[robert52]

Hi all at the moment I have a Tokina 28/80 f2.8 ATX pro & was looking for a 2nd lens for it I have sort of narrowed it down to 2 super zooms ( thats what I call them) against a normal zoom.
The 2 super zooms are 1 Pentax DA18 / 250 or Sigma 18/250 OS both are 3.5 / 6.3 OR a Sigma 70/300 OS 4 / 5 .6
All 3 are s/hand & approx same price although the 70/300 is NOS
I also own a 2x tel converter PKAF2
The thing I dont like about the 70/300 is the front lens rotates for focusing etc . ! thing I dont like about super zooms is it reminds me of what basic kit lens & bodies have ie 1 size fits all
What would you buy or any other lens.
I would like to have a 70/200 f2.8 but due to factors with in the last week I cant afford it
Thanks

[Kozlok]

If you want a 70-200, save up for it and shoot what you have now. If you buy something you don't want, you will eventually end up getting the 70-200 anyway, and you will lose money and time by having the super zoom.

If you need a second lens now, get the DAL 50-200. It is smaller, cheaper and better than the super zooms.

[robert52]

Hi trouble is I will never really justify the 2.8 to be honest & really I want a lens to go say 250+

[normhead]

The only two super zooms on my current recommended list would be the 18-135 and 55-300. We have a Sigma 18-250.... we use it from time to time, but I wouldn't recommend it. There just always seems to be something better we can use. We use it when we didn't bring anything else.

[Storm Chaser]

I would shoot what you have and save up for what you really what. I know all about the buget etc. have a couple used glass and have had no problems, maybe that would be an option? l do have the 70-200 f2.8 Tamron and like it, but my next super zoom may be the Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3. I do alot of outdoors shooting and 200mm just does not cover my long range shoots. If I can find a nice one used, thats what I will do and save some coin!

[demondata]

I agree with Storm Chaser that 200mm may be insufficient if you want real distance, and think the Pentax 55-300 is a great option, as normhead says. I have a Tamrom 70-200 as well as a Sigma 120-400, and have not yet felt the need for a 500 at the long end, but the Sigma 150-500 comes up at very good prices on the forum every now and then. Either of the 18-250 lenses includes the range covered by your Tokina, so that would not make sense to me, but the excellent Pentax 55-300 would. Try to avoid being led by current 2nd hand availability (unless your budget dictates this), but if you can't postpone the decision, I'd opt for the Pentax 18-250.

[ElJamoquio]

Hi all at the moment I have a Tokina 28/80 f2.8 ATX pro & was looking for a 2nd lens for it I have sort of narrowed it down to 2 super zooms ( thats what I call them) against a normal zoom.
The 2 super zooms are 1 Pentax DA18 / 250 or Sigma 18/250 OS both are 3.5 / 6.3 OR a Sigma 70/300 OS 4 / 5 .6
All 3 are s/hand & approx same price although the 70/300 is NOS
I also own a 2x tel converter PKAF2
The thing I dont like about the 70/300 is the front lens rotates for focusing etc . ! thing I dont like about super zooms is it reminds me of what basic kit lens & bodies have ie 1 size fits all
What would you buy or any other lens.
I would like to have a 70/200 f2.8 but due to factors with in the last week I cant afford it
Thanks

With a 28-80 already, I would not purchase a superzoom. I'd go with the 55-300 if you're trying to save cash. If you need wider you can stitch pics for free, although that won't work for subjects that move.

[Adam]

Hi all at the moment I have a Tokina 28/80 f2.8 ATX pro & was looking for a 2nd lens for it I have sort of narrowed it down to 2 super zooms ( thats what I call them) against a normal zoom.
The 2 super zooms are 1 Pentax DA18 / 250 or Sigma 18/250 OS both are 3.5 / 6.3 OR a Sigma 70/300 OS 4 / 5 .6
All 3 are s/hand & approx same price although the 70/300 is NOS
I also own a 2x tel converter PKAF2
The thing I dont like about the 70/300 is the front lens rotates for focusing etc . ! thing I dont like about super zooms is it reminds me of what basic kit lens & bodies have ie 1 size fits all
What would you buy or any other lens.
I would like to have a 70/200 f2.8 but due to factors with in the last week I cant afford it
Thanks

If you want a quality+affordable telephoto, look at the Pentax 55-300mm. It's long and considerably sharper than a superzoom.

[Des]

If you need a second lens now, get the DAL 50-200. It is smaller, cheaper and better than the super zooms.

Smaller and cheaper, yes, but are you sure about better? I would think that any of the better superzooms (Tamron/Pentax 18-250, Pentax 18-270 or Sigma 18-250) would produce images at least as good, if not better than the 50-200.

But, like everyone else, I think the 55-300 would be a better fit with the 28-80 as a longer telephoto option. It is significantly faster and better at the long end than my Tamron 18-250. The DA-L version can be had second hand for less than $200. (That might leave room in the budget for something wider too, like the Pentax DA 16-45 or, better still, a good ultrawide zoom.)

70-200 lenses are a different beast altogether. Much faster, probably much better IQ, but more expensive and a lot lot heavier. Unless you are used to a 1.2kg lens, the weight will come as a shock. If, as you say, you don't really need the speed anyway, forget it.

[robert52]

Thanks all I just bought a Tokina 80/200 f2.8 never thought I would find 1 in my price range thanks for help