Need recommendation on good value 200mm+ lens

[PentHassyKon]

Originally Posted by newarts

There's a Soligor 200/2.8 at adorama.com now for $99USD
Soligor/canon 200/2.8 Tele Lens *72

It is for a Canon (I presume FD) mount. It'd likely be easy to convert it to fully manual (ie. stop down - preset metering) Pentax K mount.

My recollection is that the Canon mount has a shorter distance to the film plane, so I don't believe that using a spare K mount in place of the Canon mount would work w/o some machining or even allowing part of the lens to go past the mounting plane. Although I've read some accounts of folks modifying their Canon lenses to fit Pentax.

[PentHassyKon]

Originally Posted by snostorm

Hi PHK,

I'm not a concert shooter, but have some experience with longer lenses. If an MF 80-200 2.8 is under consideration, I'd take a look at the Tamron SP 80-200/2.8 Adaptall 2, which is IMO the best of the fast xx-200 MF zooms.........snip......... you'd still have to get a PK/A adapter which can now be a significant expense. .................I'd say you'd get similar optical performance to your excellent A70-210/4, at a stop faster, but the size/weight penalty is significant, as it always is with fast tele stuff. If you could get lucky and find one cheap, this Tamron would be a lens to consider.

Tamron SP Adaptall-2 80-200mm F/2.8 LD Model 30A

.........something to think about if you shoot a lot of low light stuff, the better high ISO performance of the K20 or K7 CMOS sensor gives you more latitude shooting slower lenses in lower light situations. Your A70-210/4 would shine with either of these bodies at higher ISO without having the size/weight penalty of the faster glass.

A last option would be to just bump the ISO up another stop and look for a good NR program. I'd take a close look at Topaz Denoise. It's kinda slow, but does a remarkable job reducing noise while retaining finer detail.

Scott

All excellent suggestions snostorm...
1. I considered the 80-200 f2.8 but I know that they're heavy since I've used the Nikon 80-200 AF 2.8 before. I also know that I'd use it more @ 200. Although price wise they are competitive, knowing that I'd use it 200 mostly, I prefer to opt to wait for a 200/f2.5 or as I stated above possibly a Nikkor 180/2.8. I'd still consider it, if one comes at a bargain price

2. ISO performance either through another body or as I mentioned, through sensor evolution is another option, one that will have to wait. I'd rather spend the money at this moment on good glass

In the end, I opted for an AF lens. Once I have the time to look through my "test" shots, I'll let you guys know my thoughts/impressions. I will still keep an eye out for one of these: MF 80-200/2.8, 200/2.5, 180/2.8 or 200/2.8, even though I have gone ahead and purchased the 55-300.

[snostorm]

Originally Posted by PentHassyKon

All excellent suggestions snostorm...
I'd rather spend the money at this moment on good glass

In the end, I opted for an AF lens. Once I have the time to look through my "test" shots, I'll let you guys know my thoughts/impressions. I will still keep an eye out for one of these: MF 80-200/2.8, 200/2.5, 180/2.8 or 200/2.8, even though I have gone ahead and purchased the 55-300.

It sounds like you have a pretty good plan. Two recommendations to keep an eye out for that I can make from experience are the A*200/2.8 and the Tamron SP 180/2.5. Both are dangerously sharp. The supply of A*200s might loosen up with the availability of the DA*200/2.8, and there's always a possibility of a deal on the Tamron. I got mine about 2 years ago in an auction where the seller stated that there was significant finish wear and substantial internal dust. These lenses usually go for at least $400 since they were a limited edition and have a reputation of being a stellar piece of glass.

I guess a lot of potential bidders were either turned off by the exterior condition (wanting a collector class example) or the internal dust. . . long story short, I won the auction for less than $200, figuring that unless the glass was trashed, it could still be a good shooter. . . the internal dust turned out to be a layer of dust on the outer surface of the rear element which wasn't apparent because this element is recessed. Some careful cleaning with no disassembly exposed a perfect rear element, and the rest of the glass was very clean and scratch free. . . great deals are still out there. . . but sometimes you have to take a chance.

Good luck in your endeavors. . .

Scott

[PentHassyKon]

Well, I decided to put together a comparo of the 4 TeleZooms in my possession:
vivS1, v1; Pentax-A 70-210; DA 50-200; DA 55-300

See here: DA 50-200 vs DA 55-300 vs Vivitar S1 70-210 vs Pentax-A 70-210; Tele-Zoom Comparo