[morgun]

I am looking to upgrade from the kit lenses, and was trying to decide between the sigma 70-200 and the DA*200 .
Cheers for any advice

[r0ckstarr]

What do you plan to use the lens for?

[sergysergy]

The sigma will give you more flexibility

[MadMathMind]

These two lenses are fundamentally different in application. A 70-200 is a versatile zoom lens that is useful in a wide variety of situations; I'd call it an essential in any kit. A 200mm prime is more of a "stake-out" lens. You can use it when you can establish a fixed position from which the focal length is appropriate. You'll have trouble, for instance, using a 200mm at a zoo because some animals will be too close for it.

[morgun]

My main interest is wildlife, so wr is a consideration but not the only one. I was hoping someone who has used both could tell me which has better af for example, what do they perform like with a tc

[MadMathMind]

No Sigma HSM lens will work with a TC. It won't work with the Tamron one (I have it...) and it will not work with the Pentax one. Heck, only one of the Sigma 70-200 (there are 5 of them?) will even work with the Sigma TC.

If you're doing wildlife in the field and can freely choose your vantage point, then you can make a fixed 200 work. Where it's not the best is when you can't control your distance, like at a zoo.

[DeadJohn]

Image quality is partially subjective. From what I recall seeing around here, both lenses are very good. The objective differences between the lenses include:

Pentax DA 200 advantages: Weather resistance, smaller size, less weight.

Sigma 70-200 advantages: Zoom versatility. 200mm is too long for many indoor events.

P.S. You didn't say whether you plan to buy new or used. I think the Sigma 70-200 is discontinued in k-mount. The Tamron 70-200 is another option and still available new.

---------- Post added 01-25-15 at 09:50 PM ----------

My main interest is wildlife, so wr is a consideration but not the only one. I was hoping someone who has used both could tell me which has better af for example, what do they perform like with a tc

For wildlife consider the DA*300 instead. A 200 paired with a 1.4 TC comes out to 300mm/f4, but is more expensive (unless you already have a good TC) and probably won't match the DA*300 image quality. Plus, you can later add a 1.4 TC to the DA*300 if you want even more reach for birds and other small animals.

[r0ckstarr]

For wildlife consider the DA*300 instead. Plus, you can later add a 1.4 TC to the DA*300 if you want even more reach for birds and other small animals.

This^

Another thought. If you want the zoom range, why not the Pentax 60-250?

[UncleVanya]

This weekend I went to a wild animal park that you drive through. I took the 60-250 and the 1.4x HD TC. I couldn't find any shots where the TC was needed due to the distances involved. I will try to post some pictures tomorrow, let's just say it is an impressive lens.

[noelpolar]

I have a HSM OS sigma 70-200 2.8 (latest version) and also a F*300 4.5…….. in your situation rather then a 200 or Sigma 70-200 I would buy the Pentax 60-250…… unless I needed the extra stop of light for other stuff….. then the Sigma……

I do find my sigma a good bush walk around lens…..obviously a large heavy lens……but rarely need 2.8…..I keep the sigma for event/indoor shooting mostly where 2.8-3.5 is useful.....which is why I chose it over the 60-250 originally.

The 300mm pentax lenses are fabulous......but for a variety of circumstances the flexability of the 60-250 is the way to go. The image quality of he 60-250 is miles ahead of kit type lenses.

[jatrax]

I would agree with the above.

• A fixed 200mm is too restrictive for wildlife, too short for many things and no flexibility
• The 70-200 is nice but heavy and again for wildlife I think 200mm is too short
• If all you want is wildlife at distance look at the DA*300 + HD 1.4xRC
• If you want more flexibility and the ability to add the RC then the 60-250 f/4 is your best bet. 60-250 + 1.4x = 84-350

[DSims]

Usually you want a *300, as others have said. Any of the AF versions should be lighter than the Sigma 70-200. Not only is the Focal Length better, but the glass is better at producing eye-catching images. I have a slight preference for the older F*, but each one has its advantages over the other two. All of them have better IQ than the FA* or DA*200s, which in turn tend to have better IQ than the Sigma.

[Kozlok]

If you want a 70-200, do at least consider the Tamron. I think the images from it are consistently better than what I've seen from the Sigma. Not much, but I like the bokeh better, and it seems to have a better overall look to the images. It is noisy screwdrive, though. Very noisy (noisier than most lenses for sure).

[MadMathMind]

It is noisy screwdrive, though. Very noisy (noisier than most lenses for sure).

For this reason, it is not the best choice for wildlife. You really risk scaring something off. It is really loud, especially if it has to make a full turn.

[SKYGZR]

What's wrong w/the "kit lens"? (depending on what "kit lens" you wish to replace..didn't mention it in your first post) If it's the 55-300, then why not a 2x-teleconverter? Will get you "up close and personal". (I have this setup and works great w/ the K5ii--haven't really used it w/ the K-x, yet would probably also be OK.