I agree David...left the berries until the last for that reason.

Colours are nice and it's the sharpest lens i've owned...although that's not saying much.

It crops nicely as well to partly compensate for lack of reach.

Will no doubt be posting more with it from time to time.

Thanks Gareth.

I do like the focal length...coupled with max aperture and close focus (80cm) makes for a very versatile product.
Only thing it lacks is WR...MF also allows for possibility of rapid reaction 'grab shots' faster than for example my son with his new Sony A7II and 70-200 F/4 who was still trying to focus on one or two shots that i managed to make a decent stab at.

Very well put Steve.

Karlo

According to Photorumors, KP is now shown as discontinued on official Ricoh Japanese site.

Big price jump between KP and new K3III...will be a huge price gulf between K-70 and K3III without a KPII if this is confirmed.

Just taken delivery of the above lens after a long wait...paired with my K-5IIs and set off down to the river to try out.

Weather was dry but very cloudy with the occasional attempt at a solar breakthrough.

1. Horse



2. Four Mallards



3. Lichen on branch



4. Duck Pair



5. Riverscape



6. Great Crested Grebes



7. Squirrel Down



8. Gull in Flight



9. Spot The Pigeon



10. That's Close Enough



11. Berries

Some excellent shots there David.

Something very satisfying i find from getting good results for not a lot of cash!

regards

Karlo

Whatever the reason(s)..it gives people longer to save up for it anyway!

Hopefully they will still announce something new...a 70-300 or maybe a new convertor...every little thing helps.

As a 'general rule of thumb'...all other things being equal, one would expect sensors with a lower pixel density to produce images with less 'noise'...i.e they would have a higher signal to noise ratio which would result in 'cleaner'...more faithfully reproduced images.

The Pentax 645z Medium Format sensor although much larger than a FF sensor (from the K-1 for example)
has a lower pixel density (3.53MP per cm2 compared to 4.24 MP per cm2 from K-1) even though it has a higher number of pixels in total.

Both the KP and K-1 are of a similar age technology wise so wouldn't expect advances in sensor technology to alter things much here.

Very basic explanation I know and other things do affect overall image quality.

From a purely technical aspect some figures:

Sensor Area of K1 is 862mm2, nominal M.P 36.4, pixel density 4.24MP per cm2

Sensor Area of K-3II is 371mm2, nominal M.P 24, pixel density 6.66MP per cm2.

I always wanted a good copy of this lens and would have bought it a month ago if I could have obtained it for £275-£300. Unfortunately i've spent up now having committed to a Samyang 135 which apparently is a special order...should arrive next month!

This lens was always cheaper than the 150-500 of which there are more copies being sold...might be useful to see what those are going for and then price yours 10-15% below.

My son bought a 150-500 off a forum member about 2-2.5 years ago for £370 i think...vgc with case.

Ultimately as with any used item ...it's worth what someone is prepared to pay and you are prepared to accept.

Good luck with sale anyway.

Karlo