people, all pretty serious, do not depend on in lens stabilization for wildlife. You say it's a thing. They say it sin't. Who do I believe, the people who own Nikon and Canon gear, and actually shoot wildlife, or the guys who just think it might be nice.

Maybe they just aren't strong enough to stand there for hours holding those heavy lenses.

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

The thing about ƒ4, is in demanding AF situations, ƒ4 gives the AF system twice the light to work with.

The light reaching the AF sensor is restricted by the separator mask found in front of the AF sensor, most mask restrict the light to F/5.6 to F/6.3. So shooting with a faster lens ( one that lets more light in) will not provide more light to the AF sensor.
But that is not to say that the more expensive lens has the same AF performance with better motors and better designed for tacking fast targets are usually found in the more expensive and larger lenses.

---------- Post added 09-17-2018 at 07:25 PM ----------

And the point here is, you don't get the benefit of a better AF system on something like a D500

If your believe this then you might be in for a surprise

IN fact it would be interesting to see a comparison of a D500 with say a 150-600 and Pentax with a 600 ƒ4.

On my outdated D800 the 150-600 seldom misses shot and even when a 1.4 TC is added to the lens it tracks very well to the point that at the light levels it can still track noise degrades the images too much for my liking.

[UserAccessDenied]

Just a suggestion: Buy a second-hand K-mount telephoto lens, see how the whole vibe strikes you for 6-12 months, then sell on for not much of a loss and now with a better idea of what you’d like. Spend a little on tuition and wildlifing trips. Don’t make a big move till you have tested the waters first.

For a Pentax user who takes lots of bird images with I think a Sigma 500mm lens, see the excellent Ken Goh.

Yes, I personally love the work of Ken Goh.
Would love even more to get my hands on a Sigma 500 F4.5 myself...

I do like your idea, but I worry I wouldn't sell it after 6-12 months! hahah
Wish I could fund it...

[UserAccessDenied]

It's taken me three years to finally spring on the DFA150-450. The catalyst was an upcoming trip-of-a-lifetime where wildlife shooting will be the primary goal.

Up until now I have always maintained that the DA*300 +/- teleconverter would do, and it certainly makes a beautiful image, but the convenience and range of the zoom, the faster AF, the focus limiter, the on-barrel AF buttons and the placement of the zoom and focus rings are revelations.

Forget the D500. Buy the lens

Damn that's certainly motivating...

Maybe I'll do it. For the same cost of renting I could buy it, use it for 4 months and sell it.
If I like it, I'll have to consider selling it and just know I'll be buying it again. Or try to "find" the funds to purchase it permanently.

[Sandy Hancock]

Damn that's certainly motivating...

Speaking of motivation, I have two months to get my embryonic birding skills up to scratch.

While walking the dog this morning....


Australian Wood Duck (Chenonetta jubata)


Australian Magpie (Gymnorhina tibicen)

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

I'm having trouble sleeping...

I would wait and see what Pentax is coming out with and as you wait the Nikon camera will come down in price. If you are truly interested I would suggest that you rent or go down to the local camera shop and give it a try with lenses that fall with in your target FL's.

You don't need the most expensive lenses Nikon has to see a benefit in tracking. you have to remember when you see Nikon users criticizing the AF performance of the lens they are doing so expecting a great level of performance and are rating it against that performance.


Here's an example Nikon users would say that the 200-400 lenses is all but useless for tracking with a 1.7 tc but what I have found is that is was miles ahead of even the K3II and the sigma 300 2.8.



Even with the TC the lens never missed a beat.

Here is the same lens with a 1.4 tc



Here it is with the bare lens shot continuously without any frames removed ( warning large file) seldom does the D800 miss a shot.





The sigma sport on the D800 seldom misses a beat also with about 95% hit rate. In this series it only missed 1 shot by a small margin

After trying the sport on the D850 I would have to say that its almost equal to the 200-400 on the D800 with tracking and AF and under some conditions better that the D800 and 200-400.

[UserAccessDenied]

I would wait and see what Pentax is coming out with and as you wait the Nikon camera will come down in price. If you are truly interested I would suggest that you rent or go down to the local camera shop and give it a try with lenses that fall with in your target FL's.

You don't need the most expensive lenses Nikon has to see a benefit in tracking. you have to remember when you see Nikon users criticizing the AF performance of the lens they are doing so expecting a great level of performance and are rating it against that performance.


Here's an example Nikon users would say that the 200-400 lenses is all but useless for tracking with a 1.7 tc but what I have found is that is was miles ahead of even the K3II and the sigma 300 2.8.



Even with the TC the lens never missed a beat.

Here is the same lens with a 1.4 tc



Here it is with the bare lens shot continuously without any frames removed ( warning large file) seldom does the D800 miss a shot.





The sigma sport on the D800 seldom misses a beat also with about 95% hit rate. In this series it only missed 1 shot by a small margin

After trying the sport on the D850 I would have to say that its almost equal to the 200-400 on the D800 with tracking and AF and under some conditions better that the D800 and 200-400.

These are phenomenal...
Have you shot a D500, or only the D800?

I would certainly love going into a camera shop, but the closest one to me has to be 200+ miles away... Unfortunately.

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

Have you shot a D500, or only the D800?

I haven't used the D500 for BIF yet , I am more of a FF shooter for wildlife, the D800 in 1.2 crop is what I like for BIF just for the extra frame rate. If I was to go for a new camera might would be the D850, mind you the D810 are starting to drop and the used market is looking even better for the D810 which I think is better for BIF because of the tweaking of the AF and also the addition to group AF points that I think work better for some BIF. The only reason why I am looking at a new camera is that my D800 is getting old and beat up even more so that I use my first copy as a beater and the second as a backup.


If I was to get a new camera it would be as a backup to the second copy of the D800.

Sigma 150-600 sport vs $4400-$8000 lenses - Page 2 - PentaxForums.com
Here are some AF testing with the 150-600 sport with 1.4 tc on the D800. These are conditions that I would not normally use them in and was just a test to see how the combo would work

---------- Post added 09-17-2018 at 09:09 PM ----------

With the 200-500 I find that the lens is fast to acquire AF lock but the 150-600 sport if feel is slightly better at tracking but where the 150-600 pulls ahead is the ability to set custom focus limiter of your liking.

The 300mm f/4 PF is blazingly fast for just about anything

---------- Post added 09-17-2018 at 09:13 PM ----------

You don't always have to buy the most expensive lenses also take the 70-200 f4
I went out and tested the lens to see when and how the lens would fail in tracking





I like to preform these kinds of tests to see how it will fail, here right up to 3.5 meters on traffic at 110km the D800 and the 70-200F4 tracked perfectly right up to insane accuracy.
One of the reasons why I like to test this way is that it really tells how well the camera will predict the location of the subject at the time of the exposure

so here you can see where I set the AF point and if we take a look at where the camera focus we can see how much it missed by


Here you can see how much the camera missed in predicting the location of the target. even when the subject is traveling at 30m per seconds. I don't care how Nikon is able to do this, all I care about it that it can.

A few summers ago I was photographing swallows as they dived towards while passing under a bridge in a kayak, I took the D800 and the 70-200 F4 and as I passed the bridge this is what I got 2 consecutive frames




The first shot was at 5-7m and the second was at 4-6m away

Last year I switched to AF-C for most of my macro work done handheld with a very high success rate also and stopped using a rail and live view

[biz-engineer]

These are phenomenal...

Yes. Got the same from a K3 with DFA150-450. Below series of 16 shots burst all in focus. Apologize for the small size.

But I'm still skeptical. I'll get that D500 with a Sigma 500 f4 Sport or Nikkor 300 f2.8 and a TC .



---------- Post added 18-09-18 at 08:30 ----------

I'm skeptical, I'm skeptical, skeptical, what should i do?
Would that have an effect of the speed of Ricoh Imaging to release a K3-II successor?
Still skeptical.

---------- Post added 18-09-18 at 08:35 ----------

While walking the dog this morning....

Your birds aren't flying, they are posing. That doesn't count, the OP is skeptical.

[UserAccessDenied]

Yes. Got the same from a K3 with DFA150-450. Below series of 16 shots burst all in focus. Apologize for the small size.

But I'm still skeptical. I'll get that D500 with a Sigma 500 f4 Sport or Nikkor 300 f2.8 and a TC .



---------- Post added 18-09-18 at 08:30 ----------

I'm skeptical, I'm skeptical, skeptical, what should i do?
Would that have an effect of the speed of Ricoh Imaging to release a K3-II successor?
Still skeptical.

---------- Post added 18-09-18 at 08:35 ----------


Your birds aren't flying, they are posing. That doesn't count, the OP is skeptical.

Maybe it's just the down-sampling from attaching these images, but it actually looks like the K-3 + DFA150-450 missed the focus on a few frames.
This is particularly what I'm experiencing, except more so with the DA*300 + 1.4xTC.

Obviously we could nitpick any setup.

I just feel the D500 + equivalent 300mm F4 + 1.4 TC would beat out the Pentax setup I currently have.
I need to get a rig in hand to confirm this.

Planning to meet up with RockvilleBob sometime soon... Hopefully he lets me get a few minutes to test some shots!!