|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-30-2016, 01:25 PM
|
| |
Haha ye you are right. Today I tested the 55-300 PLM and I thought 300mm would give me more reach than it actually did. Still, 300mm + cropping should do the trick for any distant wildlife/objects. Seemed like a pretty impressive lens, except for situations where a fast running dog is quickly moving towards you. Had to chance to test that in practice, and seems in line with the results you read in the official hands-on article of the 55-300 PLM: kinda blurry dogs pics....But I am quite sure this can be improved since I am totally new.
Actually I already tried both plastic fantastic lenses and I cant say the screw drive really bothers me. I guess I was thinking too negatively about it before.
Good to know, thanks.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-27-2016, 04:13 AM
|
| |
Alright. But if it's a bad copy, then I suppose I can easily send it back for repairs/new one under the warranty? In other words: it's worth the 'risk'?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-10-2016, 04:27 AM
|
| |
According to an Image Resource review:
17mm: f/2.8
23mm: f/3.2
28-48mm: f/3.5
49-70mm: f/4.0
Basically this means that the Sigma 17-70 at 48mm is 'only' two-thirds of a stop slower than the 17-50 at the same focal length (f/3.5 vs f/2.8).
You raised an interesting point here. This comparison kinda makes you think twice about picking the 17-50 over the 17-70 solely based on the aperture. Perhaps the convenience of a longer focal length is worth more than two-thirds of a stop of more light coming in. This probably holds true especially in low light situations while using the K-70, which apperently has an excellent signal-noise ratio at higher ISO's right?
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-09-2016, 02:08 PM
|
| |
Thanks everyone for the input and ideas. I appreciate it!
I am still not totally convinced, but I think I might go for the K-70 + Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 + Pentax 55-300mm PLM + one or two primes. The suggestion to go for the Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4 is a good one, but perhaps it makes more sense to have the 17-50 with the fixed 2.8 aperture. For daytime landscapes a focal length of up to 50mm is fine anyway, and a fixed 2.8 aperture means it can also be quite good for a lot of low light stuff. And if i need more zoom, well, then the 55-300mm PLM picks up right where the Sigma stops...
Not necessarily :) You can still shoot pretty good low light shots with a good m43 camera and a fast lens. It's just not as good as an APS-C sensor, and certainly not as good as the K-70 which apparently is very good at high ISO's considering digital noise. This is one of the reasons why I am looking at Pentax...
Great suggestion. Indeed relatively quiet, good quality and still sort of prime-ish. However, I think it would be a lot more attractive if it would have a fixed 2.8 aperture. Also, the price is a bit high, considering alternatives.
Yes the Sigma 17-70mm seems a very good purchase. Probably a better option than the Pentax 16-85mm I was thinking of first. The Sigma 30mm is interesting too, but how do I know if it's a good copy knowing that I m very inexperienced? :)
Indeed a very practical and compact, such a 5 lens case. That way you cover a lot of focal lengths. However, these da limited lenses are not very fast, especially the 15 and 21 mm. Besides, this would involve switching from lenses just a bit too often.
Yup, the 55-300 PLM is high on my list actually. The hands-on review wasn't too positive when a fast moving dog was running towards and away from the camera, but basically this lens should be good enough for my needs.
I read about the Vixen Polarie tracker. Mostly positive reviews, althouth quite some owners do complain about a too tight fit at the battery holder which could break at some point. But anyway, it's twice the price of the Pentax O-GPS1 GPS Unit and I think I will already be quite satisfied with the 'tracking' results of the GPS unit.
Yup, I might have made it sound like I won't accept any compromise. But obviously, I am well aware that every camera choice brings compromises with it.
Going M43 means a bonus for size, compactness, handling, lens choice and features like the 4K video mode on Panasonics, but M43 automatically means a somewhat lesser IQ, especially at low light...Going Pentax means great value, ibis, weathersealing, rugged body, great IQ, great low light capacity, but perhaps less compelling lens choices, not the best AF and poor video performance.
Going the K-1 route means a lot of excellence, but at the cost of size, weight and a much thinner wallet ;) There is hardly a perfect choice...
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-06-2016, 04:48 PM
|
| |
Have my eyes set on buying a recent Pentax DSLR, but I need some advice on lens choices to really convince me to go the Pentax way (as opposed to going MFT).
Really looking forward to finally get serious with photography with a serious camera. The K-70 (or maybe the K-S2) has pretty much everything I want: weathersealing, relatively compact, a good bright OVF, fully articulating screen, good low light performance, excellent IQ and very good value for money. Also the seperate GPS module will be great for geotagging and astrophotography.
Basically I have 3 or 4 types of photography I will do mostly:
- Daytime landscape
- Evening/nighttime city shooting
- Astrophotography (basic, not planning to go for tracking mounts and such)
- Some occasional bird/animal shooting (at telephoto distance)
I figured the Pentax 18-135mm or the slighly higher value 16-85mm would be excellent for my allround daytime landscape shooting. Both are wide enough for landscapes and enough zoom for most other things. Could also go for Sigma 17-50 or 17-70 as they are faster and still have a zoom range which should be adequate for most things. However, I do kind of like a bit more zoom on this daytime lens and I don't really need a shallow DOF for portraits or something. Hence the f/2.8 isn't really needed. Besides, weathersealing would be a big plus, which the Sigma's lack.
For bird shooting the new 55-300mm should be ok, even though a hands-on review on this site wasn't too convincing when shooting a fast running dog. But perhaps the 18-135mm is already enough range for most of the bird/animal shooting. Neither of these lenses is really fast, but I will only do this in bright daylight and I probably won't shoot birds that often anyway to justify buying a much more expensive f/2.8 telephoto zoom.
So here is what's niggling me. For all low light stuff (evening strolls, nighttime city shooting and astrophotography) I'd prefer several fast, small, lightweight, autofocus, relatively cheap and QUIET primes. And I can't really find a prime lens setup that I would like.
Basically the issue is the screw-drive autofocus noise on the 50mm 1.8 and the 35mm 2.4. These 2 lenses are pretty much perfect: good quality, 2 useful focal lengths, very light small and cheap. But I don't think i can live with the autofocus sound, which reminds me of a dentist drill. Not a pleasant sound and probably a bit too loud for me (and any bystanders).
So ok, alternatives? Pretty much all of them have annoying 'issues' too.- Sigma 18-35mm: apparently some major autofocus issues on Pentax cameras, too big and heavy, and a bit too expensive.
- Sigma 35mm 1.4: Too big and heavy for a prime imo, and a bit too expensive
- Sigma 30mm 1.4: Apparently autofocus is too slow and too much hit or miss
- Pentax 55mm 1.4: A bit too heavy, expensive and not the greatest most durable SDM autofocus mechanism.
- Pentax 31mm 1.8: 1500 euros, rly?
- I could of course use any of the Tamron or Sigma f/2.8 standard zooms, but 2.8 isn't that fast, and these lenses are not light, small and compact, which is what a I'd like for nighttime usage.
Sure manual focus is a solution for the screw-drive noise, especially considering MF is needed for astrophotography anyway. But for most other low light city stuff I'd really want autofocus.
The noise really makes me question going the Pentax way, and I don't see any good alternatives for the 50mm 1.8 and the 35mm 2.4.
So anyone who can help out with this lens 'puzzle' and convince me to stay and go the Pentax way? Or should I defect to micro four firds, where at least the primes are no issue.
|
