Should I stay with Pentax?

xmeda wrote:

Bobkraus09 wrote:

I am in a similar place as the OP, with an aperture control failing K-50, but with only two lenses: DA 18-135 WR (not PLM) and a 55-300 WR with the screw motor. The 18-135 seems pretty decent to me, but the 55-300 is just awful - very slow to focus and very loud. I really like the feel of my K-50, and like using Pentax equipment. So I've taken to heart the suggestions for a K-5 or K-3 model to replace the OP's K-50.

I mostly shoot landscape and travel photos, but want to try out BIF & wildlife photography now that I live in Maine. My sister-in-law is a good wildlife photographer with Canon equipment, and happy to take me out and teach me, and share lenses. So a completely new setup with a Canon R7, RF 18-150 & RF 100-400 is a possible new route for me. I have never bought anything but relatively low end cameras & lenses, so may be time to treat myself.

On the other hand, I really like Pentax. If I were to replace the K-50 with a used K-3ii and added the 50-300 PLM lens, would I have a decent BIF setup? The better AF performance from the R7 would help my limited skills. But the Pentax camera and lenses would be weatherproof. And 400mm reach would be better than 300mm...

Could I be happy with a K3ii and 55-300 PLM for BIF/wildlife - or is this a bit of wishful thinking?

Thanks,

Bob

BIF and wildlife with F6.3@300mm lens that likes to be F8 to provide best output? That cost a lot of light and ISO to reach shutter speeds for birds in flight. On top of that Pentax cameras K3III included are no AF monsters. It can be done, I have many BIFs even with old K20D and old SMC DA 55-300/4-5.6, but it requires more skill and creates some amount of wasted shots.

Try to get Sigma 100-300/4 instead. It will give you few stops of light to work with. AF speed is similar and it works well for other animals too even if light is not perfect.

F4.5@300mm

HD DA55-300PLM focuses fast, but it is just small compact telephoto consumer zoom with its limits. Some people here think that PLM is some miracle because they had no other fast focusing lenses, but in fact it is similar to 18-135WR and on camera market in general it is rather mediocre. Even my cheap Olympus 40-150/4-5.6 focuses at least as fast as this lens being limited more by camera than by lens motor

But it definitely is not a bad lens for the money, size and size. Well.. even the older SMC DA 55-300 is not that bad, when user knows how to work with it

It can do things like

On K20D :))

Canon R7 is an option, just it is the first generation in that Canon segment. Personally I've would wait for some mark II and let them release some more lenses. But at the end, it is the user, not the machine

The Sigma 100-300 is great but the 55-300 PLM has many advantages for a newcomer to wildlife IMHO:

- the Sigma is big and heavy (1480g vs 422g). The whole PLM lens including its hood reversed can fit into the hood of the Sigma ...

- max magnification of the PLM is 0.3x, for the Sigma 0.2x

- the PLM is more flexible (55mm on wide end vs 100mm)

- the Sigma is quite difficult to find on used market, and it means it's used, vs the PLM is easy to find as new

- the Sigma is usually twice the price of the PLM (or more)

- the PLM is Weather Resistant (WR)

Side note I noticed that at f/4 the Sigma can have a "dreamy" look, worse than old 50mm 1.4 lenses. At 4.5 problem is gone mostly. I wouldn't use it without that huge hood.