I too fully understand where you're coming from John, but surely you would expect that posting the image on here is bound to invite comment / criticism of the focussing error. If you wanted discussion on other aspects of the image, perhaps it would have been a good idea to point out in your original post that you are aware of the back-focussing and specifically invite comment on other aspects of the image.

Unfortunately the focus is now the only thing that everyone viewing this thread can think about!

I'm not going to comment on this here, only on other aspects. My personal preference is from the original version of the shot, I don't like the processed one. I can see why this effect could be appropriate but for me it doesn't work. I think the first version is worthy as a family shot, a reminder of the day, the sort of shot my wife is always telling me she wants, but that I fail to take!

Regards
David

Great set Simon, a bit gruesome at the end but great images nonetheless.

Regards
David

It's been mentioned a few times that the DA 55-300 hates filters (I agree with this) yet certain other lenses don't seem affected. Does anyone know why this would be?

Regards
David

Some really superb images there Ralph, a great set. Thanks for showing them to us.

Regards
David

Stuey is right - the Siggy is best stepped back just a little from its max telephoto setting and I think it is actually only around 480mm fully extended, so 450 would be a good average when stepped back. It is pretty sharp at this setting, but not in the same league as the DA*300, which is to be expected.

I also have a very old prime 300mm, a beautiful slab of milled aluminium which is a Tamron 300mm F5.6 Adapt-a-matic. This lens cannot compete with the DA*300, again this is to be expected, and has to be stopped down to F8 or so to become sharp. However, it has other qualities and although the DA*300 has nice bokeh, the old Tamron is much better in this regard and is capable of dreamy photos. The Tamron also has a lovely subtle way with colours and contrast, whereas the Pentax is much more 'full on'.

To get back to the point of this thread, is it worth spending to get a DA*300 if you already own a Siggy 150-500? My personal opinion is 'absolutely yes'. You can do things with this lens that could not be attempted with the 150-500.

Regards
David

I agree wholeheartedly with what Iain is saying above. The Sigmas are extremely good lenses, well built and with great IQ for the money (although I don't think they are half the price of the DA*300).

The crunch for me though, is the following:

- The DA*300 is better cropped than the Sigma is at full size

- The DA*300 has F4 and is sharp at that aperture. At the Siggy's max of F6.3 it is soft and has halos around edges. This disappears by F8, but compare that with the DA*300 being sharp at F4 and this is a major difference

- The DA*300 is much more portable and much easier to handle, I can get sharp images at 1/40 second with it, that simply would not be possible with the 150-500 unless using a monopod

The DA*300 is a big investment, especially for someone like me who is not a pro photographer and earns nothing from taking pics, but it is worth every penny. It is a gem.

Regards
David

It's a magnificent lens Roger, much sharper than the 150-500 and more usable, given the smaller size/weight and the wider max aperture. It's also sharp from wide open, see my previous thread with images from this lens:

link

Hope this helps to make up your mind!

Regards
David

Not sure if you are right on this Nigel as the OP states 'Doesn't matter if I'm using AF or M focus' and also I didn't think AF when recording was possible on a K-5 or a K-7? Anyway, the OP has a K-50, I'm not sure what the AF possibilities with video are on this model.

Regards
David

The 17-70 is a great lens, IQ is very good indeed, don't have any concerns if you're thinking of buying this lens. MattyH has one for sale on this forum at present, I know it's a good 'un and in superb nick because it was mine until a couple of weeks ago!

Regards
David

Hi Larry, SRS sell these for £12:

link

Regards
David