Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 22, 2007, 7:18 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

robar wrote:
Quote:
bigdawg wrote:
Quote:
The dead rabbit will not tell me that. Dawg
ahhhh grasshopper,
you must first ingest the rabbit to achieve enlightenment..



KFmon
I find that hard to swaller !!! LOL

Dawg
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2007, 7:23 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

ishino wrote:
Quote:
i have been more than pleased with my copy but i have only taken it out once and that was to the zoo last month. i had a hard time deciding between the 170-500 and the 50-500, but finally went with the 50-500. the deciding factor wasn't the image quality as to me they looked nearly identical, but the 10x zoom range was the most appealing aspect of it to me. very nice to go from 50mm to 500mm with a turn of the wrist. also the 170-500 did not have a zoom lock, both lenses will creep out, but the 50-500 has a zoom lock switch that will prevent the lens from extending when you have it pointed it downwards.
Ah Ishino my friend that is what I was waiting for...In the area I live in finding these two and trying them out would be next to impossible..This is the type of info I was waiting on...What type of tripod and head do you use with this and is it capable or do you think you need a heavier one? Also how is the hand held shots? If it doesn't weigh over 50 pounds I'll probably use it that way too!!

Dawg
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2007, 7:28 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

87olds wrote:
Quote:
Dawg Here is the original just with a little levels and contrast adjusted> NO SHARPENING. It is at a 50% crop. I was about 35-40 feet away from where he landed. I have gotten some sharp shots and soft shots with it. I use it most for birds in my backyard and find it to work well for what I use it for. I would love to have a faster lens but for what I paid for the lens it served its purpose fine. You have to remember that these birds move alot and I caught this guy perfectly still. What are you going too be shooting with it? I will send some others when I get a minute.

Jim

That is a pretty good shot then Jim..What tripod do you use with it and do you do any hand held shots..Also the zoom creep is it a problem with you? And does it have much CA on the lighter details of a photo when shooting into the sun? What size filters does it take? Would really like to see some more of those photos too. Comments on how they were taken and some EXIF would help too! Also did you try out any other long lens before getting this one?

Dawg


bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2007, 7:33 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

thazooo wrote:
Quote:
I've had the 170-500 for around 2 years.
Pros- Carrys easy, good image quality, 500 is a bit soft but comes around with sharpening.

Cons- Zoom creep, has a tendancy to 'Fog' type flare when pointed toward the direction of the sun, mostly around water.

It's been salt sprayed and rained on and still works well.

Is it as sharp as my M*300......no, but I'd buy it again if I wear this one out.
Thank you for that Thazooo!! More good info..I like the fact you'd buy it again...How much did you pay for it way back then and was price a reason for going for it instead of the 50-500? Also what Tripod do you use with it and is the one you have adequate? Also do you do any hand held shots with it?

Dawg
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2007, 8:19 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
ishino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 661
Default

bigdawg wrote:
Quote:
What type of tripod and head do you use with this and is it capable or do you think you need a heavier one? Also how is the hand held shots? If it doesn't weigh over 50 pounds I'll probably use it that way too!!

Dawg
I have SR, I don't need no stinkin tripod!!! All the shots there were hand held. But I do have a cheapo (under $100) Sunpac tripod from Best Buy it has a plastic head and it supports it just fine.
ishino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2007, 9:58 PM   #26
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 21
Default

bigdawg wrote:
Quote:
thazooo wrote:
Quote:
I've had the 170-500 for around 2 years.
Pros- Carrys easy, good image quality, 500 is a bit soft but comes around with sharpening.

Cons- Zoom creep, has a tendancy to 'Fog' type flare when pointed toward the direction of the sun, mostly around water.

It's been salt sprayed and rained on and still works well.

Is it as sharp as my M*300......no, but I'd buy it again if I wear this one out.
Thank you for that Thazooo!! More good info..I like the fact you'd buy it again...How much did you pay for it way back then and was price a reason for going for it instead of the 50-500? Also what Tripod do you use with it and is the one you have adequate? Also do you do any hand held shots with it?

Dawg
The 50-500 was just out when I bought the 175-500, it not being a proven design then, I opted for the 175-500. I picked mine up used at KEH for around $500.
I use a beast of a tripod, Smith-Victor, circa 1980, this is good for lens or lens coupled with 1.4x tc.
I do handheld 50% or better of the time. Depending on my coffee level, it works well ;-), I've used it on my film bodies also. Gotten several good shots using 160 and 400
iso film. The SR of the K10D helps tremendously, on my ist D I normally shot iso800. On the K10D I go from 320 to 400 iso.
My model is not the DG version, the extra coatings on the DG may help with some of the Fog Flare I experienced with mine.
I post over at Pbase, account= thazooo. If you browse the avian gallery there's a bunch in there that I've shot with the 175-500.

Dana
http://www.pbase.com/thazooo
thazooo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2007, 10:43 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

ishino wrote:
Quote:
bigdawg wrote:
Quote:
What type of tripod and head do you use with this and is it capable or do you think you need a heavier one? Also how is the hand held shots? If it doesn't weigh over 50 pounds I'll probably use it that way too!!

Dawg
I have SR, I don't need no stinkin tripod!!! All the shots there were hand held. But I do have a cheapo (under $100) Sunpac tripod from Best Buy it has a plastic head and it supports it just fine.
I see you are a fan of the Treasure of the Sierra Madre too! I do half and half so I needed to know that Ishino. Thanks!

Dawg
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2007, 10:45 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

thazooo wrote:
Quote:
bigdawg wrote:
Quote:
thazooo wrote:
Quote:
I've had the 170-500 for around 2 years.
Pros- Carrys easy, good image quality, 500 is a bit soft but comes around with sharpening.

Cons- Zoom creep, has a tendancy to 'Fog' type flare when pointed toward the direction of the sun, mostly around water.

It's been salt sprayed and rained on and still works well.

Is it as sharp as my M*300......no, but I'd buy it again if I wear this one out.
Thank you for that Thazooo!! More good info..I like the fact you'd buy it again...How much did you pay for it way back then and was price a reason for going for it instead of the 50-500? Also what Tripod do you use with it and is the one you have adequate? Also do you do any hand held shots with it?

Dawg
The 50-500 was just out when I bought the 175-500, it not being a proven design then, I opted for the 175-500. I picked mine up used at KEH for around $500.
I use a beast of a tripod, Smith-Victor, circa 1980, this is good for lens or lens coupled with 1.4x tc.
I do handheld 50% or better of the time. Depending on my coffee level, it works well ;-), I've used it on my film bodies also. Gotten several good shots using 160 and 400
iso film. The SR of the K10D helps tremendously, on my ist D I normally shot iso800. On the K10D I go from 320 to 400 iso.
My model is not the DG version, the extra coatings on the DG may help with some of the Fog Flare I experienced with mine.
I post over at Pbase, account= thazooo. If you browse the avian gallery there's a bunch in there that I've shot with the 175-500.

Dana
http://www.pbase.com/thazooo
Thanks Dana...More useful info!

Just looked...Some really nice photos there. Avian is what I need as that is what I like a long lens for...The range at 10X of the 50-500 tempts me though!! I've humming bird feeders at ten feet distance and I shoot the regular feeders (at 30-40 feet
) at the same time of day.

Dawg
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2007, 6:08 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 127
Default

Dawg

I use a tripod 85% of the time when shooting with this lens. I've gotten some keepers with it handheld but would recommend using a tripod. The lens is not light. I use a giottos mt8160 tripod that I bought about 1 1/2 ago for 200 bucks. It was money well spent for a carbon fiber tripod. I have a manfrotto 804rc2 head.

I agree with thazoo about the cons and I also will have a hard time when the new lenses are released on whether or not too sell it for money towards a new lens or sell one of my kidneys and keep both and also buy the new camera when it comes out.

Here are a few more that will show you if its sharp or soft for your liking. I will take a picture of a squirrel tomorrow so you can see what its like on an subject that is of decent size.


Attached Images
 
87olds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2007, 6:09 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 127
Default

another
Attached Images
 
87olds is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:53 PM.