[Storm Chaser]

Looking at Tamron SP 200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di or Sigma 150-500mm F/5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM. I have a K5IIs, looking at a super zoom and would like to stay under a grand. Don't think I can go with Pentax at that price point? Any feed back would be great! Thank you (Sigma rebate looks good)

[ElJamoquio]

That sigma is better than that tamron.

FYI I've had better results with the DA*300 and cropping than I did with the 150-500 at the long end. YMMV, but it's another thought.

[Storm Chaser]

What does a DA*300 run in price? Prime lens I take it.

---------- Post added 10-21-14 at 07:14 PM ----------

That sigma is better than that tamron.

FYI I've had better results with the DA*300 and cropping than I did with the 150-500 at the long end. YMMV, but it's another thought.

Have you ever used a converter with that lens?

---------- Post added 10-21-14 at 07:21 PM ----------

Looks over buget but f/4 and IF I really like. Reviews look very good with this lens, maybe an idea find good used or refurb. Thanks

[Paul the Sunman]

That sigma is better than that tamron.

FYI I've had better results with the DA*300 and cropping than I did with the 150-500 at the long end. YMMV, but it's another thought.

A brilliant f4 300 or a ho-hum f6.3 500? Interesting choice.

[crewl1]

Have you ever used a converter with that lens?

All the time. Works great. See this thread and related posts. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/55946-300mm-plus-lens-club...ml#post2977629

[ElJamoquio]

What does a DA*300 run in price? Prime lens I take it.

---------- Post added 10-21-14 at 07:14 PM ----------
Have you ever used a converter with that lens?

Yes and no. I used a F1.7x or whatever it's called. I didn't find it to be much of an improvement over cropping. It was still better than the 150-500 at the long end.

People seem to have better results with the HD1.4 but I do not have that TC.

[misomosi]

I'm interested in a super telephoto for birding. I have mirror lenses but they just don't give me the sharpness I need.

I looked into all Sigmas and stopped upon an older 170-500 f5-6.3 APO DG because it's the lightest of all long Sigmas. All have 1.7 to 2kg while this one has 1.3 which for me is a really important aspect. I don't know why others say that shooting handheld at 500 is such a problem. With Pentax anti-shake system is even better and I can easily shoot 1/125, 1/160 static subjects. THe only problem remains then the weight. My mirror lenses are 0.6kg in weight which is relly easy to carry for 500mm.

Looking at the samples I see on flickr for the 170-500 and looking at the samples there are with DA 300 f4, I'm not really impressed with the 300. It's nice but.. you need teleconverter (or crop, and I already crop alot at 500mm with mirrors).

I could get the DA 300 for 1100 euro new or ~900 euros used.
Or the Sigma 170-500 used for 200 euros (it usually sells for 400) from a guy who used it alot but really looks in good shape.

Does anyone know of any comparison between this sigma and the DA 300 + TC?

Or, can you suggest something else?

---

Last edited by misomosi; 10-22-2014 at 03:51 AM.

[redpit]

The Sigma 150-500 is a great lens and after learning how to utilize it you will get results very similar to more expensive primes. The Sigma 50-500 is even better but also more expensive, though a 10X zoom that delivers quality images is not something common and I feel it worths its money.

This is my experience, I hope you get the right decision for your needs!

[Des]

I'm interested in a super telephoto for birding. I have mirror lenses but they just don't give me the sharpness I need.

I looked into all Sigmas and stopped upon an older 170-500 f5-6.3 APO DG because it's the lightest of all long Sigmas. All have 1.7 to 2kg while this one has 1.3 which for me is a really important aspect. I don't know why others say that shooting handheld at 500 is such a problem. With Pentax anti-shake system is even better and I can easily shoot 1/125, 1/160 static subjects. THe only problem remains then the weight. My mirror lenses are 0.6kg in weight which is relly easy to carry for 500mm.

Exactly the same reasoning led me to the Sigma 170-500. As a value proposition it is hard to beat. The weight is a big advantage over the 150-500 or 50-500.

But if you can get really sharp images with the 170-500 at 500mm handheld shooting a subject 50m away at 1/125th second f6.7 you should win a prize. I find I need to go to at least 1/500th of a second, even faster, and it benefits from being stopped down to f8. Which means it needs good light, or a sturdy tripod, or both.

For speed and absolute IQ, from every image I have seen, the DA*300 f4, F*300 f4.5 and FA*300 f4.5 (whether cropped or using a TC) all produce better images than the 170-500, even in ideal conditions. The advantages are probably greater using a K-3, as the 24mp sensor allows more scope for cropping, and of course greater again in less than ideal conditions. The catch is simply that the primes costs twice or three times the price. The F*300 actually seems to sell for more than the other two second hand - a reflection of its lighter weight. The DA*300 has the advantage of silent autofocus and is WR.

[misomosi]

Thanks Des for the input. That's good piece of practical info - 1/500 and f8!