[davidmanze]

At this moment, I'd say e.g. a Nikon D500+200-500 or a third-party 150-600mm would be a better option for birders such as yourself.

 

As for Pentax, I believe their strategy should allow them to expand their product line with OEM products, rather than rebadges (as a birder, why would you get a Pentax with a weaker AF, and the same lens you can buy cheaper for Canon/Nikon?).

Even "killing" the 150-450 might be a mistake, while you'd love the added reach of a x-600mm lens, others might prefer the more manageable and shorter lens.

 

Last but not least, the DA 560mm f/5.6 is much more affordable than a 600mm f/4 from the other manufacturers.

  

   Obviously the D500 + a great lens like the 200-500 or the Sigma sport or the T G2 are second only to expensive FF lenses, even then not by much.

  "Who would get a Pentax for birding?"      A pentaxian of course! 

  Lastly but "least"     the strange DA 560mm is now cheaper than before, I've just looked, Idealo have it at 5499 euros, yes it's cheaper than  a Canikon 600mm F4  .........

               ........but we all know what an extra stop of light costs at 600mm and the fact that it's sharp at that aperture, where the DA struggles at F5.6.

[davidmanze]

    Here is a shot I took yesterday with the T G2 , I meant to be shooting at F8, but must have over twiddled, it took the shot at F6.3!

 

  I was surprised by the sharpness wide open!

[Brightcolours]

To be fair to the crazy big, not that sharp, not rendering that well, Pentax 560mm f5.6, we can't judge the sharpness from that Flamingo image sharpnesswise in that resolution. 

[davidmanze]

 I just looked at the flamingo image posted here.......

 

      ........it's lost a lot of everything posting here.....oh well.   I'll put it on Dropbox and post the link.

[Brightcolours]

 I just looked at the flamingo image posted here.......

 

      ........it's lost a lot of everything posting here.....oh well.   I'll put it on Dropbox and post the link.

You do not have to, I believe you that the image is sharp. Just post a 100% crop if you want to show something is sharp.

[davidmanze]

  Kunzite was asking confirmation of sharpness at 600mm and the dropbox process is under way!

 

 

   I know you believe me BC.......never doubted it for a second!!  :lol:

 

here:

 

  https://www.dropbox.com/preview/DSC_0967...e=personal

 

  Click the link and go to telecharger/ download  depend on your location.

 

  The file is in PSD format as most won't have codecs for the D500 in RAW........

 

 

  The focus is on the center bird  F6.3 with some cropping...D500!

[JJ_SO]

When I was looking for wide ope Tamron 150-600 G2 shots, it occurred to me: There are some - when the light is bright and the air  clear, the sharpness is amazing. After trying to upload some of the yesterday's shots like that one

 



 

which is a crop out of DX at f/9 (not really wide open but showing what I like to show), I stumbled in my gallery of Sigma 150-600 Sports.

 

For occasional shots of birds or small animals Tamron's G2 a great and highly affordable, very transportable lens with some nice touches in handling. It just gets difficult to let it shine in dim light, when ether ISO have to go beyond 4 digits or shutter speed has to go in blurred risk mode. The sharpness remains the same but noise is covering details.

 

That spider's line with the water drops I just saw afterwards... resolving this detail to me is already more than worth the price. There are a lot offers for Nikon in the range of 500-600 mm.

 

Occasionally I stumbled into a gallery of my former Sigma 150-600 Sports which was a tad better and five tads heavier - so in "tad relation", I made a good change. But then... because it's so heavy, I used to take a tripod or monopod with me. These remain at home very often although I'm sure the G2 would also benefit from a steadier support.

 

The pictures might not be comparable, but I still think, if all circumstances work the right direction, the Sigma is better:

 



 

So, regarding that lens roadmap of Pentax, one has to be very dedicated to this brand. Don't get that wrong: On the Fujifilm side of things it's worse in long tele. Swallow the 100-400 or leave it... and that lens has handling downsides like focus by wire, not enough tele reach for small birds, aperture ring also by wire and a strange idea about focus delimiter...

[davidmanze]

 Atmospherics changes everything with long teles..  here this summer, anything over 20-25mts was a wash out (temps around 30° for 3 months).

 

   The dilemma with low light is very real with flying birds and tele-zooms, it usually means it's lost, F4 can save the day.....but that's another 2.5 Kgs and a bunch of extra cash.

 

   Nice shot of your humble sparrow and other! 

  

 As for Fuji I don't think many were expecting hanging a 600mm F4 on a ML, albeit possible....

 

   BTW..don't forget Pentax had a 600mm F4 and a 200-400mm lenses, now discontinued....this is not new to Pentax!

[Guest]

So "a" Tamron or Sigma 150-600mm means only the best 2? Just to be clear.

 

The DA 560mm is less than half the price of a Canon/Nikon 600mm f/4. About 5000 $/euro. I'm not surprised it's not as good :p

[Brightcolours]

So "a" Tamron or Sigma 150-600mm means only the best 2? Just to be clear.

 

The DA 560mm is less than half the price of a Canon/Nikon 600mm f/4. About 5000 $/euro. I'm not surprised it's not as good

I am pretty sure the 1st Tamron and the Sigma C also will give that Pentax a run for the money. 

The Pentax has issues finding ANY buyers, so yes, the price has dropped from $7000.

 

Do you know that you can get a Canon EF 500mm f4 L IS USM for less? And that lens will run circles around it too. Not sure why you are hell bent on defending Pentax on this particular lens...  :blink: