 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / January 2007Good 300mm zoom for K10D?
I'm looking for an SLR for wildlife photography. The K10D is appealing for a number of reason including weather sealing, and anti-shake. But all that is rather meaningless without the right lens. Sigma AF 70-300/4-5.6 APO has been suggested. Good choice? Better choices? Other options: Olympus E-1: Quite a bargain for a weather sealed SLR. Unfortunately, I can't find any appropriate lenses. Everything is too short, too dim, or both. Have I missed something? D70 + Nikor 70-300 VR is similar in price to K10D + Sigma. Probably better optics (how much?) but not as survivable.  SignaturePhotos and travelogues from Africa and Southeast Asia: http://www.exile.org > I'm looking for an SLR for wildlife photography. The K10D is > appealing for a number of reason including weather sealing, and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Other options: The old Pentax 300mm f4. > Olympus E-1: Quite a bargain for a weather sealed SLR. Unfortunately, > I can't find any appropriate lenses. Everything is too short, too dim, > or both. Have I missed something? Their pro lenses. Course, you'd be spending $2000-$5000. However, the E-1 and the pro 50-200mm combo is likely unbeatable for $1300 or thereabouts. > D70 + Nikor 70-300 VR is similar in price to K10D + Sigma. Probably > better optics (how much?) but not as survivable. Are any of the plastic things they pass off as lenses "survivable" today? One drop and it's over, especially if they are large. Nikon's 70-300 is only good if you buy the ED versions, Ebay is awash in the cheapo plain versions. >> D70 + Nikor 70-300 VR is similar in price to K10D + Sigma. Probably >> better optics (how much?) but not as survivable. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >is only good >if you buy the ED versions, Ebay is awash in the cheapo plain versions. I can keep from dropping lenses. I traveled all over Africa for 5 months and Southeast Asia for 6 months. I never damaged any equipment through physical impact. I'm more concerned about corrosion. There's only so much I can do if the ambient humidity is very high or I get caught in the rain. The Nikon lens, is indeed, the ED version. Actually, I don't think there is a Nikon 70-300 with VR but no ED. SignaturePhotos and travelogues from Africa and Southeast Asia: http://www.exile.org > I'm looking for an SLR for wildlife photography. The K10D is > appealing for a number of reason including weather sealing, and [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > D70 + Nikor 70-300 VR is similar in price to K10D + Sigma. Probably > better optics (how much?) but not as survivable.<< The Tamron AF70-300 Di is amazing for the price (as low as £53 in the UK) I bought one for my K10 simply because it was cheap - I wasn't expecting much, and I was going to return it if it was *too* awful. However, it was one BIG surprise! - sharp as a tack at 300mm, and with the AS system in the K10D it was absolutely remarkable. So much so that, instead of sending it back, I immediately ordered another one -;) Incidentally, I took a few comparison shots at 75mm (couldn't get it to read '77mm') with the illustrious FA77mm - and in terms of absolute sharpness the 77mm had it - BUT only by half a cat's whisker, and only when viewing carefully at 100%. Like I said, and absolutely amazing lens for £50 (and, to Rich, no, it won't emerge unscathed from being trampled by a herd of stampeding elephants, and yes, it's plastic. it's good though, and costs less than a tank of petrol) > The Tamron AF70-300 Di is amazing for the price (as low as £53 in the UK) > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > the 77mm had it - BUT only by half a cat's whisker, and only when viewing > carefully at 100%. I think the Tamron AF75-300 Di has it weak link at the 300mm? Not at the wide end when its min F is the smallest. Any comparison with a decent 300mm prime? Daniel, Toronto www.pbase.com/danieltong > The Tamron AF70-300 Di is amazing for the price (as low as £53 in the UK) > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > the 77mm had it - BUT only by half a cat's whisker, and only when viewing > carefully at 100%. I think the Tamron AF75-300 Di has it weak link at the 300mm? Not at the wide end when its min F is the smallest. Likely it is ok after F8 under ample light. No matter what it sounds a good deal Any comparison with a decent 300mm prime? My previous FAJ 75-300mm is ok until 200mm At 300mm it has to have F8 or above for sharp pict Daniel, Toronto www.pbase.com/danieltong I think the Tamron AF75-300 Di has it weak link at the 300mm? Not at the wide end when its min F is the smallest. Likely it is ok after F8 under ample light. No matter what it sounds a good deal Any comparison with a decent 300mm prime?<< Well, probably not - but I've never had a good 300mm Prime. I've got a good 77mm prime (the 77 Limited) and the Tamron @ 70mm stacks up remarkably well against it for sharpness. Possibly hard to believe - but that's the truth. -- >>My previous FAJ 75-300mm is ok until 200mm At 300mm it has to have F8 or above for sharp pict>> I used the Tamron today @ 300mm f5.6 and it was still decently sharp. Of course the K10D shake reduction really does work, so it's impossible to compare my 'new' 300mm images with those taken on the (no SR) istD. I previously did a simple test on our TV aerial @ 300mm, holding the camera as steadily as I possibly could with SR 'on' & 'off'. The results were very noticeable. (I'll email you the files, if you want) Bottom line is that I only bought the Tamron because it's on sale @ £53 - and I reasoned that if it was a dog it could always go on Ebay and I'd at least get my money back. As it is, far from a dog, it's a bit of a gem. Dunno why - a lucky combination of elements/materials/assembly? Other 70-300 Di users have made similar observations though, so it seems that Tamron have hit a (probably unexpected) winner - which makes it ironic that it's being knocked out a fires-sale price. > Bottom line is that I only bought the Tamron because it's on sale @ £53 - > and I reasoned that if it was a dog it could always go on Ebay and I'd at [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Tamron have hit a (probably unexpected) winner - which makes it ironic that > it's being knocked out a fires-sale price. Probably other reasons. Tamron's UK importer are also the Pentax distributor, and a K10D arrives with me tomorrow, but they wouldn't send a 75-300 Di II. They said 'that's just one of the cheap ones' - I had been insisting that I got something other than the Pentax kit lens to test the K10D, as my experience in October with it was that the kit lens couldn't push the sensor into producing its best results. They are sending me a 28-75mm f2.8, which is useful, because I have a 28-75mm f2.8 Minolta (Tamron in drag) for my Sony A100 (same sensor as the K10D) and will be able to manage a tolerable comparison. The 75-300mm Minolta/KM/Sony is supposed to be a close cousin of the Tamron 75-300mm and sells for three times the £53 price you quote. I've used them and they are surprisingly good, almost a match for the £400-ish 100-300mm Minolta APO. The weak point has been close focus, very squiffy field flatness and edge detail when cranking the 300mm end ultra-close for a butterfly or similar. David >> Bottom line is that I only bought the Tamron because it's on sale @ £53 - >> and I reasoned that if it was a dog it could always go on Ebay and I'd at [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > field flatness and edge detail when cranking the 300mm end ultra-close for > a butterfly or similar.<< The Tamron distributors (Intro2020) are, actually, sub-distributors for Pentax. They supply smaller 'non-chain' camera shops (except 3, who deal with pentax UK directly) but are supplied, in turn, by Pentax UK (who are supplied by Pentax Europe) I'll be interested to read your opinion of the K10 - not without its faults, but with some good points. One thing seems clear to me - they vary. My first one had quite bad colour moire and the most abysmal white balance that you can imagine. The replacement (different store, different serial number run) has no colour moire, and a much improved (but not perfect) white balance. I think that the second one has a slight focus edge as well - but that might just be my imagination. My own opinion, fwiw, is that the K10D fits in between the Alpha and the 30D - better IQ than one, not as good as the other, but with some features that make it attractive to people wanting a good value package, without demanding (or prepared to pay for) the absolute best IQ in that class. (read top notch Cannon glass) Pretty much in the Pentax tradition, when you think about it. > I'm looking for an SLR for wildlife photography. The K10D is > appealing for a number of reason including weather sealing, and [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > -- > Photos and travelogues from Africa and Southeast Asia:http://www.exile.org The E1 is a very nice, well built camera but it is only 5mp, and even its biggest advocates are saying the sensor pales in comparison to the 10mp sensors available. It slenses are first rate but very pricey. the 50-200 might be an excellent lens to take. I'd look at the Nikon D200 too, with it, a Tamron 17-50 and a Nikon 70-300 VR lens. That would be a great light weight set for your trip, with a tough camera body. D200 prices have come down substantially in recent months. Tom >The E1 is a very nice, well built camera but it is only 5mp, and even >its biggest advocates are saying the sensor pales in comparison to the >10mp sensors available. It slenses are first rate but very pricey. the >50-200 might be an excellent lens to take. Fits in the "too dim" category, though not grossly so. My experience is that 420mm/F8 + ISO800 is on the hairy edge of usable. With good light, it's OK. 300mm/F5.6 is much easier to handle but just doesn't have enough reach for the rain forest. The E1's small sensor turns 50-200 into 100-400. Unfortunately, it is also known to be noisy above ISO400. 400mm/F5.6 + ISO400 just won't do. > I'd look at the Nikon D200 >too, with it, a Tamron 17-50 and a Nikon 70-300 VR lens. That would be >a great light weight set for your trip, with a tough camera body. D200 >prices have come down substantially in recent months. The D200 has come down but it is still rather expensive. So is the 70-300 VR lens. $1295 (D200) + $526 (Nikor 70-300VR) = 1821 $ 869 (K10D) + $188 (Sigma 70-300 APO) = 1057 ==== 764 SignaturePhotos and travelogues from Africa and Southeast Asia: http://www.exile.org The Sigma 100-300 f4 is supposed to be an excellent lens optically. Google reviews on it. It might be too expensive, though. Toby > I'm looking for an SLR for wildlife photography. The K10D is > appealing for a number of reason including weather sealing, and [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > D70 + Nikor 70-300 VR is similar in price to K10D + Sigma. Probably > better optics (how much?) but not as survivable. >The Sigma 100-300 f4 is supposed to be an excellent lens optically. Google >reviews on it. It might be too expensive, though. Looks like a nice piece of glass. But I don't think I'd be comfortable carrying a $1200 non-weather sealed lens into Amazonia in the wet season. Looks it's still between the Tamron 70-300 IS and Sigma 70-300 APO. Each has it's supporters but there doesn't seem to be a clear favorite. I'm going with the Sigma. It is probably a slightly better lens and, when paired with the K10D, the cost difference isn't significant. SignaturePhotos and travelogues from Africa and Southeast Asia: http://www.exile.org >>The Sigma 100-300 f4 is supposed to be an excellent lens optically. Google >>reviews on it. It might be too expensive, though. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I'm going with the Sigma. It is probably a slightly better lens and, > when paired with the K10D, the cost difference isn't significant. FWIW, I just got the Sigma 70-300 APO a few weeks ago and so far I'm impressed. I'm using the Pentax AF version as well. -- Al Reid >>>The Sigma 100-300 f4 is supposed to be an excellent lens optically. Google >>>reviews on it. It might be too expensive, though. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >FWIW, I just got the Sigma 70-300 APO a few weeks ago and so far I'm >impressed. I'm using the Pentax AF version as well. Any issues near 300? I will be using the lens quite a lot near the top of the range. Some posters on web forums have suggested that the Tamrom might be sharper near the top. waffle. waffle. SignaturePhotos and travelogues from Africa and Southeast Asia: http://www.exile.org >>>>The Sigma 100-300 f4 is supposed to be an excellent lens optically. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > of the range. Some posters on web forums have suggested that the Tamrom > might be sharper near the top. waffle. waffle. Not that I've noticed so far. -- Al Reid |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.