Many thanks for all the comments

1: For Nigel, it was ISO640

2: Special thanks to Daron for some great tips - I think these need taking out and kept as a Note somewhere ?

3: Karlo - I did point out that the image is a 100% crop of the untouched camera jpg, so the shadow under the wing was how the camera saw it.
For the record I'll post below a 100% crop from a processed RAW file - the shadow is still there but I think the bit of sea in between is now clearer ?




Thanks again
Peter

I'm certainly not complaining, David - simply amazed at what I got and yet another great performance from my DA18-135 !
Just curious as to what settings some others use ?

Peter

There have been many postings about the difficulties of capturing birds in flight and it is something I have struggled with.
Things seem to fall into two camps as I see it - either you go out specifically attempting such shots or you happen to see something when out walking.

For what it's worth I'll show an example I got recently when on holiday in Oban, just generally wandering around with my 'travel kit' of DA18-135 on the K50,
When we got to the harbour there was the usual activity of gulls swooping around quite quickly.
I therefore put the K50 onto Tav mode and selected 1/1000s to try to freeze movement and f/8 to give me a reasonable DoF.
I tried several times and eventually got the following image. This is a crop of Actual Pixels from the camera JPEG with no PP.

I'd be grateful for any comments or suggestions.

Thanks
Peter

Congratulations on your purchase decision - that does look a good price.
If you don't need the extra reach beyond 135mm I'm sure you will be very happy with the DA18-135 as it is extremely versatile (and WR of course !)

I used my Sigma 18-250 at the Fairford air show last year and was very pleased with the results I got. However, I'd suggest you do a bit more research before deciding which long zoom to go for. I know there are many people here who favour the 300 prime but that is a more expensive choice.
Till then, enjoy the 18-135
Best regards
Peter

I'm going to commit what on this Forum will be considered heresy but say that for a 'newby' go for the Sigma 18-300 !

My first DSLR was a K-r with the 2 lens kit and I extended to range by getting the DA55-300. However, like you, I soon realised that I didn't want to change lenses 'in the field' but preferred to just carry one lens.

I looked around at several reviews and went for the Sigma 18-250 (the 18-300 had not been released at that time).

I have NO regrets as I've found it a superb lens and you will find many of my shots with this lens in my Portfolio here.

NOTE: I also have the DA18-135WR as I got that as the kit lens with my K50 and that is also a superb lens, which was used for my last 2 postings on this gallery.

I alternate between the 18-135 and the Sigma 18-250 depending on whether I feel I might need that extra reach of the Sigma.

Indeed, having seen the reviews of the Sigma 18-300 I'm tempted to PX some lenses and go for that one now ?

Probably the Pentax 18-135 has the edge over the Sigma on general sharpness but as you say you are a newcomer I would be prepared to sacrifice that small difference for the versatility of the Sigma ?

I'll probably get 'shot down in flames' by other people on this Forum but that is my opinion FWIW !

Whatever you decide, just have fun, experiment and when you can afford more lenses then look around again !

Best regards
Peter

Congratulations, Rodney, and good luck with the 55-300. I too got one on the advice of john Riley - it was the first new lens I got for my K-r in 2011 and I got it especially for bird shots.
As Andrew has said shooting BIF is a very difficult task and you may need to take very many shots to get just one good one. On my day at the Hawk Conservancy (with the K-r and DA55-300 I took over 900 !
One thing I did find that sometimes you may need to set the camera onto the 'Sport/Action' mode to take multiple exposures with fast shutter speeds (hence my 900 shots !)
I also found it easier if the birds were flying TOWARDS me, then you don't need to pan the camera as much. However, you can't trust what wild birds are going to do so you just have to persevere !
I can see that you are doing just that so good luck.
One thing I found with the DA55-300 is that the 'hunting' of focus (for which it is notorious) is worst for long distance shots when the contrast is low. When the birds are nearer and the contrast it better you should find the AF locks on much quicker ?
All the best
Peter

And that is now dearer than SRS this weekend !

Looks like those spirits may not have been in the church but out of a bottle !
Whatever, it was well worth posting for general entertainment.
And remember ......
"The man that never made a mistake, never made anything !"

Best wishes Stan
Peter

I'm finding this a very interesting thread as I've also had great problems with 'action' shots at long focal lengths, both birds and aircraft. The link in the quote poses some very interesting points relating to both lenses and cameras !

My first DSLR was a K-r and to do some bird photograhy I posted a similar question on this forum, i.e which lens to get ? As the unanimous answer was the Pentax DA55-300 that was was what I got. I was very pleased with the general results but extremely frustrated by the way it 'hunted' at around 300mm when looking into the skies (i.i the contrast was low). At shorter zooms and with good light and more contrast the results were extremely good.

Wanting a single 'walk-around' lens covering the full range down to 18mm I did some research and as a result bought the Sigma 18-250.
This may not be quite as sharp as the DA55-300 but the AF is both quick (it is motor driven) and accurate, the sharpness is very good throughout the full zoom range and I've rarely had any 'hunting' problems.

I upgraded to my current K50 and have used both the DA55-300 and the Sigma 18-250 with similar results to those with the K-r. However, I have always wondered if part of the problem might be camera sensitivity rather than lens performance ? The US Forum quoted above has comments comparing results with the K30 with those from a K3. This poses the question of whether the sensor performance (24MP vs 10 or 16MP) has the greater effect on AF under more difficult lighting conditions?

It is usually said the 'better glass is more important than a better camera' but I'm having some doubts ?

What do the experts think ?
And would the new K70 perform as well as a K3 in this respect ?

Peter

Congratulations on the new K70, Stan - you must be one of the first to get one ?
Have fun playing with all those new options.

However, only 2 weeks ago you said a new camera was out of the question !
c'est la vie !

All the best
Peter