Pigeon Posing in front of 80-320mm
Posted 06/11/2009 - 18:45
Link
well the 80-320 clearly performs well in the right hands, I must try harder with mine!
nice shot John
nice shot John
you don't have to be mad to post here
but it does help
but it does help
Posted 06/11/2009 - 20:06
Link
The only thing wrong with the 80-320 is its tendency to hunt for focus, apart from that I find it an excelent lens, In the past I have sung its praises by saying the quality is better than the considerably more expensive Bigma, though to be fair I am comparing these at 320 and 500mm respectively.
I think I read somewhere that the 80-320 is the best of Pentax's cheaper range long zooms and that the silver version is slightly better than the older black.
PS; dare I say John that I think its a tad oversharpened?
I think I read somewhere that the 80-320 is the best of Pentax's cheaper range long zooms and that the silver version is slightly better than the older black.
PS; dare I say John that I think its a tad oversharpened?
Posted 06/11/2009 - 20:57
Link
No flash, just low natural light last Monday at Martin Mere. We've got to the point these days where nobody believes a picture can be just as it is and we tend to look for complicated post processing. Here the only processing was a slight tweak to levels and some sharpening.
Too much sharpening or not is a matter of taste I suppose, but I would generally favour less rather than more. If you think I've overdone it fair enough!
Too much sharpening or not is a matter of taste I suppose, but I would generally favour less rather than more. If you think I've overdone it fair enough!
Best regards, John
Posted 06/11/2009 - 21:33
Link
Quote:
No flash, just low natural light
Strange how the light can fool us.No flash, just low natural light
We had a guy to the camera club a few years ago, he'd been fortunate enough to visit the Falklands, after several shots of birds, gulls etc I asked him what his flash set up was, no flash he said, its all natural light, I would have put money on that flash had been used.
Quote:
If you think I've overdone it fair enough
OK, yes you did
If you think I've overdone it fair enough
Posted 06/11/2009 - 22:07
Link
impotentspider wrote:
The only thing wrong with the 80-320 is its tendency to hunt for focus, apart from that I find it an excelent lens, In the past I have sung its praises by saying the quality is better than the considerably more expensive Bigma, though to be fair I am comparing these at 320 and 500mm respectively.
I think I read somewhere that the 80-320 is the best of Pentax's cheaper range long zooms and that the silver version is slightly better than the older black.
PS; dare I say John that I think its a tad oversharpened?
Hence I must try harder, I have the silver version and I've never been completely satisfied with its results beyond 200mm. My Dad's 55-300 blows it out of the water in all respects.
The only thing wrong with the 80-320 is its tendency to hunt for focus, apart from that I find it an excelent lens, In the past I have sung its praises by saying the quality is better than the considerably more expensive Bigma, though to be fair I am comparing these at 320 and 500mm respectively.
I think I read somewhere that the 80-320 is the best of Pentax's cheaper range long zooms and that the silver version is slightly better than the older black.
PS; dare I say John that I think its a tad oversharpened?
you don't have to be mad to post here
but it does help
but it does help
Posted 06/11/2009 - 22:35
Link
johnriley wrote:
Too much sharpening or not is a matter of taste I suppose, but I would generally favour less rather than more. If you think I've overdone it fair enough!
I couldn't see any evidence of the haloing that's characteristic of oversharpening, and the detail in the feathers is quite natural looking. So I can't see any oversharpening myself.Too much sharpening or not is a matter of taste I suppose, but I would generally favour less rather than more. If you think I've overdone it fair enough!
I think what makes it look slightly suspect is the way the foreground stands out so dramatically from the background. In fact, my initial reaction was to suspect flash, or even that that the pigeon had been placed on a different background from the original. But of course, if you say it's just one exposure, and the PP as you say, minor, then fair play.
If that's just natural light, then it's very unusual, and very well captured.
johnriley wrote:
We've got to the point these days where nobody believes a picture can be just as it is and we tend to look for complicated post processing.
In your case, John, you'd have to concede that it wouldn't be an unreasonable assumption. We've got to the point these days where nobody believes a picture can be just as it is and we tend to look for complicated post processing.
Mongoose wrote:
Hence I must try harder, I have the silver version and I've never been completely satisfied with its results beyond 200mm. My Dad's 55-300 blows it out of the water in all respects.
I had an 80-320 for a short while, and was quite disappointed with it. Then I got a 55-300, and found it much superior.
Hence I must try harder, I have the silver version and I've never been completely satisfied with its results beyond 200mm. My Dad's 55-300 blows it out of the water in all respects.
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Posted 06/11/2009 - 22:46
Link
impotentspider wrote:
Indeed thought so at first too.Quote:
No flash, just low natural light
Strange how the light can fool us.No flash, just low natural light
It's a wonderful shot John and a lucky one
Really like how the green in his neck comes out.
Posted 07/11/2009 - 02:18
Link
Nice shot John, clear crisp and well posed.
Does look like there is a snake in the background waiting to strike
Does look like there is a snake in the background waiting to strike
C&C welcome.
Don.
Don.
Posted 07/11/2009 - 11:44
Link
I was hesitating to ask my "flash" question I thought I am the only fooled one But as I see, the light is unusual for others too
The low light is really warm. But usually then the light is not so strong any more. But here the shadows are really dark. Contrast and saturation ...
The low light is really warm. But usually then the light is not so strong any more. But here the shadows are really dark. Contrast and saturation ...
Posted 07/11/2009 - 12:01
Link
Not sure what the time was without checking but it was getting towards the end of the day, so I guess 3pm or so at this time of year.
Best regards, John
Posted 07/11/2009 - 12:01
Link
I think what fooled me in this shot is the light streak just over the back and the darkish one around the right side of the head. It looks a bit like cut out and stuck to the background.
My suspicion was a darkening of the background.
As for the sharpening, I don't think it is overdone, apart from the two areas I mentioned perhaps.
The sharp bird and blurred background make this an interesting shot (at least for me), even if a pigeon might not be the most exciting bird...
Prieni
My suspicion was a darkening of the background.
As for the sharpening, I don't think it is overdone, apart from the two areas I mentioned perhaps.
The sharp bird and blurred background make this an interesting shot (at least for me), even if a pigeon might not be the most exciting bird...
Prieni
How inappropriate to call this planet earth when it is quite clearly Ocean. - Arthur C. Clarke
Prieni's PPG page
Prieni's PPG page
Posted 09/11/2009 - 10:03
Link
I think it's great. Not oversharpened at all for my taste - it's just a sharp photo
Tim
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27”, Macbook Pro 17”, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr • Fluidr • PPG • Street • Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27”, Macbook Pro 17”, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr • Fluidr • PPG • Street • Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
Posted 09/11/2009 - 23:31
Link
Very nice shot, John. Clean and crisp and nice composition.
Cameras:K-7/K20D/*ist D/K10D
Lenses:DA14 f2.8, A16 f2.8, FA20 f2.8, FA31 f1.8, DA35 f2.8 macro, FA43 f1.9, FA50 f1.4, A50 f1.4, A50 f1.2, FA50 f2.8 macro, DA*55 f1.4, FA77 f1.8, DFA100 f2.8 macro, A100 f2.8, DA*300 f4, FA*300 f4.5, DA10-17 FE, DA12-24 f4, DA*16-50 f2.8, DA17-70 f4, FA*28-70 f2.8, DA*50-135 f2.8, DA*60-250 f4, FA*80-200 f2.8.
Flashes:AF540FGZ, AF360FGZ
Lenses:DA14 f2.8, A16 f2.8, FA20 f2.8, FA31 f1.8, DA35 f2.8 macro, FA43 f1.9, FA50 f1.4, A50 f1.4, A50 f1.2, FA50 f2.8 macro, DA*55 f1.4, FA77 f1.8, DFA100 f2.8 macro, A100 f2.8, DA*300 f4, FA*300 f4.5, DA10-17 FE, DA12-24 f4, DA*16-50 f2.8, DA17-70 f4, FA*28-70 f2.8, DA*50-135 f2.8, DA*60-250 f4, FA*80-200 f2.8.
Flashes:AF540FGZ, AF360FGZ
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.



24416 posts
24 years
Tyldesley,
Manchester
[IMG]http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff250/johnriley1uk/006-Pigeon-Posing.jpg[/IMG]
This is using the SMC Pentax-FA 80-320mm, which I am very pleased with. The extra 20mm at the long end is quite useful for wildlife.