Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 14, 2008, 8:25 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,095
Default

And that robin shot isn't bad, definitely worth keeping even if it will only get occasional use.

Ira
Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 14, 2008, 11:27 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
brokenbokeh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 195
Default

2many, believe it or not, I have not yet attached the lens to a tripod. All my test shots with it have been hand held.

mtngal, the lens weighs a mere 4.4 lbs, although it feels about a ton when trying to hold it steady, especially after using it for a while! :lol:

As with mtngal, it's not really a lens I see as part of my lifestyle. I like her and Monza's comments about "not bad". It can produce images that are recognizable, and sometimes that is enough.

I wonder how much better the image quality of a Bigma + 2 TC's would be?

Here's another robin shot, underexposed at ISO 800 so I had to push it +1 in PP, and processed somewhat differently than the 1st.


Attached Images
 
brokenbokeh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2008, 2:04 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

Judging from both of the pictures you posted, I think this lens might be better than Bigma and two TC's - it's certainly lighter at only 4.4 lbs. But since I have no experience with Bigma, I'm only going by a combination of what I've seen here and "traditional" wisdom when it comes to TCs in general. It would make an interesting comparison.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2008, 3:16 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
rhermans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Antwerp - Belgium
Posts: 3,454
Default

First of a 'real' late happy birthday, and ...
the lens does a better job than I ever would've expected.

Handheld at 1300 mm is something I wouldn't even try.

Ronny
rhermans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2008, 7:26 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
NonEntity1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lake Placid Florida USA
Posts: 2,689
Default

You know, considering the price point of this lens, the results are really not bad. Of course, credit is due the photographer and the post processing work as well.

Tim
NonEntity1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2008, 11:32 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Rodney9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yeronga, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3,518
Default

Amazon emailed about this lens http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000MXZWMQ/...08990_pe_ar_t2

It looked interesting but a bit to good to be true, so I searched for some reviews but all I could find was some forum comments which were all very bad.
However your shots are surprisingly good considering.
Rodney9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2008, 11:55 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
brokenbokeh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 195
Default

Yeah, Rodney, I looked up the lens online, also, and found pretty much what you had stated. OTOH, if you set your expectations low, you will seldom be disappointed! :G

The Amazon link is indeed my lens.

Interesting note, at least to me: my tripod is useless for this lens. The tripod supports it just fine, the issue is mirror-slap; it creates such a vibration that the image is softened. I actually have gotten sharper photos handheld, because my hands and forehead dampen the mirror-slap.

I hope I'm not over-doing this topic... the lens is a rather bizarre animal, really the antithesis of the reason most folks get a SLR (good IQ) and yet it's fascinating to get so much reach for less than $300 USD. In my case, it was $0. :blah:

Tim, here's how I use this lens: first, I guesstimate the combination of shutter speed and ISO I'll need to get a halfway decent exposure. Then I hope I can aim and focus the lens with reasonable accuracy. The I take a couple of shots, examine one in the camera's LCD, and re-adjust either the shutter speed or ISO. Then I aim the rocket launcher - er, lens - and fire off some more pictures. By this time my left arm is getting tired from hold and focussing, so I go inside and download the photos to my PC. I shoot RAW, and use Adobe ACR, so the first thing I do in processing is to crank up the contrast to at least +70, as this lens has almost no contrast to speak of. At this point, if I can recognize what it is I just shot, the photo's a keeper!

Anyway, I'll leave you with a couple of hand-held moon shots:

Late afternoon, 1300mm, F16, 1/350s, ISO 1600, full frame (the faint brown streaking you see is because I was shooting between tree branches)


Attached Images
 
brokenbokeh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2008, 11:58 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
brokenbokeh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 195
Default

Around 11 pm this evening...

1300mm, F16, 1/500s, ISO 800, full frame


Attached Images
 
brokenbokeh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2008, 12:15 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Gumnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 1,259
Default



you sure cant argue with those images for what you paid for the lens $0

you need to make something that will take the weight but still be mobile

like a tank


Gumnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 17, 2008, 6:37 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
NonEntity1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lake Placid Florida USA
Posts: 2,689
Default

The second moon shot would be impressive with any lens, let alone a handheld el-cheapo. Very good job.

Tim
NonEntity1 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 7:40 PM.