Pete D wrote:
> "Doug Jewell" <ask@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:47e7034b$0$17341$5a62ac22@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Cryptopixel wrote:
>>> http://www.clocksnprints.com/bugsat200mm.htm
>> Clicked send on my other reply before I was ready. oops. Anyway, as I
said
>> before, nice pic doug.
>>> Sigma and other after market lens makers have some exceptional lenses
>>> in their ranges. The patented nature of lens based image stabilization
>>> means that these smaller makers are at a substancial disadvantage...
>>> Until the likes of Pentax and Sony (to name just two) catch up with
>>> camera body technology.
>>>
>>> The latest Pentax K20D is one example of where serious photographers
>>> can save thousands of dollars and not sacrifice anything, compared to
>>> buying Canon and Nikon kits. In-camera image stabilization saves
>>> photographers serious money when buying excellent quality lenses.
>>>
>>> The Sigma 70 -200 F/2.8 (macro) that took this picture costs less than
>>> half of what a VR Nikon equivalent costs. Almost enough price
>>> difference to pay for a Pentax K20D body!
>> Was this shot with a K20D? - I thought you were using S5's and D300s.
>>> It's hard to justify the weight and cost of in-lens gyros when cameras
>>> with sensor based IS are now every bit as good as their Canon and
>>> Nikon rivals.
>> Most tests tend to show that lens based IS is better than body based,
and
>> that's probably right. But we survived so long without any IS at all,
that
>> surely there are more im****tant things to rate a system on than the
>> performance of IS with one or two particular lenses. Canon & Nikon
>> definitely have a better range of fast telephoto lenses than Pentax do
-
>> this makes In-Body or In-Lens IS irrelevant if it is hard to even find
a
>> suitable lens for the body. But certainly for someone who mostly needs
>> wide through to moderate-telephoto the Pentax system represents
>> exceptional value.
>
> Not sure what lenses you need in Pentax mount but their 200mm F2.8 looks
> pretty good and their soon to be released 300mm F4 will probably be good
as
> well. If you really need big glass though I would suggest that Pentax is
not
> for you.
Pentax certainly offers all that I need, and then some! But
for some of the s****ts and wildlife nuts, the lack of fast
300+ glass is a compelling reason not to go pentax.
>
> If you are shooting with a K20D it would seem that faster long lenses
while
> normally desirable may not be quite as needed as they once were because
the
> high ISO performance is getting to be so good.
True, but regardless of how high you can go in ISO, if you
have fast glass you will always have an advantage over slow
glass. Yes, the high ISO performance of the K20 will mean a
K20 & 5.6 lens will do what would need a 2.8 lens on the
K10, but a K20 & 2.8 lens will be better again. Whether that
translates into faster shutters for better frozen motion, or
whether it translates into lower light shooting is up to the
owner, but regardless, they are still better off with the
fast glass.
>
>
|
