50-135mm vs 70-200mm

bertbert · 07-16-2010, 12:03 AM

I own both the 50-135 and 70-200. I find the 70-200 too big for general walkaround. The 50-135 is about half the weight (765g vs 1150g excl tripod mount). The 70-200 is front heavy on a K7 without battery grip, and quite long with the hood on.

Love both lenses though.

ivoire · 07-16-2010, 05:50 AM

I previously owned the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8. Its IQ and bokeh is excellent. I found it a bit heavy to carry for a few hours while hiking and the focus whine did disturb wildlife. I have replaced it with the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8. Faster AF, almost as good IQ, and silent. The loss of 50mm has not been a problem when wandering heavily wooded areas. For more open areas I use the Pentax f*300mm. It competes well with the Pentax 50-135mm also. decisions, decisions.... pricing made it easier for me

houstonmacgregor · 07-16-2010, 07:37 AM

I use to have the Pentax 28-105 and 100-300 power zoom lenses as my walk arounds and figure nothing can weigh more than those.

nah · 07-16-2010, 10:01 AM

I have the 50-135mm and now looking at the Sigma 70-200, but the thing that worries me is the chance of a bad copy.

Reportage · 07-16-2010, 01:55 PM

Originally posted by nah

I have the 50-135mm and now looking at the Sigma 70-200, but the thing that worries me is the chance of a bad copy.

as long within warranty shouldnt be a problem.

07-16-2010, 05:50 AM	#17
ivoire Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,381	I previously owned the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8. Its IQ and bokeh is excellent. I found it a bit heavy to carry for a few hours while hiking and the focus whine did disturb wildlife. I have replaced it with the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8. Faster AF, almost as good IQ, and silent. The loss of 50mm has not been a problem when wandering heavily wooded areas. For more open areas I use the Pentax f300mm. It competes well with the Pentax 50-135mm also. decisions, decisions.... pricing made it easier for me Last edited by ivoire; 07-16-2010 at 05:57 AM.*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Super Takumar 135mm & 200mm, Vivitar 135mm, SMC 28mm	MSM	Sold Items	24	06-13-2010 09:55 PM
50-135mm or 70-200mm	GLXLR	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	06-10-2009 03:30 AM
Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 vs. Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 vs Pentax 50-135mm f/2.8	nah	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	12-08-2008 01:03 AM
DA* 50-135mm or DA* 200mm	EAD Studios	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	08-30-2008 05:27 AM
For Sale - Sold: Make Offers: Haminex 135mm f/2.8, Sears 135mm f/2.8, Super Albinar 100-200mm f	inneyeseakay	Sold Items	1	06-23-2007 02:05 AM

07-16-2010, 12:03 AM	#16
bertbert New Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 21	I own both the 50-135 and 70-200. I find the 70-200 too big for general walkaround. The 50-135 is about half the weight (765g vs 1150g excl tripod mount). The 70-200 is front heavy on a K7 without battery grip, and quite long with the hood on. Love both lenses though.

07-16-2010, 07:37 AM	#18
houstonmacgregor Forum Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 97 Original Poster	I use to have the Pentax 28-105 and 100-300 power zoom lenses as my walk arounds and figure nothing can weigh more than those.

07-16-2010, 10:01 AM	#19
nah Senior Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: New Westminster, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 282	I have the 50-135mm and now looking at the Sigma 70-200, but the thing that worries me is the chance of a bad copy.

07-16-2010, 01:55 PM	#20
Reportage Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 739	Originally posted by nah I have the 50-135mm and now looking at the Sigma 70-200, but the thing that worries me is the chance of a bad copy. as long within warranty shouldnt be a problem.