|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-13-2017, 02:03 PM
|
| |
I think I still have the Lumia 1020 (a yellow one) hidden in a box. :) I loved Nokia but I hated Windows on phones. You gave me some work to do if I can find it. :D
---------- Post added 09-13-17 at 09:11 PM ----------
The first and the last one I like. I don't have solid arguments, but I was used to flat images from the phones (I don't use at all my phone for taking pictures) and seeing the blured background and some tiny dof... I don't know, I just like them. :)
How true you are regarding the lighting for portrait photography. It can make or breake an image no matter the lens or camera used.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-13-2017, 03:54 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-12-2017, 10:15 PM
|
| |
God, even a simple joke with the intend to move a little the discution from this supposed war between brands it is considered trolling? The world indeed has changed. It is no longer flat... :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-12-2017, 02:01 PM
|
| |
We are debating lenses and expensive gear. Meanwhile, others don't need Canon, Fuji, Olympus, Nikon, Pentax, Sony... The world is changing. :) A few more projects like this and we can say goodbye for good to compact cameras. :)
TIME's Latest Cover Photos were Shot on the iPhone |
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-12-2017, 09:15 AM
|
| |
Ok, Normhead. You made your point, I made my point. Your reasons are as far as I'm concerned based on the fact that you are a Pentax shooter with limited experience with other systems (as you said on various occasions). Nothing wrong with that. For someone who is interested in both systems, a different opinion than yours may be worth reading, or not. It's the OP choice to read my point of view also. I don't want to go off topic again because of one lens.
To the OP, if you sell the 24-105mm and if you want a very fast lens for action, with excelent IQ also, the 70-200mm f4L IS lens worth every penny. You can use it with 1.4x TC and get 156-448mm on a 80D or with 2x TC and get 224 - 640mm on 80D (Canon has 1.6x crop factor). If you look at my website, 70% of the images were taken with 70-200mm f4L lens.
But again, if you look at Canon for crop cameras, take a closer look at 80D. If you have 6D (the camera I had until 3 days ago), then there is no point in going to K-3 II. K1 will be a solid upgrade from 6D.
Good luck and let us know your decision. Renting a K1 and a 80D is the best solution for your dilema. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-12-2017, 08:16 AM
|
| |
I'm not in "war" with no one. :) If you look at my comments and based on the OP needs (a full frame for landscape and a crop camera for action), I said that to me a Canon 80D is overall better than 7D Mark II because it has tilt screen, 24mp (7D Mark II has 20), better image quality at higher ISO, better dynamic range.
Regarding the 60-250mm vs 70-200mm, it was my personal conclusion after shooting with both. I didn't bought the 60-250mm in the end despite the fact that it is a sharp lens because:
- 2 of my friends had problems with SDM motor and second hand there were available only a few with the SDM motor canceled
- it has focus breathing, and it varies from copy to copy (the 2 lenses I tested were in reality 220 and 230mm at their maximum focal lenght)
- it was slow to focus (a little slower as I remember than Pentax 300mm f4)
- it vignettes on K1 and you have to crop the image in Lr os PS
There are lenses better on Pentax, D-FA 100mm f2.8 macro being one example of a lens which is better than Canon 100mmL macro lens.
For landscape and for general purposes also, the most logic choice is K1, for a lot of reasons, price included. There are occasions where speed, accuracy of the focus and also fast fps are required, but for 70-80% of the time a K1 will do just fine. Given the fact that the OP is not in a hurry, I would wait (as I said in my first comment) the release of K-3 Mark III. It may be the camera that can satisfy the OP on landscape and also on wildlife/action. Running 2 systems is often expensive...
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-12-2017, 07:03 AM
|
| |
Ok, Normhead. I was reffering to the 70-200mm vs 60-250mm. You made some strong affirmations regarding how better value has 60-250mm compared to 70-200mm. Except the focal lenght, there is nothing that makes 60-250mm better than 70-200mm. Except price in your country, which I agree, it's expensive (the Canon lens) compared to romanian and US prices. For the rest... construction is the same (but with the SDM motor problem on the Pentax lens), both have weather sealing, Pentax is havier, the dimensions are almost identical, 70-200mm being faster to focus and 100% compatible to full frame cameras...
If you read the above comments of mine, I said that K-3 II has far better quality than 7D Mark II and I also said that I wouldn't choose 7D Mark II if I have to pick a Canon body. I would pick a 80D which has better image quality, better dynamic range, tilt screen, etc.
I also said that when comes to APS-C cameras, Pentax has a lot of small and cheap lenses that makes the system a lot more apealing to people who want to travel light and who wants also to have good images. Don't jump with conclusions as soon as someone say something that doesn't suits you.
Later edit. I quoted the B&H prices because the OP lives in US.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-12-2017, 06:39 AM
|
| |
I did. Without tripod mount ring it weights 760g and with tripod mount ring it weights 915g (Pentax weights 1230g). If I add the price of the original tripod mount ring, then the price at B&H is 1243$ for Canon, with 54$ cheaper than Pentax 60-250mm.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-12-2017, 06:32 AM
|
| |
It doesn't have. But a Tripod Mount Ring costs:
- 143$ at B&H if you want to buy the original version
- 20$ if you want to buy the Phottix Tripod Mount Ring. I bought the Phottix one and it is all metal and it has on the insight some soft material, just like the Canon one.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-12-2017, 06:27 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-12-2017, 06:12 AM
|
| |
Normhead, in Romania and in USA the prices are better for the Canon lens. I gave you the B&H prices and below are the prices from romanian store. I'm not lying regarding weight. At your website it is not mentioned the hood weight, but it is mentioned on Pentax forum review. With hood and tripod foot Pentax 60-250mm weights 1230g. Again, I'm not making up this. It is written on different websites. On your website also say that is an APS-C lens. I know it works on K1 because I've tested it, but it vignettes a bit and you have to crop a little in Lr or PS. The difference in size is almost invisible. The af it is or it isn't a big deal to you, but you have to consider it when you make comparations. So, althrough Pentax 60-250mm is a very good lens, it doesn't have any significant advantage over the Canon lens.
---------- Post added 09-12-17 at 01:20 PM ----------
Then the stabilisation is not needed and then the difference in price is even bigger, because Canon 70-200mm without stabilisation costs $799.99 CAD. Pentax has small prime lenses that makes it apealing to people who want to travel light. And they are cheap also. In this regard, Canon laks behind big time.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-12-2017, 04:58 AM
|
| |
7D Mark II uses the old Canon sensor. It has a very good af (far better than K-3 II) and has also a slightly better fps. Build quality is on par on both cameras. If image quality is important, then in my opinion is far better on K-3 II at any ISO. I would probably choose a 80D instead of a 7D Mark II if I have to choose a Canon crop camera. It's not as fast, but has a good af, decent fps and the sensor is far better than the one from 7D Mark II.
If I have to pick a crop camera from Pentax, I would probably wait the K3 Mark III. It may take another 6-8 months until we can see it, but it will probably worth the wait. K-3 II is a very good camera,
especially for its current price point. I wouldn't buy 7D Mark II if image quality is the first priority.
---------- Post added 09-12-17 at 12:37 PM ----------
There are a few things that you missed in your comparation.
1. Pentax 60-250mm weights 1230g (hood and tripod foot included), while Canon 70-200mm F4l IS (stabilised version) weights 915g (hood and tripod foot included). It's a 315g difference in the favor of the Canon lens.
2. Pentax 60-250mm costs 1297$ at B&H, while Canon 70-200mm F4l IS (stabilised version) costs 1099$. It's a 198$ difference in the favor of the Canon lens.
3. I know Pentax has weather sealing, but also Canon 70-200mm f4L IS has (I own one).
4. Pentax 60-250mm has very good image quality, but it is slow to focus, has problems with SDM motor, and has some focus breathing (most of the users, myself included has found out that it is actualy a 230mm at its maximum focal lenght)
5. Pentax 60-250mm has:
- Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.2 x 6.6" (8.13 x 16.76 cm)
while Canon 70-200mm has
- Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.0 x 6.8" (7.62 x 17.27 cm)
Canon has internal zooming which for some is better, for others is not and others don't care.
6. Canon 70-200mm is fully compatible with full frame cameras, Pentax 60-250mm has some vigneting on K1 (not something to be worry about, but it is visible)
So, although Pentax 60-250mm is good optically, I have to disagree with you regarding some of your conclusions. Pentax 60-250mm is heavier and more expensive than Canon 70-200mm.
|
