|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
11-05-2013, 07:39 AM
|
| |
Not surprisingly, SilkyPix has just released an update to DSPro[45] that includes support for the K3. I've always liked the output of DSProE for my K5 and was given a 20% discount on the price for DSPro5. I wonder if the special WB option in the K3 may not be recognized by previously existing raw converters?
LPA
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
09-27-2013, 06:52 AM
|
| |
I have had my K5 for almost 3 years and my DA*300 for 3 1/2 years. I mainly do bird photography and this combo has served me well. From time to time I have looked at what the other guys offer, but I always found myself looking for what I already had: light weight, comfortable ergonomics, rugged build, excellent high ISO performance, and fully implemented TAv mode. Some people have claimed that 300mm is too short for bird photography, but I prefer to hike out in the natural world and work to get as close as I can to my subjects. So the DA*300 has been the perfect match for my K5. Here is an example:
http://remotesensingart.com/Pentax16/BarredOwl_K549166small.jpg
shot in near darkness at 1/160, f/4, ISO=5000, cropped to 1760x2200 and downsized for the web.
I would appreciate better AF-C performance, although I have gotten many BIFs with focus spot on, such as this Red-shouldered Hawk:
http://remotesensingart.com/Pentax6/RedshoulderedHawk_K528420small.jpg
But I have missed some BIF shots with the K5. I was tempted by the K5IIs and its reported greatly improved AF-C, but decided to wait for the next body. Assuming the rumored feature set of the K3 is real, I will add it and keep my K5 so I can go out with a second body and a shorter lens such as the DFA100. Also assuming the long-promised 1.4x TC is finally released, I will get that as well and then have what I would consider to be an unmatched combo for bushwalking photography.
LPA
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-11-2012, 12:59 PM
|
| |
What would need to be added to an astronomical scope to make it a camera lens are the things I listed: AF, metering, change of aperture and wider focal range. The only thing on the scope that is more elaborate than needed for terrestrial use is the focuser. Nevertheless, the 10:1 fine focus knob on my TV85 is invaluable for focusing, so I wouldn't want that to go.
LPA
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
09-11-2012, 11:52 AM
|
| |
I have and I do. Here is a link to an animation I created from 15 frames I shot of a hummingbird at 50 ft using my Televue 85 scope, a 0.8x field-flattener/focal reducer, my 1.7AFA and my K5 (= 816mm f/9.52), cropped to 2200x1760 and then reduced to 1024x819 (640x512 as posted) for the animation:
http://remotesensingart.com/Hummers2012/HummerDance.gif
and here is a link to an animation of the moon's libration I shot over 18 nights using the same gear, cropped to 2000x2000 and then reduced to 900x900 for the animation:
http://remotesensingart.com/Pentax10/Moon05_22b.gif
I'll make a different comparison here. I love my TV85, but Televue's NP101is is a better scope to compare with the 560. It is a 540mm f/5.4 Petzval design with a doublet objective and a doublet corrector lens, 4 elements in 2 groups. It has a little better resolution and IQ than my TV85 which already is outstanding. By the time I got all the adaptors and other accessories I would need to use this as a terrestrial lens, the total street cost would approach $5,000. So what would another $2,000 get me if I bought the 560? I would get the ability to AF, meter, change aperture, and not have to add extension tubes for closer focus, plus have AW sealing for the lens. Are those worth another $2k? If the 560's IQ is comparable to my TV85, then it would make that lens much more usable to me for wildlife shooting and I would work at saving the money to buy one.
One other note: all 14 elements in that 500 f/4 absorb some light and all those surfaces scatter a little even with the best coatings.
LPA
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
06-13-2012, 07:28 AM
|
| |
When I go out a little before sunset to look for owls, I invariably need to use high ISO. Here is a Barred Owl I found up in the canopy.
K5+DA*300 TAv, f/5.6, 1/320, ISO 6400:
It was even darker when I shot this Cooper's Hawk. It still needed some pushing in PP, so the effective ISO was even higher.
K5+DA*300 TAv, f/4, 1/200, ISO 6400:
These images do not convey how very dark it was where these birds were perched. I did some NR while converting from raw with Silkypix DSP and then did more NR with DeNoise5. I always do NR before doing any levels or brightness adjustments with the image.
Larry
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
05-23-2010, 10:32 PM
|
| |
I just returned from a trip to Seney National Wildlife Refuge. I went there to photograph Trumpeter Swans and Loons, along with other feathered and furred critters that inhabit this very special place. In an attempt to capture some of its ambience, I took this shot of a pair of swans and purposely left it dark. Hopefully this conveys some of the mystery and peaceful nature of Seney. I'd like to know what others think of this effort.
LPA
 |
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
06-16-2009, 06:33 AM
|
| |
After getting shots of a great egret with my K20D+bigma, I came across some aquatic flowers being visited by a bee. Since I don't yet have a dedicated macro lens for my K20D, I tried taking some shots with the bigma at 500mm.
Here is a 100% crop from that image:
LPA
|
