AFRAID TO SAY IT!

What an odd way to look through a viewfinder....

I also wear spectacles but press them against the rubber viewfinder surround when using my K30. I've never really thought much about it, as it feels natural to me to do it that way. Is that what other spectacle wearers do?

Andrew

That's what I do Andrew. It always puzzled me that other people who wore glasses sometimes said they couldn't see all the screen properly...the guy in the video would have seen just the very centre, so maybe that's an answer in some cases.

It just goes to show we can't take anything for granted. As people become used to how a compact camera is held, why should we assume that automatically they know how to use a DSLR viewfinder? It seems obvious, but maybe not.

Nikon had a very popular camera that was made to use like
that.... F3HP The entire viewfinder could be seen from 25mm
away. Useful for spectacle wearers which is probably why they
sold well.

Doesn't look like he's using his glasses to me. He is looking over the top of them.

Common problem with people who just use glasses for reading. Do you take them off or look over the top when using the viewfinder.

I take them off normally (but not always), but have to put them back on to review the rear screen.

I can get away with the dioptre adjustment on my DSLRs but need glasses with compacts and my ME Super (one thing I don't like about using a compact is fishing out my glasses, maybe taking sunglasses off first and finding an empty pocket to put them in - note to myself to buy a compact with a viewfinder next time). I need glasses to make sense of the screen menus on the K20, but for the K5 at a pinch I can do without.

Quite definitely, I mentioned it because 80% of my shots that don't work out are down to me and not the gear. I used 'worrying' subconsciously but it allows lots of room to buy new gear that will help. I just don't see much advantage in switching systems in the hope that it will make a significant difference and the extra expense in doing so might be better spent on your existing system.

I wear reading glasses for close up stuff, and often push them down to the top if my nose so I can look through the viewfinder without glasses. I get my eye closer than that guy though and can see 100% of the screen

I agree about switching brands. Although to be fair if you're a dedicated sports photography fan then Pentax might not be the best brand to start with.

If Brand X can do something Brand Y can't then it doesn't matter how good your technique is.

But for most scenarios I agree that switching brands ain't going to get you better pictures

Might be tempted to trade the 150 500 for a DA* 300

Would cropping be just as good?

Blythman?

Given the quality of the shots you are getting Alistair I'm not sure why you feel the need? I've just acquired a 150-500 (non OS) and I have had the opportunity to use it quite a bit on both my K-x and my K-5. The quality of image it has produced on both has impressed me tremendously - it is streets ahead of the 50-500 I used to own. Alan (Blythman) is probably best placed to advise whether a crop on the DA*300 would beat a full size image from the 150-500 at say 470mm or so, but I would be surprised if the DA* crop would be much better.

Alan's images with the 150-500 seem to me to be very close in IQ to those shot with the DA*300 (admittedly I've only seen them on the forum and in the gallery). You would also lose the flexibility of the zoom down to 150mm; not sure how critical this is to you but I definitely find it useful and often shoot at the lower end of the range. Here's an example of one I took last week with the K-x and 150-500, shot through perspex; I'm sure your 150-500 is capable of similar results:





Are you in a position to borrow, rent or share the use of a DA*300, if only for a single day's shoot?

Regards
David

Hi guys. The DA 300 beats the 150-500 at 300, no question. But between 450-500 I still prefer to pick up the 150-500.

I don't think there's much if any difference in quality.
The DA300 isn't the fastest focusing lens
I prefer the OS in the Siggy for the stabilised viewfinder
I like being able to use the second OS setting on the Siggy for panning. SR has to be turned off in camera when panning.
Using the DA 300 makes the target smaller in the viewfinder, so AF will be less accurate, and there's more chance of losing focus.

What the DA 300 is ideal for is closer work. Birds like Waxwings let you get closer, and the DA 300 produced sharper images for me. Also ideal for mammals in dark woods where the f4 is particularly useful.

I don't think I'd like to sell either of them Alistair, but if I needed to sell one I think it would be the DA 300.

I might be wrong, but if you are in the same place as me, then the shots you are missing are the smaller birds in flight. Your mates with the 7D or the D700 are making those shots, but your gear isn't up to it. The DA 300 isn't fast enough at focusing to get you those shots. I did toy with going for the Sigma 300mm f2.8 which is reputed to be faster. However at £2k+ that's an expensive gamble.

You would see an AF improvement with a K5, but it isn't massive.

Only you can make the choice Alistair. The choice as I see it, is to accept the limitations, or switch system.

Thanks David for the compliment and thanks Alan for the da300 info. you are spot on about birds in flight. The set up is pretty poor at this
i am going to have to have a long think