DA*60-250 on K1 Full Frame test

[ralphhardwick]

Happy New year all.

I have a job on Saturday where I will be capturing a driven pheasant shoot. I will be using the K1 with the K3 as backup. I have the FA24-105 , but can't help thinking that I will want a bit more reach, so I am thinking of using the 60-250. I had read how this lens is very nearly FF and that with a modification to an internal baffle it could be made fully FF.
However, before I start dismantling a £1200 lens I thought I would try a basic experiment to see just how bad the vignetting actually is.
The results are below.
60mm @ f4


60mm@f5.6


60mm@f8


60mm@f11


250mm@f4


250mm@f5.6


250mm@f8


250mm@f11


All I have done with these is add lens profile correction in Lightroom.

As you can see, at 60mm it is useable at any aperture but there is no vignetting at all beyond f5.6

At 250mm there is vignetting right up to f11, but can easily be corrected in post from f8 and maybe even f5.6. Of course you can crop it, but that sort of defeats the point of using it on a full frame.

I intend to see how it goes on Saturday before I consider the baffle modification (https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/304092-da-60-250-mod-ff-6.html, but if it's successful I've saved myself a fortune on the FA*70-200 and gained a bit at either end of the focal range

Any how I just thought some of you may be interested.

[LennyBloke]

I've seen similar results Ralph - but I'm happy to PP correct most of the time, or even crop - the amount you have to crop by isn't massive, so IMO it's still worth using it as FF (rather than switching to APS-C or Square) as you still get the image at high quality and make use of most of the pixels.

[ralphhardwick]

Have you thought about doing the mod and remove the baffle?

[LennyBloke]

Have you thought about doing the mod and remove the baffle?

I had considered it but declined on religious grounds.....

...Devout Coward

[Mannesty]

With results like that at 250mm I wouldn't bother modifying the lens because:

A: the vignetting can be reduced/removed in PP
B: resale value of the lens could be dramatically reduced

I'd live with it as is.

[Smeggypants]

With results like that at 250mm I wouldn't bother modifying the lens because:

A: the vignetting can be reduced/removed in PP
B: resale value of the lens could be dramatically reduced

I'd live with it as is.

I'd agree. It performs better than I'd expected.

[ralphhardwick]

I think you're all probably right.

Although I fancy the idea of modifying it, I shall probably set the aperture to f5.6, Shutter speed to 1/200 and let the ISO choose itself up to 6400 (TaV mode) and fix anything that needs doing in post. Hopefully the autofocus won't miss too many birds, especially the dead ones!

I use this lens so infrequently that it will almost definitely be good enough for my needs

[Smeggypants]

I think you're all probably right.

Although I fancy the idea of modifying it, I shall probably set the aperture to f5.6, Shutter speed to 1/200 and let the ISO choose itself up to 6400 (TaV mode) and fix anything that needs doing in post. Hopefully the autofocus won't miss too many birds, especially the dead ones!

I use this lens so infrequently that it will almost definitely be good enough for my needs

MIght be worth enquiring how much a spare baffle costs in case you start using the lens a lot on the k-1

[HarisF1]

Removing the baffle simply requires the breaking of a glue seal. If you want to reinstall the baffle, a few glue spots would suffice.

[Smeggypants]

Would removing the baffle totally, cause some unwanted internal reflections though?

[ronniemac]

Hope you remove and modify the baffle tube Ralph, test it and post the images. That would be a great service to this community.

[ralphhardwick]

So here are a few results of my day using the 60-250:













All of these were shot using TAV mode @ 1/200 and between f4-f8. As you will see I have deliberately kept the vignette on many and actually added it on some of the cropped ones. This created a 'style' for the series of images which some may like and some may not. However it did make editing the 900+ images form the first day a lot easier. I also have another 600+ to go through from yesterdays shoot.

Is it useable? Yes-ish. Will I modify it? No. Will I continue to use it? Only until I can replace it with something else.

Why? Well to be honest having to keep adjusting my aperture to try and minimise the vignette was a real pain and meant significant jumps in ISO jus the get a good exposure. The weather was overcast and, in the woodlands I had to push it to 6400 ISO at times. Regardless of the K1's low light capability this did have an impact on image quality.

The new 70-200 seems the obvious contender, especially as it is constant f2.8. However it is nearly £2K, weighs nearly 2lb more and I found that I used the 60mm end quite a lot. So 'upping' that lower end to 70mm would limit it's effectiveness.

This may become a regular income stream, during the season, and if if it does I will have to consider if my Pentax kit is the right choice. I will add another thread to discuss my thoughts on the K-1 and why I might have to think of something different.

[Smeggypants]

I'm not keen on the subject matter, but nicely composed pics. The last one is my fave. Even though, dare I say it "Single shooter in a Field"

Did 6400 impact on image quality enough to be a real detriment? I ask that in terms of presuming clients will be more concerned with composition, general artisticness?

[Derek897]

They seem to have worked out really well from what I can see on my ph anyway, will have a proper look on pc later.
Would the 77mm Ltd be worth investing in.
It's not a bad fl and would really allow for some artistic and creative shots while still being more standard stopped down.
Might be worth borrowing one to try out.