Great photgraphy all round

Nice shot

Comparing a D500 with a K1 is probably unfair because of the file size etc but compare the actual important differences that makes the D500 an incredible BIF shooter

A realistic comparison is a D500 vs K3 ll because they are quite ' comparable" as a camera overall, each having sime unique advantages and both are APS

When you consider why the D500 is on it's own as a truly high speed action / birding camera comparing the focus systems and the buffering capability in particular shows the Nikon is immensely different and capable from the normal semi pro DSLR such as the excellent Pentax K3ll

Focus system

Number of Focus Points: D500 153. : K3 ll. 27. D500. 126 (560%) more focus points.

Number of Cross Type Focus Points: D500. 99. : K3 ll. 25. D500. 74 (396%) more cros-type

Shooting rate: D500 10.0 fps. : K3 ll. 8.3 fps. (17% faster)

Buffer ( see following comments from a recent comparison review by cameradecision.com)

The "200-frame buffer" is only in Nikon's marketing material; it is a misleading claim. If you shoot 14-bit RAW, the true buffer is 29 frames. ( this in itself is very high capability)

However, if you use a fast XQD memory card, such as a 2933x Lexar, the D500 can empty its buffer faster than you can capture images @ 10 fps.

* Hence nothing is left in the buffer.

* Thus the buffer is virtually endless.

Couple or three nice Pentax lenses out there; the 150-450 and DA* 300mm are the two I use for birding but the problem is that for anything other than large slow moving birds in flight, Pentax do not make a body that will handle small, fast flying birds and although I have quite a few decent shots taken with my current atmoury of K3, K3II and a couple of K1's, my hit rate is abysmal.

I Know by bitter experience that the lens is not the issue it is the bodies; Slow focus, poor tracking capabilty and very poor buffering make it a very hit ir miss issue.as regards small fast moving subjects.

The K3Ii Coupled with the 150-450 is the best combination in my view, but my hit rate in terms of sharply focussed images of Puffins (for instance ) at 10 metres is at best 1:12.

Recently had a session with a Nikon D500 which is a world apart; admittedly the lens was horrendously expensive but you could just track a bird and keep shooting with only 1in 20 being off par.

Reveiwing the specs of the latest Mk2 FF Pentax , whilst it does have some very interesting upgradeded featues I am afraid the changes as regards what they refer to as "hi-speed AF" are not going to get that close to the capability needed for tracking small, fast flying birds.

On the K1Mk2 the buffering performance is virtually the same as the original K1 which gets choked in seconds when shooting raw.in continuous mode.

However accepting that the Pentax FFs are not the best for "Small BIF" the uprated iso performance, shake reduction and hand held pixel shift ( in particular) are classleading as are the lenses £ for £ .

I wonder what Pentax can do with the FF replacement for the K1Mk2 ; maybe they are happy not to be catering for the specialist birding fraternity or fast action sports shooters.

To be fair, there are enough pluses in the current FF's to satisfy enthusiasts, event photographers and general wild life photographers, with great glass too, so we can't have everything I suppose.








However

I use the DFA 24/70 f2.8 generally for events and weddings which i am told frequently is a Tamron, so if that is the case it could be a cheaper option. To get an actual Tamron. But the lens is lovely if not too big

However for a prime it is very difficult to find anything that can live in the same camera bag as the 35mm f1.4 Sigma Art lens which lives up to the incredible reviews in spades.

It might not be wide enough in the opinion of some but I find it perfect for weddings, events and groups and of course at f1.4, which is totally useable, it is insurpsssable for anything indoors.

I regulatly use it for indoor sports too, (at courtside) and even on APS it is wonderful .

Wide open it is still wonderful so I am not the lesst bit reluctant to shoot sway at f1.4.

Good luck

Well said Richard, hence 99%of my photography is not BIF hence my continued appreciation and " putting my money where my mouth is" with Pentax.

The K1 is a blinder so I am very happy to have one and accept in total what you say: if I intend to really pursue small BIF going forward as a priority then I will buy the D500 with a used 400 2.8 Nikon .

If Pentax bring out a new FF soon then I will not buy it until I need it as the K1 is a marvelous camera

Remember we are talking about cameras in the thread and the K1 cannot focus or track small birds in flight like the Nikon (fact). However in most other compatible criteria I think Pentax is the best for me.

The D500 can match that lens at £1500, the AF and tracking is up to the job as is the buffer, it is that simple

The lens is £11000 new so it is not something that I would compare to Canon, Pentax or any other maker , and whilst I might consider a good used specimen of the older version, the price of the latest version is ridiculous and makes the lens an impractical investment for all but Rock Stars and Footballers

Even if Pentax produced a lens like the Nikon 400f 2.8, which i don't think is necessary anyway, we don't have a body than can "keep up " or buffer the images quick enough .

All in All I think Pentax produce the best lenses at the price points they achieve but it is clear, better AF and Buffering capability in the camera would do justice to some of the great optics Pentax produce.

I think the 150 - 450 and some DA*s are more than adequate speed wise and definitely optically, to do a great job, if there was a Pentax camera with uprated AF and buffering;

That is a much bigger issue than lenses - Camera capability is the issue for small BIF,

As I said and have posted on numerous times, I genuinely feel Pentax make lenses which are better than most others when comparing like for like.

For the record, I too have quite a few shots of very fast small BIF taken with Pentax gear that are sharp but my hit rate is much less than 10%

The D500 captures extremely fast flying small birds regardless if they are passing at close range or flying directly towards the camera and it can do so at very fast, continuous shooting rates.

That is the only area where Nikon have a marked superiority as I see it, but that does not mean that Pentax is an inferior make, it isn't at all and frankly speaking the exotic lenses are probably huge loss makers for the manufacturers producing them, they are not a practical or affordable option for the hobbyist or indeed most of the pros and such lenses are not going to sell like hot cakes,

I have photographed birds for over 50 years and I have also had Nikon, Canon and Olympus systems but my allegiance to Pentax has never wavered and never will .

However small BIF is a very difficult pursuit and in all those years, only this latest combo from Nikon makes small BIF photography a very practical possibility for those who are interested in that branch of wildlife photography and can afford this Nikon combo without selling a an organ.

By the way if I bought a £11000 lens my wife would see to it that I would be singing soprano for the rest of my days ,

I love my K1 too but as my main interest is small birds in flight I stick with my K3 II (and K3) for that, (But with very limited success) and use the K1 for everything else, where it never fails to impress..

Whilst a large / medium bird in flight is do-able with the later Pentax DSLRs, in my experience it is mostly beyond any Pentax set up to achieve high success rates on small birds in flight.

If an upgrade came with a better buffer and better AF then I will try it but I am close getting to a Nikon set up with the 400 2.8 for small Birds.

A Pentax man for 50 yrs it pains me to say there is nothing available that can live with a D500 and the Nikon 400 2.8 from any manufacturer let alone Pentax.

When you consider the price of the D500 it is marvelous, particularly when mounted on the the 400 2.8 when shooting BIF.

However whilst the camera is very reasonable the lens is horrendously expensive in both the latest version and it's predecessor, so I am daily scouring the dealers for a good used lens.

In recent months I almost got one but realize there is quite a number of birders also looking for the same lens and they get snapped up almost immediately when they become available despite a decent used version of even the previous model to the latest, having a hefty four figure price tag

As regards the next Pentax FF, I am hoping Pentax will make a leap on both Buffer capability and AF with the any new FF. but it might be a stretch too far moving from the current "pro-spec" offers to a camera that match the Nikons, in one model step .

See Tech Radar league top table below :
Here's our pick of the standout DSLR cameras you can buy right now: ( at least the Ki has made the back end of the top ten
Nikon D500. ...
Nikon D7500. ...
Canon EOS 7D Mark II. ...
Nikon D750. ...
Nikon D3400. ...
Canon EOS Rebel T7i / Canon EOS 800D. ...
Nikon D810. ...
Pentax K-1. Pentax's first full-frame DSLR has a lot to offer.
More items...
The 10 best DSLRs you can buy right now | TechRadar

Lovely Photography, well captured super subject

Protection is the biggest advantage

As regards flare the hood is not that effective; I still have to use my hat or my hand on occasions to "impede flare" if that is the right term.

I honestly don't see that this lens suffers with flare anymore than other Pentax wide angle zooms and it is permantly mounted on my old K3 which is always with me, so it does get almost daly use and is by far my favourite walkaround , " have go at anything lens".

I have posted several times on this little Gem, so I won't sing its praises again. Except to underline that flare is not an issue anymore than is the case with my other other more expensive w/a lenses and rarely bothers me.,

Don't hesitate it is an absolute "corker"

See this thread re this lens;