|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-11-2021, 01:20 AM
|
| |
Sure, but even my K-5 II got some drops of water inside the top LCD when used in bad weather. I learned my lesson and since then I have a rain cover in my backpack. :) Also, it is possible that the bottom in the new Sony models to have some protection but we don't know until someone will make a video in this regard. What I wanted to point out is that the word "junk" is a bold statement which in my opinion doesn't have any kind of arguments other than a personal opinion of someone who most certain doesn't have experience with Sony cameras. As with every manufacturer, we see pro photographers using their Sony, Pentax, Fuji, Oly, Canon, Nikon, Panasonic cameras in quite challenging conditions. That's why I can't agree with such bold statements when comes to gear in general, being Sony, Pentax, Nikon, Canon, etc... It's clickbait rather than reality. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-10-2021, 11:11 PM
|
| |
Lens rental said about A7R III that and I quote "So What Did We Learn Today?
Sony spoke truly. Except for the bottom this camera has thorough and extensive weather sealing, as good as any camera I’ve seen." If they said this about an older model like A7R III, then their findings seems to contradict you and they do have arguments and images to back up their findings. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-10-2021, 03:41 PM
|
| |
Almost no one if you ask me. Sony lenses aside, there are native Sigma and Tamron lenses for Sony users. And they came in f1.4 or f1.8 for the ones with or without budget.
---------- Post added 03-10-21 at 10:46 PM ----------
True, but junk is quite a bold statement and I'm not sure if our colleague is familiar with the junk cameras... It's easy to give verdicts based on info found online, but it's hard to sustain them without having some direct experience... :)
|
|
Forum: General Photography
03-09-2021, 01:32 PM
|
| |
You're so trapped in your own comments that it's amazing how you can't see (or refuze to see) what I said. It is proven since ever that each time a camera is released, after a while people think about features they would like to see in the successor. It doesn't even matter if is K1, KP or K-3 II. This is not an assumption. You make it sound wrong if people wants more than 8 or 10 fps or video or other stuff that Ricoh added in K-3 III. People want these features, otherwise Ricoh won't add them and won't have to release new cameras just because you can deal with K-3 II and K-3 III doesn't suit you.
When people are asking if there will be a future for DSLR, according to what you said in the latest comments no one needs a better camera than what Ricoh has now. I mean, why should people buy a K-3 III if af, OVF, 4k and fps aren't features worth upgrading?
|
|
Forum: General Photography
03-09-2021, 11:57 AM
|
| |
I was thinking more about upgrading from K-3 II to K-3 III for example than upgrading from smatphone to DSLR. :) Smatphones already "killed" most of the compact cameras and if I look at a friend of mine who sold his Nikon D5300 with the kit lens because his new smartphone offer him enough image quality for what he needs (Instagram and Facebook), it seems that micro 4/3 cameras and also some of the entry level APS-C cameras with kit lenses are in the target of smartphones, at least for the ones who don't buy other lenses than the kit lens. :)
To be fair, if I wasn't shooting for stock, my EOS R would stay at home when traveling because my wife's latest Samsung phone is more capable than I thought it will be for the intended use of the images: social media.
---------- Post added 03-09-21 at 07:08 PM ----------
"I'm certain that after K-3 Mark III will be released and one or 2 years will pass, a demand for better af and more fps will arise on this forum." As you see in my comment, I wasn't pointed you. Pentax is not only about you. K-3 II came and people bought it, myself included, as an upgrade from K-5 II. Pentax K-3 III is about to come and people will buy it as an upgrade from K-3 II. Considering that K-3 III is the upgrade of the K-3 II, we can say that some will buy the latest and the greatest of Ricoh as an upgrade from what it is now the latest and the greatest of Ricoh, which is K-3 II. It's wrong? I don't think so. The same will happen once K-3 Mark IV will be released... people will buy it for maybe 16fps and 80 cross type af points.
If the specs of the new Pentax doesn't suit you and you are happy with 8fps, that's great for you. That doesn't mean that there won't be a lot of people benefiting of the 12fps and faster af. We will see how many like me there are once the K-3 will start shipping and post feedback about fps and af.
Ah, if we talk about ultimate IQ, then the lenses should have a big role here. I would like to talk about IQ with people who shoot with K1 and the new 50mm or 85mm f1.4. Because with this kind of lenses I know for sure that K1 can deliver the ultimate IQ you mentioned.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
03-09-2021, 04:08 AM
|
| |
I see it differently. For me the mirrorless Af is better because I get the 1Dx Mark III performance at 2500$ which is the price of R6. Therefore, I don't need to pay extra 4000$ if I'm interested in Af and fps. R6 is the equivalent of 6D Mark II when comes to DSLRs and the difference in speed and Af is night and day between 6D Mark II and R6. That's the advantages I'm interested in and the ones I look for. Same when comes to 5D Mark IV and R5. It's quite a big upgrade the R5 in every single aspect.
Sure, given the huge number of lenses available for DSLRs, we may see a few more years DSLRs around us, especially due to the huge second hand market and the very cheap prices that comes with it. A Nikon D850 with around 40000 shutter clicks can be found in my country for 2100$ and a 5D Mark IV with 30000 shutter clicks for 1800$. DSLR lenses are also at the lowest prices I ever saw on the second hand market. The technology seems to move towards mirrorless and given the amount of money Canon and Nikon already invested in mirrorless, they will push as hard as they can the mirrorless trend. Once Canon and Nikon will launch their mirrorless flagship sports cameras and some of their sport and wildlife exotic lenses, I don't think they will release anything else for DSLRs... The good news is that the adapter work so good with my DSLR lenses that I don't have to worry about this aspect until my lenses will need a replacement. With the DSLR lenses I have, I'm good for the next 2-3 years. I usually upgrade my lenses after 4-5 years due to extensive use. :)
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
03-05-2021, 11:29 AM
|
| |
There was no distraction, just straight answer to the subject. You said the K3 or KP can't be beaten in terms of size and weight with lenses attached. I proved that with just 2 lenses you cover 17mm to 180mm at 2.8. And replacing the zoom lenses with small prime lenses as you did, it's the same result. I also proved that a full frame with lenses that cover 17mm to 180mm at constant f2.8 can be lighter than K1, mostly due to support of the Tamron lenses. And not just by a hair lighter, but with 2000 grams lighter. And 45$ cheaper than K1 with its f2.8 trinity lenses. So, when you had no answer to this, you chose to forget it and concentrate on the other subject that I will cover again below.
Yet, every time I post images from real life situations as arguments, you post lab results from DXO or Imaging Resources.
First of all, my example wasn't to prove that a high mp camera is better than a low resolution camera at high ISO when comes to full size images. My example was posted for the exact opposite reason, to prove that a great high ISO camera like Canon R6 from my example (with Low-Light ISO score of 3394 on DXO) has no advantage over a higher mp camera that has less capable ISO which is EOS R (with Low-Light ISO score of 2742 ISO) if I resize the image of EOS R from 30mp to 20mp to match the R6 resolution. That's why I told to Parry in my first comment that I wouldn't worry about A7R IV high ISO images, because even if it won't be in real life as good at high ISO as other low mp cameras or as good as DXO or any other lab test say it is, he will always gain 1-2 stops in terms of noise by resizing images.
If you have images taken side by side from A7R IV and lower resolution cameras like K1 or D810 for example, taken in real life conditions, we can take a look and draw some conclusions. I was able to provide an example with a just released camera with 20mp that has a much better performance than a 30mp EOS R camera, at high ISO.
When comes to resized images from high resolution cameras, even 8 points won't make a difference. Pixel peeping a resized image from 50mp to 16mp side by side with a 16mp image from a 20mp camera won't reveal a real advantage of the lower resolution camera even if the difference is bigger than 8 points when comes to high ISO performance. I realized this when I tested 5DsR side by side with 6D and 5D Mark IV. If I can find the images (I know I posted one in this forum) I will post them.
I chose the camera which we discussed in this thread from the beginning, which is A7R IV. I wasn't searching for a specific camera to make a point and since I don't look at DXO or lab tests in general, I didn't knew if A7R IV has or hasn't a good high ISO performance. And as I said, I don't care how bad it is at high ISO as long as I can gain a stop or 2 by resizing the images from 61mp to 16mp.
You're confusing the lack of experience in interpreting results of lab tests with the lack of interest in lab tests. :) Once I understood the lab tests, I also understood that they are a lot less useful than the CIPA measurements when comes to batteries life for example. :)
Look at my example because the difference is bigger. R6 has a high ISO score of 3394 while EOS R has a 2742 score. The difference in mp is 20mp vs 30mp. I think my image proves exactly what I said, that even if the higher mp camera has worse image quality at high ISO, resizing both images to 12 or 16mp will take away the R6 advantage. And bare in mind that the EOS R image was taken at 12800 ISO while R6 image was taken at 3200 ISO.
If I'm so wrong and you are so right, you can always provide me a 12800 ISO image taken by you in real life conditions with A7R IV and an image taken with K1 at 3600 ISO so we can resize both images to 16mp and see if K1 has an advantage over A7R IV with 2 stops in terms of ISO between the 2 images, as it was in my image I posted as example. :) It's that simple if you really want to make a point.
Given the very difficult light conditions from the church in my example (warm light bulbs, cold light bulbs, dark walls, yellow paintings, window lights, dark clothes, etc.) what I can say from my example is that EOS R did exceptionally well in terms of high ISO and color reproduction given the 2 stops difference in terms of ISO and it's even more obvious once both images were resized. And as I said, I wouldn't have any kind of problem to provide that image taken at ISO 12800 to a client once it's resized to 4000px on the long edge. So, in my opinion it's far away of being an unacceptable image, as you implied. Not to mention that I also can apply some noise reduction on it if I don't want to resize it and it would still be usable at full size resolution.
As far as I'm concerned, K1 can be according to DXO and according to real life shooting conditions 2 stops better than A7R IV at high ISO. I said and I repeat, as long as A7R IV will match the noise performance once both images are resized to 16mp, then the one who's shooting with A7R IV has less to worry about, which is exactly what I said in my first comment and I quote myself "I wouldn't worry at all about noise. The advantage of a high resolution sensor is that if you resize the image from 61mp to 20mp you "gain" close to 2 stops in terms of noise.". As you can see, I already had in mind the idea that A7R IV has or may have worse high ISO performance compared to a lower resolution camera when I made this affirmation.
I strongly suggest you to stop offending people you know nothing about. You don't know who I hang out with and therefore I expect apologies here. You can contradict me on a subject without offending me or my friends by telling they don't have a clue about photography.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
03-05-2021, 02:43 AM
|
| |
If I take the DXO test as the absolute and incontestable truth, then I would care even less about the noise on A7R IV because according to DXO, A7R IV has a better noise performance than Pentax K1, with extra 25 more mp on Sony camera.
DXO results for Pentax K1:
Portrait (Color Depth): 25.4 bits
Landscape (Dynamic Range): 14.6 Evs
Sports (Low-Light ISO): 3280 ISO
Overall Score: 96
DXO results for Sony A7R IV:
Portrait (Color Depth): 26 bits
Landscape (Dynamic Range): 14.8 Evs
Sports (Low-Light ISO): 3344 ISO
Overall Score: 99
I already posted the total price of K1 II with the trinity of lenses vs. Sony A7R IV with the Tamron new trinity of lenses and Sony was 45$ cheaper and 2070g lighter while having basically 2 cameras in one: a 61mp full frame and a 26mp APS-C camera which according to DXO will take better high ISO images than K1.
But, there are many reasons I don't look at DXO or lab tests and the most important one is the fact that I'm interested in what a camera can do in real life situations, in the day by day shooting conditions where I normally use the camera. DXO tests in controlled environment, with camera on a tripod, means absolutely nothing to me. A few weeks ago I was the godfather at a christening. I gave my camera to my nephew and the ISO was set to Auto ISO with the upper limit of 12800 ISO. The official photographer had Canon R6 which among other things is very good at high ISO. I saw the differences when we received the full resolution images compared to my EOS R in terms of noise performance at same ISO. That being said, resized both of the images taken with R6 and EOS R to 2048px on the long edge for normal view on social media or websites, the difference in terms of noise was gone, which is why I said that resizing an image helps when comes to overall noise.
Here is an example with me being photographed by my almost 12 years old nephew and by the official photographer. The image taken by my nephew was at ISO 12800 because he had exposure compensation on +1 also and I was a little against the direction of the light. I also cropped the head from both images at 100% so that you can see there is a noticeable difference in terms of noise if the files are seen at full size resolution and zoomed in.
I would have no problem sending the 12800 ISO image from this example to a client, resized from 6700px which is the normal file size of EOS R to 4096px (4k resolution) because at 4k resolution the clients won't tell the difference between my image taken at 12800 ISO and the image taken by the official photographer at 3200 ISO, unless they pixel peep each and every image. I wouldn't trade my EOS R with its DXO Sports (Low-Light ISO) score of 2742 ISO for R6 with its (Low-Light ISO) score of 3394 ISO because resizing my files from 30mp to 20mp close the gap between the two cameras in terms of noise. I would trade my EOS R for R6 for other reasons, eye af being the most important of them. :)
The noise on the head can be better viewed by clicking the Download the original image button. The zooming button on the link messes up the images.
 |
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
03-04-2021, 09:48 AM
|
| |
I wouldn't worry at all about noise. The advantage of a high resolution sensor is that if you resize the image from 61mp to 20mp you "gain" close to 2 stops in terms of noise. :)
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
03-04-2021, 05:38 AM
|
| |
Yes, I would probably wait a little to see the official announcement of A7 IV before buying any Sony camera. It should be a very interesting camera knowing the specs and performance of A7R IV, A7S III and A1.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
03-04-2021, 01:06 AM
|
| |
Here is another option worth considering for flexibility, price and weight, all of the lenses being modern f2.8 also:
Sony A7R IV (a camera with 61mp full frame sensor with the option to shoot at 26mp in APS-C mode) at $2,998 and 665g
Tamron 17-28mm f2.8 at $899 and 420g
Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 at $879 and 550g
Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 at $1,199 and 810g
Total $5,975 and 2445 grams
I can't get the same price for Pentax K-1 II or for Canon R5 or Nikon Z7 II with the f2.8 Tamron trinity lenses.
By comparison:
K1 Mark II with Pentax 15-30mm f2.8, Pentax 24-70mm f2.8 and Pentax 70-200mm f2.8 cost $6,020 at B&H and the total weight of this combo is 4507g.
Canon R5 with Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 G2, Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2, Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 G2 and adapter cost $7,695 at B&H and the total weight of this combo is 4362g. The same lenses, but with 5D Mark IV instead will cost $6,196 and the weight will be 4344g.
Nikon Z7 II with Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 G2, Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2, Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 G2 and adapter cost $6,994 at B&H and the total weight of this combo is 4274g. The same lenses, but with D850 will cost $6,694 and the total weight will be 4429g.
Sony has the advantage of weight and price over all of them and also has the advantage over Canon and Nikon because Tamron lenses don't need adapter. Third party lenses have a huge role in both price and weight and Sony has the advantage over Pentax, Canon and Nikon. Once Tamron and Sigma will start releasing lenses for RF and Z mounts, Sony may face even more competition in mirrorless market. Until then, it does offer the lightest f2.8 combo from 17 to 180mm and the cheapest compared to Canon, Pentax and Nikon.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
03-01-2021, 11:27 PM
|
| |
Don't go to stock photography because you have absolutely no clue of what you're talking about. As long as I can live in Romania from stock photography working a few hours/week, you can't tell me I can't make a career out of it. My income increased by 12% this year with only 30 images added in 2021. So, again, you're talking with someone who's actually making money from stock and who can live from stock. When you will live from shooting sport with K1, then we can have a proper conversation about stock or sport photography.
As for me switching for 6D, I said more than once that the Pentax system didn't provided me what I wanted at the time when I had K-3 II: no reliable flash system, no modern lenses, no full frame, no third party support, etc.. And 6D provided all I wanted at that time due to the huge system behind it with all the third party support included. And yes, 6D gave me better images than K3 II, especially at high ISO and much reliable af in challenging conditions. Part of the reasons of better images were the L lenses. Put a Canon 35mm f1.4L on a 6D and shoot against Pentax K-3 II with any lens you want in the same focal range at events and we can have a proper discussion about image quality and af. Even the basic 6D has a more configurable af than K-3 II... Then I upgraded to 5D Mark IV and when I tested K1 side by side, the Canon af blew away K1 in terms of speed and consistency. I liked the fact that af-s of K1 was accurate. That was a plus compared with K-3 II. And the most important factor when comes to Canon vs. Pentax is that Canon allows me to choose while with Pentax I only have K1 which you consistently want to make it a winner in each and every aspect of photography, from sport to landscapes. K1 it's a landscape oriented camera where it is among the best due to its features, nothing less, nothing more. For me, less work to get the job done it's important, especially at paid shooting so if I have options in the market which help me get the job faster and easier, I go for it. That's why I changed from 6D to 5D Mark IV and then I went for EOS R. If I need better, there are options available while with Pentax I don't have any. It's a reality which seems to affect you very very much as long as you keep insisting you can have the same results with K1 shooting side by side with D5 or A1/A9. Surfar said it very well in 3 words...
So again, you can never get the same results with K1 shooting side by side with a sport oriented camera like A1. That's a fact. Posting a random image has nothing to do with day by day reality. You can get a lucky shot from time to time, but A1 or D5 weren't build for lucky shots... And as Surfar said, it's the shot you can't get with a field camera that counts for pro sport photographers.
So, keep lying yourself as much as you want, but K1 it's so much far away in terms of performance for sport or wildlife that it's not worth to talk about it... It's even obvious when you see the excitement of pentaxians regarding the K-3 III af. When a guy like this has lots of in focus images with a much smaller and much faster subject than the guy on the board you posted and with water splash on lots of his images (https://www.marksmithgallery.com/Birds/Water-Birds/Osprey-Image-Gallery/ ), I have a strong feeling that you didn't knew how to set the D5 af and I tend to believe that neither the A9 af for action... Even Jared Polin of which I'm not a big fan shows how the af of A9 II stick with the subject in a far more challenging situation than the example you gave
Youtu.be
|
src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/VaYQ5yphhsE?controls=1" allowfullscreen>
|
and you compare K1 with sports cameras by posting a random image. This shows how far you are when comes to understanding A1 target...
As for 8k, have you ever tried to edit a 30 minutes 8k video from Canon or Sony? I had a chance to be in a room with a videographer editing an 8k video. It isn't fun even with a top computer... But, for short commercial clips of 4-8 minutes it's a different story. For stock it's the best tool at the price you pay for R5 because the videos uploaded to stock should be between 8 and 60 seconds. But, since you know nothing about stock, as usual you have no idea why people pay for 8k...
As for eye af, perfect or not, when fails you have options available at a press of a button. That's why options are good and it's important to have them. It's a little odd how big is the af square in the Northrup video even when the focus is on the eye level but I don't get into such details as long as you most certainly know nothing about Canon eye af. Yet, why not? Maybe you will learn something... Northrup used the one shot af selected in order to make people understand what they are trying to explain. Nothing wrong with that, given that it is meant as an educational video, but it's not exactly how af square will look like when eye af is activated in servo mode (af-c in Pentax).
Let me educate you a little in this regard. From Canon manual:
1. for stationary subjects the Af point is displayed in green when the subject is in focus (as you can see in Northrup video, the camera was already focused on the background and no matter how she moves, the af won't track her)
2. for moving subjects, the af point is displayed in blue and tracks subject movement
See how easily you can be fooled? It took Northrup 10 seconds to do that. :D :D :D
As for surf images, this is what a sport oriented camera will get you and it will provide consistency over and over again instead of a random lucky shot with which you try to convince people that you can take the same images as with a sport camera. By the way, a gimmicks 8k video can offer such short videos at 3900$... And there are tons of pros willing to pay the money for such feature.
You Tube
|
src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iNXPMoN7iOM?controls=1" allowfullscreen>
|
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
03-01-2021, 09:06 AM
|
| |
Yes, flagships for amateurs are overkill. It's the main reason I don't own one. I try to rent or borrow a flagship or an exotic tele lens only when I know I will have to drive 300km just to get an image of a specific bird and given the amount of time and effort I put in such a journey, I want to make sure it worth it. :)
---------- Post added 03-01-21 at 04:09 PM ----------
To be honest, so do I. :) My wife has the latest Samsung mobile phone and for a picture I edited for her I had to look at the exif to see if it was taken with a phone or a full frame. It was resized at 2048px on the long edge so it was difficult to see differences. Not to mention how great the video is. Impressive how far smartphones went in just a few years. :)
---------- Post added 03-01-21 at 04:10 PM ----------
Exactly! :)
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-28-2021, 11:19 PM
|
| |
After all this time you still can't understand the A1 or A9 target and you post a random image saying it could be taken with K1. Pro action photographers want speed and another thing that you always forget: consinstency. These 2 things have nothing to do with K1 and shooting one random action image when you feel like. Not to mention that the head of the person in your image is outside the af points reach of DSLRs...
I saw it and not only that thread regarding K3 III and I saw how interested suddenly some people became in eye af, a feature that a few weeks ago wasn't important to them because it was found in mirrorless instead of DSLRs. It is so funny to see how people change their mind in a matter of weeks. :D Why don't you go in that thread and tell people meh about K3 III af because if you can shoot anything when comes to action with K1 as you say when comes to Sony or Nikon flagship cameras, then why a K3 III is needed as long as K1 and KP can shoot any kind of action in your hands?! The same meh should be applied to any sport oriented camera, K3 III included. :) Or it's true only about the full frame sport flagships of other brands because you can't understand their target?! You want to be impartial? Go in K3 III thread and tell people why eye af isn't important, tell them why the new af isn't important because K1 or KP can get according to your way of thinking any shot that K3 III can take. :D
I am and I asked you to point out the comment no. ... where Beholder said A9 failed because I can't find absolutely not a single comment in this regard with any kind of proof. Aggressive pricing of all their cameras for getting into the sport market and gain market share isn't failure in my opinion. It's one of the reasons why Nikon is in the worse position ever...
I do listen everyone who have a rational perspective on things. It's hard to make a conversation with someone who wants K1 to "win" every single "battle", from sport photography to landscape. It's hard to have a conversation with someone who think of the D5 af tracking, which is one of the best today (or even A9) that is meh and then saying it can be done with any cheap camera. When you will accept that you never can get the same results shooting with K1 and D5 or A9 side by side, you may understand the target of A1. Until then...
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
03-01-2021, 02:02 AM
|
| |
Yes, and as always it's just one image to make a point. :D If we put verdicts on cameras af performance based on singular images, then I have another 100 sets of singular images like the ones below as so called arguments for action photography, but it has nothing to do with consistency, among other things which differentiate sport flagship cameras like D5 or A1 from field or budget cameras that anyone can get some action with (below are images taken with 6D, EOS R and 5D Mark IV). :) Saying meh about D5 or A9 II af tracking performance it's like saying meh when comes to build quality of K1. :D :D :D
 |
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-28-2021, 02:05 PM
|
| |
I kept only the lenses I use and sold the ones that I wasn't using much. I use EOS R as my main camera with 3 lenses when I have paid shootings: Canon 16-35mm f4L for group shots, Canon 35mm f1.4L and Canon 85mm f1.4L. For travel I have also 35mm f1.8 (I replaced the f2 EF version with the f1.8 RF version) and 85mm f1.8.
I found out that I don't need the focal lenghts between 85mm and 200mm so I got rid of the lenses in this focal range. :) The only one I miss from time to time is the 135mm f2L lens. For wildlife I rent lenses. :) The Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 it's interesting due to weight and price. It's a lens that I could buy for these 2 reasons. :)
I don't like going to shoot with a bag full of lenses so I understand the need for light gear. As you can see above what lenses I use, I understand the choice of primes also. The f1.8 ones may not be the best on a demanding sensor as the 61mp one is on the A7R IV, but I don't think that anyone will buy them to make big prints. :)
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-28-2021, 12:54 PM
|
| |
It wasn't meant as an offensive comment. I was speaking about differences between the 2 tele lenses, one of them being f2.8 while the other being f4.5-f6.3 (reach vs. aperture). We discussed in other topics about the actual use of gear and I told you more than once that when comes to performance, I talk only about the lenses or cameras I used. This was not such a case and that's why I spoke about the difference in terms of aperture between the Pentax and Tamron lens, as you mentioned above for example KP or 20-40mm which as far as you said in other topics you haven't use. :) I also learned something which I didn't knew about the Tamron, that it doesn't have a TC available. I don't use TCs on lenses with little reach (70-180mm, 70-200mm) and this is the reason I didn't knew about the use of TC, if this is your concern. :)
If I would have to choose a light APS-C combo right now, between all the camera brands available I would pick the following:
1. Sony A6600 at 503g (with battery and memory card inserted)
2. Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 at 525g
3. Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 at 810g
Total package weight = 1838g. This kit would be 414g heavier than your kit, but I would have constant f2.8 from 17mm to 180mm. Replacing the 70-180mm lens with a 70-300mm f4.5-f6.3 lens and the kit would be similar in weight with yours, but with a big advantage from 17 to 70mm due to constant f2.8 aperture. The main reason for this choice of mine would be the two f2.8 Tamron lenses.
If you go out and shoot with K3 and 21mm f3.2 lens (good lens, I had it), you'll have a total weight of 934g and you will be limited by the focal length. Going out with Sony and 17-70mm f2.8 you'll have a total weight of 1028g, but way more flexibility for extra weight of 94g. Now, if you keep the same focal length for Sony, you can replace the 17-70mm f2.8 with Sony 20mm f1.8 at 373g and the difference between K3 with DA 21mm lens and A6600 with 20mm f1.8 will be exactly 58g in favor of Sony with the benefit of having f1.8 instead of f3.2.
Then, K3 with 40mm f2.8 will have 851g, while A6600 with Zeiss 40mm f2 will have 864g. Again, 13g advantage of Pentax with a little more advantage in terms of aperture for Sony (f2 vs. f2.8).
If you go out and shoot with K3 and 55-300mm, your total weight will be 1245g. Going out with Sony and Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 your total weight will be 1313g. You loose 120mm but you gain 2 stops in terms of aperture for extra weight of 68g. Replacing the 70-180mm f2.8 with Tamron 70-300mm f4.5-6.3 and the total weight will be 1048g, which is 197g lighter than your kit. Both 70-180mm and 70-300mm are full frame lenses, while 55-300mm PLM is an APS-C lens.
As I said, it all depends on what you plan shooting. Me, I would trade the extra 120mm reach on the tele lens for constant f2.8 from 17mm to 180mm. But that being said, I can't find any reason to go back to APS-C. The best lenses available are the full frame ones anyway (new Pentax lenses like 50mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4, etc.) so for me a full frame makes much more sense... In this regard, a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 at 550g with a Tamron 70-180mm at 810g would make a nice and light 28-180mm f2.8 kit with A7R IV at less than 2kg.
With:
1. Tamron 17-28mm f2.8 at 420g
2. Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 at 550g
3. Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 at 810g
you have a 17-180mm f2.8 full frame combo or a 25-270mm f2.8 APS-C combo from 3 lenses at the weight of Pentax 70-200mm f2.8 alone (1780g for 3 f2.8 lenses vs. 1755g for Pentax lens).
As for price and weight comparation:
1. K-1 II with Pentax 15-30mm f2.8, Pentax 24-70mm f2.8 and Pentax 70-200mm f2.8 cost at B&H today 6020$ and the total weight of this combo is 4507g.
2. A7R III (released 3-4 months before K-1 II) with Tamron 17-28mm f2.8, Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 and Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 cost at B&H today 5275$ and the total weight of this combo is 2437g.
There is a 745$ price advantage for Sony combo with a 2070g weight advantage for Sony also. Even if you replace A7R III with A7R IV and you will still have a 45$ cheaper combo than Pentax with a full frame 61mp sensor or with a 26mp APS-C option included. I don't know about you, but I call this portability for the ones looking at both full frame and APS-C while having fast f2.8 aperture lenses in the bag. :) That's why I hope to see Tamron lenses in RF and Z mount, because they bring portability at quite good performance and price.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-04-2021, 04:25 AM
|
| |
Done that more than a year ago (the ignoring button in Normhead case). What I didn't knew is that people from the ignore list can still see and comment on my posts and when I removed him from the ignore list to check if it's true that he can see my comments, I saw some comments of him addressed to me in some topics I was also participating. I think I would have liked if he simply can't see my comments (as I can't see his) once he's in my ignore list because it's even worse when someone it's talking to you and you're not aware of it... :)
But, if I have only the ignore button available, I reactivated it again in his case.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-03-2021, 03:41 PM
|
| |
Well, I think you spoke about the problems you had with your Rebel processors more than you think in this forum.
And, in case I didn't explained well enough, he hasn't left. He just switched for another camera for sport and video while he kept Pentax K1 for high resoution. He just explained his reasons which many Pentaxian shares when comes to action.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-03-2021, 05:31 PM
|
| |
To me it's also about consinstency which lacks in the case of very few people. I don't understand how someone who say pretty clear that due to the lack of tilt screen he won't buy K-3 III doesn't understand and accept why someone else didn't wait for K-3 III and went for other camera to get his job done, even with arguments way more solid than the lack of a tilt screen.
Anyway, I rather let the OP to post a further comment if he thinks it is needed rather than seeing people associating this post with the launch of K-3 Mark III as if there is a contest between the 2 cameras when every photographer know it isn't the case due to various reasons. :)
---------- Post added 02-04-21 at 12:35 AM ----------
What way out? He keeps his Pentax K1 and it's not my invention, he said that. I quote him "As I said, I feel that 36MP is the sweet spot... so I actually like having both systems, at least for now. Pentax K-1 for slow paced moments (landscapes/astro/Macro). :D You want a Pentaxian gone for adding a second system and because he shared his decision? My God, I can't believe it's getting this far...
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-03-2021, 10:24 AM
|
| |
I'm still debating between getting the R5 or R6. With R5 I had the pleasure to shoot a little, but not with R6. While I was shooting a lot of BIF before the pandemic, in the last 6-7 months I wasn't so active in this area and I dedicated my time to stock photography more and more.
For wildlife in my experience a good hide it's more useful than a long lens and therefore I wouldn't be concerned about R6's resolution because I don't crop much. With the little experience I have shooting sport, again, I think that if you can find a good spot to shoot from, less cropping it's necessary. On the other hand, a fast f2.8 zoom would be ideal so that you can keep the ISO as low as possible and get the subject separation as well. I suggest to get the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L II (not III) and use it with adapter if you don't have the budget for the RF lenses. You won't notice any kind of problems due to adapter in terms of focusing or image quality. Of that I'm 1000% sure because I used 6D, 5D Mark IV and now EOS R and all the EF lenses work great with the Canon adapter on EOS R. The lens can be found at decent prices second hand. :)
R5 on the other hand has the 8k and also the 4k at 120fps and because I want to start shooting short videos for stock, on the long term R5 may be a better value. I'm not such a big fan of high resolution cameras for photos because I don't print larger than 20" and because I don't like to crop and therefore I find the best approach when I'm out shooting so that I won't have to crop my images. :)
I think you made a good choice in getting the R6 given what you shoot because it seems a solid camera for sport and action in general due to high ISO performance, fast fps, eye af and good buffer. You also benefit of the great af in video also which again, it's great.
Please come back once you start to put the camera at work and give us some impressions and maybe show a few images also. :)
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-14-2021, 04:47 PM
|
| |
It's what I said also, that cameras like A1, D6 or 1Dx are niche cameras which are not released for huge profits, but to cover the needs of a niche market.
I don't know who pay me 1000-1200$/month to buy my stock images and I don't care. :) The 30-40 images with birds that I have on stock agencies made me a few hundred $ in 3 years. Therefore, based on my experience, there would be a market for exotic birds or animals. It's just that it needs to be explored and as I said, I don't have exotic animals/birds to photograph so that's why I don't plan to invest 15000$ in a lens I have no use for. :)
Yet, manufacturers keep releasing sports cameras at 6500$, agencies and photographers buy them and the need for niche products continue to be supplied by cameras with great features that can't be found in consumer cameras.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-14-2021, 08:05 AM
|
| |
It doesn't matter if pro photographers are sponsored by manufacturers or by sport agencies. They use the best tools available for what they have to shoot. That's why you see 1Dx, D6, A9 and probably A1 also at every major sport event. These cameras are targeted to this kind of photographers. They are niche cameras, as Jason Lanier also stated in his youtube video regarding A1.
Freelance sport photographers do shoot with sports cameras also, even if in some cases they don't use the latest camera model, but a generation behind. I always look for what pros are using at every major sport event I attended over the years (Madrid Open Tour, Monte Carlo Masters, Champions League football games, etc.) and I saw only a few D850 or 5D Mark IV cameras but used as a third body.
Will enthuziastic photographers buy this A1? Sure, there will be some who would buy them. But, from what I saw in online, most of them are oriented to A7R IV, D850, R5 type of bodies rather than A1. And the reasons why these are much more appealing than A1, 1Dx or D6 are:
1. Much lower price
2. Good enough af even for some serious action
But, when you are paid to shoot sport, you won't see 2000-2500$ cameras like K1, R6, Z6, A7 III being used and this video of Michael Willson let us know why:
1. He need fps
2. He need great Af to track players
3. He need buffer and fast readout so that he can take another burst in a split of a second
4. He need connectivity to send their files fast to editors
5. He need lenses which in case of Pentax he won't have (a fast 300mm f2.8 or a 400mm f2.8)
Amators don't need that because there is no pressure in getting the shots so most of the ones with a bigger budget than the ones buying the entry level models go for the second best offer, which is what manufacturers relly on in terms os sales: D850, 5D Mark IV, R5, Z7, A7R IV. These are the popular ones because they have resolution, great af, great image quality, cheaper price than the flagships. Flagships are not designed for huge sales and big profits.
So, when you say that with 6500$ you won't buy A1 because K1 does the job for you for action, it's more than clear that you are not in Sony target with their A1 and they know that as Canon or Nikon know their target with 1Dx or D6. :) I'm not in this target either because I have what I need from the cheaper cameras. If tomorow I will be hired to shoot sport for the next 3-4 years, I would be writing this with me on the way to the store to buy a 1Dx III or A1 if I were a Sony shooter :D
Youtu.be
|
src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KBkUzhPLokQ?controls=1" allowfullscreen>
|
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-12-2021, 04:16 PM
|
| |
I asked a friend who has E-M1X and he told me that in Pro Capture Low, which means 18 fps, it can do tracking and up to 35 frames can be captured before the shutter button is pressed all the way down. According to him, in Pro Capture High mode the camera can shoot at 60fps, but only in Af-S. :) Maybe someone who has an Oly can confirm/infirm this. :)
---------- Post added 02-13-21 at 12:00 AM ----------
This depends also on the cost of a camera. One thing is to buy the latest camera that Pentax will be releasing soon, at around 2000$, and it's a different story when the price is 6500$. :) That and again, it also depends on what you shoot.
For example, for this kind of images, I would never buy a high resolution camera as long as I don't print larger than 20" and 6D was more than enough at 20mp to deliver what I wanted. And for internet use, no one can't tell if you shoot with a 50mp camera or with a 16mp camera. :)
For shooting the same bird as above (the European bee eater), but in flight, 6D put me a little more at work, especially with 600mm lenses I used for the below image. That's why I upgraded to a more suited camera, which helped me to get more keeper images to choose from (due to faster fps and more advanced af system).
My clients can't tell the difference between an image taken with A7R IV or Pentax K5. All of my clients which were happy with images like the below one (used for an online store) taken with 6D are as happy with the images I deliver them, taken with EOS R or 5Ds or whatever camera I used (rented or borrowed for testing them). If it would be about my clients, I would never had to upgrade my K-5 II. But, each time I update/upgrade my gear I do it because it helps me get the job easier. That's why I upgraded from K-5 II to K-3 II, from K-3 II to 6D, to 5D Mark IV and now EOS R, the latest mostly due to eye af which makes my shootings less problematic with moving people when shooting at fast apertures.
If I were a paid sport photographer, especially one shooting with Sony, this A1 would be tempting due to the much improved EVF, faster readout, improved af over A9 II. Resolution would be less of a concern given that most sport photographers shoot in JPEG and I can select a lower resolution on A1. We also have to take into consideration that a sport camera it's a lot more used than a camera used at weddings or landscapes so upgrading the main camera after 3-4 years of intense use it's not that uncommon.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-12-2021, 07:32 AM
|
| |
Agree to disagree. :) I see cameras like 6D, D610, D780 or A7 III as consumer cameras. I see cameras like R5, D850, Z7 or A7R IV to be oriented to above average photographers (financially speaking) and A1, 1Dx, D6 oriented to a much smaller audience with specific needs.
Same with medium format. You have consumer cameras like 645z, Fuji GFX and then you have those 30000$ Phase One and Hasselblad cameras oriented to photographers with specific needs.
|
