All Forum Comments
Comment by testdasi posted on FS: Pentax SMC DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED at 01/06/2011 - 12:51
I like my 35mm limited but realise I have nothing better than f2 in my gear. I think a very fast normal/wide lens will be very useful for travel e.g. in a dimly lit restaurant.
The 35 limited is also slightly not wide enough for me, my "normal" is probably closer to 40mm equivalent, not 53mm. It seems that when I use this lens for street, I always feel like it crops just a tiny bit to tight.
So just wondering what you guys think about the Sigma 30mm f1.4, both on its own merit and as an alternative to the 35mm limited. If possible, please comment on resolution, bokeh and close-focus capability.
Cheers.
The 35 limited is also slightly not wide enough for me, my "normal" is probably closer to 40mm equivalent, not 53mm. It seems that when I use this lens for street, I always feel like it crops just a tiny bit to tight.
So just wondering what you guys think about the Sigma 30mm f1.4, both on its own merit and as an alternative to the 35mm limited. If possible, please comment on resolution, bokeh and close-focus capability.
Cheers.
Comment by testdasi posted on Opinions on the Sigma 30mm f1.4 please at 29/05/2011 - 15:09
Thanks guys. A 25% crop is probably not worth the extra money. Maybe I'll consider the Bigma in the future.
It's lunch time! by Tùng béo, on Flickr
Seeking the way by Tùng béo, on Flickr
toy_car_uk wrote:
I found the Tamron 70-300 needed to be stopped down a lot to get anything half decent. @300mm I was finding my copy needed to be stopped down to f11 to get the best of it.
I don't think you should avoid or select a lens based on cost alone. If you get the right one first time it could well be cheaper than buying several lens until you are settled on the right one for you.
I have recently purchased the Sigma 50-500mm (HSM OS version). It has no issue with focus on my K-r. Its heaver and slower(aperture) than the 135-400mm though I still tend to hand hold the lens. the OS is stunningly effective on the 50-500 far better than the in-body option.
Simply put I have found it to be a stunning a replacement for my 70-300. But surprisingly I am using it in areas I had not planed. Focus is fast accurate and almost silent with HSM. Its tack sharp from f8 and the quick shift style focus is bonus on the odd occasion its locks in the wrong af point.
Have you also considered the Pentax 55-300 or the 150-500mm 120-400mm HSM OS sigma offerings? what is you intended use for the lens?
I'm not in for absolute best IQ just because I can afford it but rather best value for money. The Tamron 70-300 is excellent value for money. Of my humble 12 pictures in the Pentax Photo Gallery, 2 are by the Tamron which is quite significant considering my 35mm limited has nada.I found the Tamron 70-300 needed to be stopped down a lot to get anything half decent. @300mm I was finding my copy needed to be stopped down to f11 to get the best of it.
I don't think you should avoid or select a lens based on cost alone. If you get the right one first time it could well be cheaper than buying several lens until you are settled on the right one for you.
I have recently purchased the Sigma 50-500mm (HSM OS version). It has no issue with focus on my K-r. Its heaver and slower(aperture) than the 135-400mm though I still tend to hand hold the lens. the OS is stunningly effective on the 50-500 far better than the in-body option.
Simply put I have found it to be a stunning a replacement for my 70-300. But surprisingly I am using it in areas I had not planed. Focus is fast accurate and almost silent with HSM. Its tack sharp from f8 and the quick shift style focus is bonus on the odd occasion its locks in the wrong af point.
Have you also considered the Pentax 55-300 or the 150-500mm 120-400mm HSM OS sigma offerings? what is you intended use for the lens?
It's lunch time! by Tùng béo, on Flickr
Seeking the way by Tùng béo, on Flickr
Comment by testdasi posted on Tamron 70-300 vs Sigma 135-400 at 29/05/2011 - 14:15
Ya, I know it's not like-for-like but it is one of those situations where I have an orange and wonder if I should get a grapefruit.
Both have similar aperture on long end so speed wise will be similar. Is 400mm that much different from 300mm in term of focal length? How much do I have to crop to get 400mm equivalent from 300mm?
What is the IQ like on the long end wide open?
Is there any alternative out there?
I'm trying to avoid the 170-500 and 50-500 because they are too expensive and I'm not so sure about f6.3 (I believe most DSLR AF system is rated for f5.6, please correct me if I'm wrong).
Any comment is appreciated. If you think it's just LBA and I should ignore it, please say so too.
Both have similar aperture on long end so speed wise will be similar. Is 400mm that much different from 300mm in term of focal length? How much do I have to crop to get 400mm equivalent from 300mm?
What is the IQ like on the long end wide open?
Is there any alternative out there?
I'm trying to avoid the 170-500 and 50-500 because they are too expensive and I'm not so sure about f6.3 (I believe most DSLR AF system is rated for f5.6, please correct me if I'm wrong).
Any comment is appreciated. If you think it's just LBA and I should ignore it, please say so too.
Comment by testdasi posted on Tamron 70-300 vs Sigma 135-400 at 24/05/2011 - 23:37
timd wrote:
I realise that asking for advise is opening up a thousand views and a lens choice is subjective, but just for fun, what do you suggest I buy next? I have a k200d with DA18-55 II kit and DA55-300 and have been browsing the web for my next lens. I did have a FA28-80 F3.5-5.6 and a sigma 70-300 and an A50 F2 before they were stolen. Using Exposureplot I discovered that I take photos predominantly at the ends of the zoom (where they are not so good!)
Which of the following should I get next?
- Pentax DA18-135 F3.5-5.6 ED AL DC WR
- Pentax DA35 F2.4 AL
- Pentax DA40 F2.8 Limited
- Tamron 28-75 F2.8 XR Di LD
Are there any that I should avoid?
Thanks!
Tamron 28-75 is a good lens and is quite good for occasions like weddings when you don't want anything too wide nor too tele. Somewhere in the middle, normal (for group) to short tele (for portraits). I would have bought this lens if the Sigma 50-150 had not popped up with a good price.I realise that asking for advise is opening up a thousand views and a lens choice is subjective, but just for fun, what do you suggest I buy next? I have a k200d with DA18-55 II kit and DA55-300 and have been browsing the web for my next lens. I did have a FA28-80 F3.5-5.6 and a sigma 70-300 and an A50 F2 before they were stolen. Using Exposureplot I discovered that I take photos predominantly at the ends of the zoom (where they are not so good!)
Which of the following should I get next?
- Pentax DA18-135 F3.5-5.6 ED AL DC WR
- Pentax DA35 F2.4 AL
- Pentax DA40 F2.8 Limited
- Tamron 28-75 F2.8 XR Di LD
Are there any that I should avoid?
Thanks!
The 18-135 is the best travel zoom for Pentax if you can ignore the price and the photozone review.
The 40mm Ltd IQ is compact, cheap and good but I'm not sold on the focal length. It's neither short enough to be normal nor long enough for portraits.
35mm f2.4 has plastic mount which immediately scratches it off my list. IQ is much better than the kit lens. But it's something to do with plastic and mount together that make me reluctant to get this one.
The 35mm macro limited is an alternative to both of the above. I hate changing lens due to possibility of dust landing on sensor. Yet, I found myself changing back to the 35mm ltd after almost every session because the current lens on the camera is too specialised. IQ is also very good.
Comment by testdasi posted on Lens Advice...for fun! at 24/05/2011 - 22:03
I believe ISO 3200 is ISO 1600 pulled up by 1 stop by "software". There's probably a reason Pentax performs RAW noise reduction (which cannot be turned off) only from ISO 3200.
Comment by testdasi posted on K5 - how high do you set "Auto iso"? at 24/05/2011 - 19:26
It depends on what mode. I base my settings on DXOMark tests since I do RAW almost exclusively.
Portrait: 5000 (keep Color Sensitivity above red dotted line)
Action: 8000 (SNR above red dotted line)
Normal: 12800 (Tonal Range above red dotted line)
Landscape: 2500 (DR above 8 bits; < 8 bits = may as well do JPEG) but most of the time fixed at 80
Portrait: 5000 (keep Color Sensitivity above red dotted line)
Action: 8000 (SNR above red dotted line)
Normal: 12800 (Tonal Range above red dotted line)
Landscape: 2500 (DR above 8 bits; < 8 bits = may as well do JPEG) but most of the time fixed at 80
Comment by testdasi posted on K5 - how high do you set "Auto iso"? at 24/05/2011 - 19:00
I'm currently having a Tamron AD2 macro with AD2 2x teleconverter to make it 180mm. Do you guys know of any long macro lens on / can be adapted to Pentax mount? I'm looking for something 135mm or longer.
Bugs hate me. They run away everytime I am near. >_
Bugs hate me. They run away everytime I am near. >_
Comment by testdasi posted on Any long macro option? at 24/05/2011 - 14:25
I'm looking for a macro lens 135mm or longer. If anyone has one to sell, please let me know.
Cheers.
Cheers.
Comment by testdasi posted on WTB: long macro lens at 24/05/2011 - 13:50
PM sent
Comment by testdasi posted on For Sale Sigma APO 150-500 DG OS HSM at 17/05/2011 - 20:26
You've taken some great pics with this lens Mike. Surprised its going. Guess you must have a cunning plan for new glass