Thinking of switching to Pentax from Canon

Started Aug 6, 2013 | Discussions thread
ultimitsu Veteran Member • Posts: 6,650
Re: This is already way out of topic, I promise this is the last time I'll humour you.

fakuryu wrote:

I stated even with that small pic (thumb nail) smoothing is already evident and there is already a lot of loss in detail,

You are wrong. Why dont you circle the part in my image where you think there is detail loss in thumbnail? Let see if you are honest or just lying.

You image does not match the canon 1600, by the way.

Well I am not really admitting anything, I just find it funny that even when some sites says that the the Canon 70-200L II is not even a 200mm that some sites even says that the Tamron has the longer end, is sharper all throughout, is cheaper. Surely there is no bias from you favoring your expensive L glass right? No double standards here!

Every other site except popphoto say tamron has significant focus breathing. popphoto's number probably was measured at infinity. Other sites say canon has very small amount of focus breathing and is in the reverse, at MFD it is slight longer than 200mm. So it is possible that Canon is just under 200mm when focusing at infinity but is 200 mm at 10m. While tamron is universally identified as 188/186 at 10m. Do you use your 70-200 more at 10m and less, or at infinity?

Your runway shot is in no way a sufficient stress test for that lens's AF capability. just becasue you used a old body doesnt mean it ought to do better with newer bodies.

As I don't really shoot running dogs and such,

You do not have to shoot dogs, you can shoot BIF, soccer or rugby game, etc. There are various subjects that can really test AF performance, just not runway models.

I guess you never shot a runway show before (or did you?) since the model was "just standing there".

I have shot weddings and I have shot stage shows, they can be worse lit than runway models and subject move faster. But I do not test AF in these places either.

So if one review site says one thing and one the other, either way, still sharper and has a better distortion control over the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM while $1000 cheaper.

As I said earlier, the Tamron is a good lens and a low cost alternative to the Canon 70-200II, but it is in no way the same class as the Canon and it is not a real 70-200.

tamron at 200mm (186mm) F2.8

Canon at 200mm F2.8

Yeah its not in the same class as the LII, in fact it is better than the VRII and LII on some review sites. I thought we were discussing the new Tamron 70-200 f2.8 DI VC USD that has a tested 196.11mm?

You thought correctly and if you did look at the URL of the tamron feld map image you would have seen this:


And please, if you are going to quote me, quote everything.

You should take your own advice. see below.

This is already way out of topic. In no way or form a 60D has better lowlight low noise high ISO performance over a K30/K50/K500/K01.

Take your own advice on quoting properly. I never said "60D has better lowlight low noise high ISO performance over a K30/K50/K500/K01."

Well I never did say or implied that you stated that right?

So why arge it?

I said:

1, noise itself is not an issue in practice because you can easily clean it up in post. what matters is detail and DR retention.

2, 60D is a bit behind, there is no debate. [But] the difference is not as much as people often make it out to be.

I have shown you plenty of my own high ISO images. MOD EDIT, Edited last section for flame. bating.

1. Noise is an issue, if not, why would we need a FF DSLR? (aside from the other obvious stuff) Additionally, less noise, less time post processing.

People buy FF because it has better detail and DR retention at high ISO. lower noise is just the byproduct of better high ISO IQ. As an FF owner I still do NR for high ISO image anyway, it is not like just because I now own FF I can forgot NR altogether.

2. The difference is HUGE its not even funny compared to the K5II.

It is not. it is less than 1 stop below 3200 and just about 1 stop over 6400.

So therefore, the K30 is such a bargain right now since its high ISO low noise performance is almost or as good as the K5II. I promise, this will be my last reply on this topic.

K30 is a good value body, Pentax tend to price their low end body very competitively against Canikon, there is no denying that. K30's major strength against Canon APS-C in general is low ISO IQ. But high ISO, the difference is not that big, K30 is a rehash of K5 which was not that big of a leap from 60D.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow