Some photos from our local park (sorry)


Mike-P

Link Posted 27/07/2008 - 14:19
As the Sigma 135-400mm DG APO arrived a few days ago I decided to take it out to see if it was any good or whether it was going back on Ebay and go for the Pentax DA 55-300mm.


















. My Flickr

Phototramp

Link Posted 29/07/2008 - 21:31
I hope your proud of these shots Sockpuppet. Every one of them are great. I think #'s 1,3,5, and 6 are keepers and 36 is my favorite.
Photography is a foot print for the future.

Phototramp

Link Posted 29/07/2008 - 21:34
I hit the wrong key sorry I meant #6 is my favorite.
Photography is a foot print for the future.

Mike-P

Link Posted 30/07/2008 - 07:15
Thank you for your comments on these and the others I posted.
Appreciate it
. My Flickr

hefty1

Link Posted 30/07/2008 - 11:11
Without seeing the pictures from the Sigma and the Pentax - taken by the same person, of the same subjects, at the same time, with the same camera - side by side, it's difficult to make an evaluation on which is better. Having said that, none of these look especially pleasing to my eye and having seen your excellent macro work I don't think that's entirely down to the photographer. The colours somehow don't look "right" and there's a certain softness that I think is probably attributable to the lens - pictures I've seen from the 55-300 on the other hand seem as sharp as a tack and the colours look more natural somehow.

Not exactly a test that will stand up to close scientific scrutiny, but from what I've seen (on this thread and others) if I had the choice of the two I'd go for the Pentax offering...
Joining the Q

Mike-P

Link Posted 30/07/2008 - 12:06
Do you know something, I entirely agree with you which is why I posted the pictures and the lens I used.
I was actually hoping someone would comment on the softness which I noticed and so back up what I was thinking which is why I also put them on another forum I use.
From them I gained some useful information about shutter speed combined with ISO (I was getting them totally mixed up .. please remember I have only been doing this a few months) and so I went back yesterday with the same lens. These are a few of what I took, not an earth shattering subject but this excercise was more about the lens.
















Trouble was I think, that I got so wrapped up with doing macro stuff that I haven't really used the camera for anything else and the settings for that are more or less burned into my brain.
. My Flickr
Last Edited by Mike-P on 30/07/2008 - 12:09

GivingTree

Link Posted 31/07/2008 - 06:07
OK, these look so much better. Sharpness and colors are right on. Definitely an example of making the most of a lens.
"Just put your eye to the camera and push the button-thingy."
Flickr page:
link

Nimitz

Link Posted 31/07/2008 - 07:04
Last post is def. better - no doubt.

Some of the first shots looks like you used the wrong WB as well - or the colours are just screwed up/flat.
www.mieritz.net

Mike-P

Link Posted 31/07/2008 - 07:57
Nimitz wrote:

Some of the first shots looks like you used the wrong WB as well - or the colours are just screwed up/flat.

From what I learned the shutter speed was FAR too low, as was the ISO.
The park is very dark (all under trees) so by upping the ISO to as much as 800 in some cases I got a much more suitable shutter speed for the length and weight of the lens (the squirrel, which is the softest to me was iso 100 1/90)and so eliminated shake.
I know this is old news to all of you but I am learning as I go along and up until now I never used an ISO above 400 as I thought it would cause horrendous noise on the picture.

I was so concerned about the IQ that I emailed Chris at SRS Monday to order a 55-300mm but thankfully he has no stock

I am happy to carry on with the lens now until the DA*60-250mm arrives (if ever) as that is the one I am waiting for.
. My Flickr

Nimitz

Link Posted 31/07/2008 - 08:28
sockpuppet wrote:
Nimitz wrote:

Some of the first shots looks like you used the wrong WB as well - or the colours are just screwed up/flat.

From what I learned the shutter speed was FAR too low, as was the ISO.
The park is very dark (all under trees) so by upping the ISO to as much as 800 in some cases I got a much more suitable shutter speed for the length and weight of the lens (the squirrel, which is the softest to me was iso 100 1/90)and so eliminated shake.
I know this is old news to all of you but I am learning as I go along and up until now I never used an ISO above 400 as I thought it would cause horrendous noise on the picture.

I was so concerned about the IQ that I emailed Chris at SRS Monday to order a 55-300mm but thankfully he has no stock

I am happy to carry on with the lens now until the DA*60-250mm arrives (if ever) as that is the one I am waiting for.

Yes higher iso gives you faster shutterspeed. But the colours still seems a bit off in the first post. Still if the forest is dark the colours should be right. Did you shoot in raw? If you did try alter the WB - I'm sure you will have some better results colour wise.
www.mieritz.net
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.