Excellent shot! Now the (almost) inevitable question - what lens were you using?!

Haha... good idea Chris - I was wondering how to afford that SIGMA lens I keep looking at !!!

You should be so lucky..... I've started to get mails that say 'click here for your chance to win a mobility scooter'!!!

I agree the poll can't really be answered - they are two different art forms - just as painting and sculpture are.

There are also two forms of photography:

1. One that attempts to produce an accurate and faithful reproduction of the scene/person exactly as it was.

2. One that tries to portray the subject in a way that attempts to communicate to the viewer some of the emotion that the photographer experienced when taking the picture.

The first type just requires good equipment and technical knowledge... the second requires a lot more and takes time to develop. In my experience, the development goes through several stages:
1. Point and shoot
2. Point and shoot but better equipment/technical knowledge
3. Taking photographs that try to reproduce the effect of other images you have seen in magazines etc - copying someone else's style
4. Developing your own unique style.

And it's the last one that's the most difficult to progress to. I guess I'm largely at stage 3 at the moment!

Right, that's my morning arty waffle... now back to thinking about that long lens!!

The only thing that puts me off the sigma lens (apart from the price!) is that it is a non os and HSM version and I don't know how the autofocus would work under the 'old' system compared to the newer. Any relevant comments welcome!!

The more I look into the long lens choice, the more I realise how limited it is. Why didn't sigma bring out the 120-300 in Pentax format!

I current use the sigma 120-400mm non-os and, whilst I get some good images, they're not really sharp unless I use f8 or more and even then aren't often earth-shatteringly sharp. I also wanted a slightly longer reach.

Originally I was considering the 150-500mm os but sharpness etc. in low light was still a problem.

This has lead me to consider two options - DA*300mm f4 + 1.7 tc or Sigma 300mm f2.8 + 2x TC.

The SIGMA is WAY more expensive than the Pentax (it's f2. but as far as I can see it's a much older lens - no os or HSM. And on that basis, I wonder whether it would be really worth the money?

Anybody use one (the Sigma) or made the same choice - ignoring the financial element???

I've started to appreciate why some people move to another brand for this purpose!
Martyn

Choices at the long end for Pentax aren't that numerous. This thread was very useful :

link

It's such a pity that it didn't include the SIGMA zooms!

I'm currently tempted to change my 120-400 for a DA*300 - or go mad and get a SIGMA 300mm f2.8!

1. Take more time and press the shutter button less.

2. Delete all bar the best off the computer.

3. Spend more time sitting under trees.

Lenses I would like to own that I can't justify are mainly long focal lengths - the Sigma 300mm 2.8 or 500mm in particular

Lenses that aren't available that I'd love to see are a 150 or 200 Macro and a longer than 300mm DA*

Not unless I've missed something in the manual!! You can normally only check after you've taken the pic - by looking at the histogram, which is the key to getting the right exposure really. Mind you....it's a good idea... small histogram in viewfinder!