|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-10-2018, 11:08 PM
|
| |
Thanks for your comments Bruce. I figured some time ago that I would get better results with this lens stopping down at least one stop, and compromising on the ISO and/or shutter speed if necessary. I try to keep the ISO range capped at 1600 or 2000 wherever possible. You've mentioned the other advantage of f8 - more scope for getting the subject in focus.
You'll notice that most of the birds in these samples are perched. There's generally at least a moment when birds are absolutely still when perched; I try to capture that moment, which means that if the stance is right it is possible to drop the shutter speed if necessary. And if the light is good, it doesn't seem to matter a lot whether the image is at 800 or 1600 ISO - DxO does a good job of cleaning up. The priorities might be different when the subject is moving. (And my approach is different when I'm using the FA*300 f4.5. I can open up with confidence with that lens. It's very good at f4.5-5.6 and outstanding at f6.3. I only go to f8 if I need to for DOF, and try to keep the ISO as low as possible.)
I take your point about eliminating distraction by using a narrower DOF. I guess it depends on the scene. Often you get pretty good subject isolation just from having a clear background and/or foreground, but if you've got a critter in the grass or a bird in tree branches (or bucks fighting in the woods) yes the wider aperture may be an advantage.
As for the choice of using 300mm or zooming out a little for better resolution, I haven't done any comparative testing but my sense is that it's better for the subject to fill the frame more. Especially if I am going to crop - which I do most of the time, often heavily. But I've got an open mind about this - interested if someone has done a comparison.
I agree with your point about how much gain can be made from a little judicious PP. I'm no expert but I find that a little tweaking of the tone curve, increasing micro-contrast and a light touch on the clarity slider make a world of difference - especially with a cheaper lens.
Here's a before and after example, comparing a straight conversion from the DNG with a processed and cropped image. K-3 + DA-L 55-300, 260mm (so I did back off a bit!), f8, 1/500th, ISO 1600 - and probably underexposed by at least a stop. (I think the galah chick was off centre in the original because I was using centre-spot AF and concentrating on getting the eye in focus, and I didn't wait to recompose.)
For @Knightyo I should point out that the original image was 6016 x 4000 pixels; crop (to portrait format) is 1869 x 2811. So from about 24mp to about 5.2mp. That's about par for the course, or better, for bird shots with this lens - the galah is a medium-large bird, and the distance was about 7 or 8 metres (say 22-26 feet). If I had been using my old K-30 I would have started with only 16mp, so the same crop would have been only about 3.4mp. With a smaller bird at the same range, the difference would have been even greater. This was one of the biggest gains when I went from the K-30 to the K-3.
 |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-10-2018, 06:55 PM
|
| |
Welcome to PF Alan.
You've got lots of good advice already. I'll just add what I can from my own experience.
I have the DA-L 55-300 and it's quite capable if you can get close enough. I agree with what @MarcusBMG said about getting the best from it. Here are some samples with it.
Going beyond 300mm is generally expensive. Especially if you want AF, which I think is invaluable for wildlife. I used to have a Sigma 170-500 (non-DG version) and while it was fun to learn with, it didn't really add anything to cropping from the 55-300. The more recent Sigma xx-500 lenses are probably better, but they are a lot heavier (about 2kg) and way more than $150, even second hand.
I have ended up with a FA*300 f4.5 and a Kenko 1.5x TC, which gives me the equivalent of 420mm f6.3 in a compact and fairly lightweight package. That works for me, and it's great value for the excellent optical quality, but you are still looking at something like $US750 for the combination.
I used to have a K-30, which has the same sensor as the K-50. Sweet camera, but going to a K-3 was a big improvement for wildlife shooting - much better AF, better metering and more pixels for cropping. With a tight budget, I think that would be your best value as an upgrade. Used K-3 bodies have become quite affordable, and they are very robust. Add a cheap Rogue Safari flash extender (Rogue Safari Flash Extender - PentaxForums.com) and you should get some better results.
|
