|
No Gravitas posted:Full frame Pentax http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=645D&gclid=COKWg9_wtcACFa_m7AodkCEA7Q&N=4291284238+4259332394 Pentax merely decided that full frame is for chumps
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 12:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
8th-snype posted:Full frame sensors would have been a big deal back before APS-C sensors got good now it really doesn't matter (unless you shoot Canon then whelp). What's wrong with Canon APS-C? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 14:24
|
|
|
It doesn't look like it's much bigger than the K-01, I'd say this will be the closest 'successor' we get to it. Really wish they'd put out another XS inexpensive small prime instead of the 18-55 kit for these things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
grack posted:Well, there's apparently a user-selectable AA filter, but from the description it sounds like a software solution. It's not a software solution. It's most likely using the K-3's system which uses the shake reduction system to shake the sensor at a sub-pixel level. Effectively creating an anti-aliasing filter. You can set the the amount of anti-aliasing (how much the shake reduction shakes the sensor) in software.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
Does anyone have experience of these two lenses: Sigma APO 120-300mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Nikon Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 DG OS HSM S Nikon Am I right in thinking the second one is just an update? It looks amazing but £2700 is a a bit rich for me, I can get the APO for £1400 used. My other option is the Tamron 70-200 2.8 USD VC. I'm usually shooting portraits and landscapes but sports on the odd occasion. Comments? Thanks 
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 15:06
|
|
|
Haha. Yeah, sorry for the confusion. When I said film, I meant movies. :P I don't currently own any cameras so I was looking at the 70D as a good all around camera to start me off. In a few years, I'll expand with more cameras.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 15:17
|
|
|
whsa posted:Does anyone have experience of these two lenses: Lensrentals had some info on what changed--I vaguely recall there being some durability issues that might have been fixed. That said, I've rented the lens and it's a beast. I would not want to use it for portraits.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 15:26
|
|
|
whsa posted:Does anyone have experience of these two lenses: According to Roger @ Lens Rentals, the optical formula in both is exactly the same , and most of the construction is the same, although there was some improvements in that area with the new "Sports" version when he took them both apart. The main advantage you get with the sports version is all the customizing you can do with the USB dock - custom focus adjustment for different distances, programmable focus modes (speed priority / accuracy priority), programmable focal limiters, etc. There's a lot that can be done with this lens via the dock. Edit: Agreed with the above - this lens is a LOT bigger than a 70-200/2.8. And a lot heavier.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 15:26
|
|
|
It's a zoom that goes to 300mm f/2.8. If you use it for portraits, all of your subjects will look terrified - plus you'll be far away, because even at 120mm and full-frame (I don't know what body you have, whsa) you're on the other side of a long room. That lens should be awesome for sports, though. And birds. Shoot birds, and start lusting for even more reach.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:It's a zoom that goes to 300mm f/2.8. If you use it for portraits, all of your subjects will look terrified - plus you'll be far away, because even at 120mm and full-frame (I don't know what body you have, whsa) you're on the other side of a long room. I have a D610. I should have mentioned that my wife uses the camera to shoot wildlife...that's the whole reason I'm looking to get longer reach than 200mm. Decent 400 and 500mm lenses are just not going to happen unfortunately. I read a review where the guy tried it out and it looked lovely. timrenzi574 posted:all the customizing you can do with the USB dock Yeah, this sounds interesting but it's not something I need to spend £1000 on. powderific posted:I would not want to use it for portraits. I think this pointed me in the right direction...it's 3kg, the tamron is half that and plenty heavy. Thanks for the advice!
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 15:56
|
|
|
whsa posted:
Yeah it's neat, but unless you make a living off sports photography where it's going to significantly increase your income (or you're really well heeled), it's a stretch to justify. It's definitely vastly different from a 70-200 2.8 though, we're talking 3.5 pound lens vs 7 pound lens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 16:06
|
|
|
I'm considering getting a fuji x100 (around $600 now) since I always wanted one. How well has it aged though? Should I hold out until x100s is cheaper?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
HolyDukeNukem posted:It's not a software solution. It's most likely using the K-3's system which uses the shake reduction system to shake the sensor at a sub-pixel level. Effectively creating an anti-aliasing filter. You can set the the amount of anti-aliasing (how much the shake reduction shakes the sensor) in software. That's actually kinda cool, but I guess the new features are down to "glowy lights" for the K-S1
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
I actually kind of like the look though of it. The rumors are that Pentax are trying to produce a better/modern user interface. It looks like they tried to take the next step and try and produce a more modern looking camera as well. The big question for me is weather-sealing since this thing is replacing the K-50 I would hope that it has weather-sealing like that range has had for a while.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
teraflame posted:I'm considering getting a fuji x100 (around $600 now) since I always wanted one. How well has it aged though? Should I hold out until x100s is cheaper? Wait until the x100T is announced (rumors are starting to fly) and pick up an x100 for dirt cheap, or an x100s for cheap. Rumors are saying things like tilt screen, 24mp sensor, and better EVF - which don't really amount to a huge upgrade from the x100s unless this phantom sensor has amazingly better ISO performance or something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
HolyDukeNukem posted:I actually kind of like the look though of it. The rumors are that Pentax are trying to produce a better/modern user interface. It looks like they tried to take the next step and try and produce a more modern looking camera as well. The big question for me is weather-sealing since this thing is replacing the K-50 I would hope that it has weather-sealing like that range has had for a while. Doesn't look like it's weather-sealed, otherwise I would think Ricoh/Pentax would have mentioned it in the press release and official specs http://news.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/rim_info2/2014/20140828_005754.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
Pentax keeps alternating (or maybe 1 in 3) with how interesting their new announcements / rumours are to me. K-3? Cool! K-50 / K-500? Hey, not bad, I'm glad to see they've got a decent contender at the entry level, and the K-50 keeps the K-30's emphasis on weathersealing. K-01? Q-10? Meh, whatever. This newest thing , the K-S1, looks like the replacement for the K-01 - so no weathersealing, and the size (small) aimed towards PentaxForums posted:two key audiences: users who want a small DSLR, and photographers interested in fashionable cameras.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
grack posted:Doesn't look like it's weather-sealed, otherwise I would think Ricoh/Pentax would have mentioned it in the press release and official specs Yea I noticed that right after I posted. ExecuDork posted:Pentax keeps alternating (or maybe 1 in 3) with how interesting their new announcements / rumours are to me. K-3? Cool! K-50 / K-500? Hey, not bad, I'm glad to see they've got a decent contender at the entry level, and the K-50 keeps the K-30's emphasis on weathersealing. K-01? Q-10? Meh, whatever. That's pretty much how I've been feeling. Hope the next flagship DSLR they release is going to be pretty awesome. Pentax seems to like to trickle the features down to their lower end cameras, so the exciting features really only show up on the flagship announcements.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
teraflame posted:I'm considering getting a fuji x100 (around $600 now) since I always wanted one. How well has it aged though? Should I hold out until x100s is cheaper? I have an x100. I have an early sn (13a) and live in fear of sticky aperture blades. Look into that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
whsa posted:I have a D610. I should have mentioned that my wife uses the camera to shoot wildlife...that's the whole reason I'm looking to get longer reach than 200mm. Decent 400 and 500mm lenses are just not going to happen unfortunately. They're not identical. I have the older, cheaper one, for canon, and it's great. But the new one is sharper, measurably. Some new materials/coatings for the same lens design.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
Why are all the Tamron 150-600s going for a couple hundred bucks above the retail price on Ebay? Is the backorder time for a new one supposed to be really long?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Why are all the Tamron 150-600s going for a couple hundred bucks above the retail price on Ebay? Is the backorder time for a new one supposed to be really long? Yeah it's still back ordered for weeks, so people are taking advantage. All the 3rd party sellers on amazon have it listed available but at 1500$
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
I snagged one on Amazon for 1100 about two weeks ago from some camera store that only had one in stock. After that the next lowest price was like 1500. So check it every once and awhile.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
I ordered mine from B&H in June and I'm still waiting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Sigma just announced a 150-600mm f5-6.3 OS Sport lens. Supposedly it will be higher quality glass than the Tamron and will be weather sealed. Probably a little more expensive than the Tammy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Sigma just announced a 150-600mm f5-6.3 OS Sport lens. Supposedly it will be higher quality glass than the Tamron and will be weather sealed. Probably a little more expensive than the Tammy. That's a hell of a reach but f/6.3? Woof. I don't know if I'd want that trade-off. I mean, I know you're not gonna get a 600mm f/2.8 for less than $crazy, but that seems like overkill length for a really slow aperture.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
Have you seen the reviews of the Tamron? Its wildly popular and backordered out to the heat death of the universe. The 6.3 is slow but its the tradeoff to get it to the price point and weight to make it attractive to all us poor birders without trust funds. What's crazy here is that Sigma's press release says that this lens is optimized for compatabilty with their new line of teleconverters which I don't even know what the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
Yeah, it's not really competing with the super expensive fast lenses, it's competing with a 70-300 with a teleconverter. Also I hope they can release it in A mount sooner than Tamron has been able to.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Have you seen the reviews of the Tamron? Its wildly popular and backordered out to the heat death of the universe. The 6.3 is slow but its the tradeoff to get it to the price point and weight to make it attractive to all us poor birders without trust funds. What's crazy here is that Sigma's press release says that this lens is optimized for compatabilty with their new line of teleconverters which I don't even know what the gently caress. 1200 mm f8 and be way over there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
SD Cards are gear, right? Right. There's a 64GB Samsung UHS-1 (older design, same specs) on AmazonUK for ~£21.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:Yeah, it's not really competing with the super expensive fast lenses, it's competing with a 70-300 with a teleconverter. aaahh OK I hadn't thought of it that way. My bad then Shellman posted:1200 mm f8 and be way over there. lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 18:36
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:Yeah, it's not really competing with the super expensive fast lenses, it's competing with a 70-300 with a teleconverter. If they can make it sharper at 600 than the tamron, the aperture will stop no one from buying it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:If they can make it sharper at 600 than the tamron, the aperture will stop no one from buying it. Heavy bugger though - only a lb and change lighter than the 120-300/2.8
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
My Tamron 17-50 2.8 died today in the middle of my trip. Something something our boat captain rammed a freighter and poo poo got smashed. So Is the 17-50 non-VC still the best option or has Tamron improved the VC model? I think I remember reading about an update to it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 09:07
|
|
|
The Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS is a little better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 10:43
|
|
|
DJExile posted:I don't know if I'd want that trade-off. I mean, I know you're not gonna get a 600mm f/2.8 for less than $crazy, but that seems like overkill length for a really slow aperture. You also have to factor in the cost of a team of Sherpas if you want to haul a 600/2.8 anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:You also have to factor in the cost of a team of Sherpas if you want to haul a 600/2.8 anywhere. It's only a third of a stop slower than 5.6 anyway, and people buy 400/5.6 lenses by the truckload. So I don't see the big deal - this and the tamron are a way for normal consumers to go that much longer
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
Mango Polo posted:My Tamron 17-50 2.8 died today in the middle of my trip. Something something our boat captain rammed a freighter and poo poo got smashed. Wtf are you on a greenpeace boat?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:Wtf are you on a greenpeace boat? Captain got us out of the harbour, then came on the deck to show us where we'd be going on a map. We all had our backs turned until we heard the other cargo ship honking. Honk honk, 8 seconds later we collided. Result:  I just wanted to fish and take some bird photos  Not shown: how utterly the prow got smashed, the sweet Norwegian Navy frigate that came to help, or their hilarious crew who we bantered with despite the boat needing 5 water pumps to stop it from sinking. I'll have a look at the 17-50 sigma. I'm turning into a sigma fanboy since I also want the nice 600 to replace my 500 that also took a nasty hit from the crash.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
If it was a commercial trip (did you pay to be on the boat?) you should be getting the boat operator/company to pay for the lenses.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 18:20
|
|