Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-21-2010, 04:09 PM   #1
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 14
300mm vs 60-250mm

I currently have the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 lens that I got to use for taking wildlife and kid/football picks. I'd really like something with a little more range than the 200mm. What would you guys recommend the 60-250 or the 300mm? My only concern about the 300mm is that it won't be as verstatile as a walk around lens for wildlife.

06-21-2010, 04:14 PM   #2
Pentaxian
ivoire's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: chicago burbs
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,368
What about the Sigma 100-300mm?
06-21-2010, 04:41 PM   #3
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 14
Original Poster
Id really like to try a pentax lens - both lenses I have now are sigma's. No complaints really, just want a Pentax for a change.
06-21-2010, 05:11 PM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ankeny, Iowa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 388
I had both 60-250/4 and 300/f4 DA*s, only complaint I have on the 60-250mm/4 is not long enough for me while I am shooting wildlife. Well, sometimes 300mm might not be long enough, depends on the situation.
on the other hand, 60-250/4 was my fav. walk around lens...

06-22-2010, 02:44 AM   #5
Veteran Member
adwb's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Bristol UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,632
QuoteOriginally posted by thechucked Quote
I currently have the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 lens that I got to use for taking wildlife and kid/football picks. I'd really like something with a little more range than the 200mm. What would you guys recommend the 60-250 or the 300mm? My only concern about the 300mm is that it won't be as versatile as a walk around lens for wildlife.
I had up till recently a Sigma 28-300 which was due to the focal range a great walk round lens. I believe Sigma still make them. However I always found the higher magnification end a bit soft and at 300 all over soft. I did not realise how much till I tried a Pentax 55-300 DAL lens the difference between two images at 300 was very noticeable in the sharpness of fine detail like birds plumage, wall textures etc.
I know the DAL is a "cheap"kit lens but I would suggest at the price well worth looking at as It is price wise comparable to the Sigmas.
Alistair
06-22-2010, 07:29 PM   #6
Veteran Member
Reportage's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 739
how about getting Sigma 1.4x or 2.0x teleconverter to extend the 200 f/2.8 range however will lose about one stop of light. seeing that the alternatives are also f/4, might give it a try.
06-23-2010, 05:09 AM   #7
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
QuoteOriginally posted by thechucked Quote
I currently have the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 lens that I got to use for taking wildlife and kid/football picks. I'd really like something with a little more range than the 200mm. What would you guys recommend the 60-250 or the 300mm? My only concern about the 300mm is that it won't be as verstatile as a walk around lens for wildlife.
which version of the sigma.

All but the HSM version work very well with sigma's EX-DG tele-converters

the TCs cost about $200 each for the 1.4x and 2x versions. this way you get length when you need it, but retain the F2.8 when you don't
06-23-2010, 08:47 AM   #8
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 14
Original Poster
I've got the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro HSM II AF . I checked the sigma site a while back it wasn't listed on the compatability chart for the 2x convertor but now it is :Lens - Teleconverter Compatability Chart .

I tried a teleconvertor from BH and while back with the 70-200 and didn't work at all..no af, no manual focus confirmation, couldnt access camera menus with it attached...so I kinda gave up on the TC route.

06-23-2010, 09:56 AM   #9
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
Since this question is about lenses, I'm moving it to the lens forum.
06-23-2010, 10:43 AM   #10
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,906
250 is not really much more than 200 and the wide end is not what you want, so I'd go with the 300 if you are only choosing between those 2 lenses.
06-23-2010, 05:36 PM   #11
Site Supporter
Clinton's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,826
The 60-250 is surprisingly lightweight. It makes it easier to pack around to be sure.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
300mm, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, slr lens, wildlife
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
18-250mm or 55-300mm? NecroticSoldier Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 04-09-2010 10:28 AM
DA 55-300mm vs. DA* 60-250mm? redpigeons Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 30 02-17-2010 07:59 PM
PENTAX 18-250mm VS QUANTARAY 70-300mm@250mm charliezap Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 02-08-2010 11:38 PM
DA 55-300mm: much of an upgrade from DA 18-250mm ? aerodave Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 11-17-2009 11:36 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:07 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top