Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-01-2007, 02:23 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Wales, UK
Posts: 645
50-200 replacement - any recommendations ?

I'm looking to replace the 50-200 kit lens with something of better quality - would welcome suggestions. Unfortunately I don't have endless funds so I'm a little limited on price

thanks

simon

09-01-2007, 02:52 PM   #2
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 92
If you need AF the F 70-210 is your best bet if you can find one. Other than that you're getting into the 2.8 lenses which will be more expensive (>$1000).
09-01-2007, 03:14 PM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Wales, UK
Posts: 645
Original Poster
2 example shots with 50-200

Thanks Maggie...

Maybe I should explain a little further - I've just attended a Hot air balloon festival here in North Wales, which was basically my first trip out with the 50-200. Having take quite a lot of shots I'm quite dissappointed with the colour/sharpness of the images the 50-200 has produced (2 examples included) - certainly nowhere near the quality of my new Sigma 17-70.

It could be my inexperience with tele lenses or am I expecting too much from the lens ?

thanks

simon



09-01-2007, 03:38 PM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Washington, D.C., USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 417
QuoteOriginally posted by simonkit Quote
Thanks Maggie...

Maybe I should explain a little further - I've just attended a Hot air balloon festival here in North Wales, which was basically my first trip out with the 50-200. Having take quite a lot of shots I'm quite dissappointed with the colour/sharpness of the images the 50-200 has produced (2 examples included) - certainly nowhere near the quality of my new Sigma 17-70.

It could be my inexperience with tele lenses or am I expecting too much from the lens ?
Simon,
Here is a link to a gallery of photos all taken with the Pentax 50-200 on a mostly cloudy day(shot in raw and enhanced with UnsharpMask in Photoshop). http://erlhouston.smugmug.com/gallery/2831097/1/151535332 Personally, I like the results I get from my copy. For the moment I am keeping it along with the DA*50-135 for the extra reach. I think for your money it is about as good as you can do, assuming you have a good copy. Sigma makes a lens in a similar range. I also used one of the incarnations of the Sigma 70-300f4-5.6 for many years and was happy with it. Best wishes

09-01-2007, 03:49 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Wales, UK
Posts: 645
Original Poster
Having just read through several posts regarding "tele" choices many suggest the 50-200 is the best budget options (against Tamron/Sigma 70-300) - pentax SMC FAJ 75-300mm also seems recommended.

I wonder if I may have a bad copy - how is it possible to check this though ?

thanks

simon

Last edited by simonkit; 09-01-2007 at 03:59 PM.
09-01-2007, 04:23 PM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,004
Tamron 18-250?



I just received this lens but I am already impressed with it. I can't see where I will ever use my 50-200 again now that I have this. It delivers more range and much better IQ all in a small, light package. This may at last be the real "walkabout" lens. I've only taken a dozen or so shots, but enough to see the difference immediately.

Last edited by Rupert; 02-07-2015 at 09:26 AM.
09-01-2007, 05:36 PM   #7
Veteran Member
PaulAndAPentax's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 390
I have the Tamron 28-300 on my K10D much of the time. I like it quite a bit, my only complaint with it is CA.
09-01-2007, 05:37 PM   #8
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 264
QuoteOriginally posted by Maggie Quote
If you need AF the F 70-210 is your best bet if you can find one. Other than that you're getting into the 2.8 lenses which will be more expensive (>$1000).
Also there are no f/2.8 lenses that go beyond the 135mm of the new 50-135... unless you are prepared to take out a mortgage or commit murder to get your hands on one of the older FA* lenses or third-party ones no longer in production.

But then maybe that situation will change over the course of the next year or so... hint hint Pentax

09-01-2007, 05:43 PM   #9
Senior Member
jslifoaw's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Toronto/Victoria
Posts: 262
I actually like those photos very much. A better lens will probably not help terribly much (unless you happen to go out at dawn or dusk next time, where F/2.8 might help).

Shooting at a distance, you sometimes experience atmospheric effects which might deteriorate the image, i.e. haziness.

If the weather is dull (like it often is in the UK and here in Victoria, BC), you might be surprised by how much better things look when the weather is clearer or sunnier too.

Additionally, I find the out-of-camera JPEGs a bit too dull for my liking, so I usually shoot +2 saturation, -2 contrast, +1 sharpness (K100D), or shoot RAW.

But I think the lens itself is doing a good job in your photos!
09-01-2007, 09:01 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Owego, NY
Posts: 976
Yeah, those photos look quite decent to me.

As mentioned, there are some situations where even the most expensive lens on the planet won't help you, and those photos are one of them - As far as I can tell, what you are complaining about is atmospheric haze. The weather conditions were obviously pretty bad (in terms of haze) in the original poster's examples.

Possibly trying a different white balance in the RAW conversion process might improve the colors a bit. They do look like the color temperature is a bit cool. You did shoot RAW, right?
09-02-2007, 01:20 AM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Wales, UK
Posts: 645
Original Poster
Thanks everyone for the assistance. I did consider the weather conditions & whilst it wasn't the best I didn't think haze was too present - these were taken from above 1000feet though. I'll definitely give the lens an outing in better weather conditions before making any decisions.

-- As alternatives go it seems the Tamron/Sigma 70-300 are not much (if any) of an improvement so probably wouldn't give me any noticeable improvement.

The Tamron 18-250 sounds a possible alternative -- it gets excellent reviews, particularly consider the focal range & obviously would serve a useful purpose as a travel lens too

simon
09-02-2007, 07:22 AM   #12
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 269
I think the first photo is just slightly out of focus. The second photo looks very nice to my eyes and doubt you will be able to do better than the DA 50-200 without spending much more money.

Regards,

Ted
09-02-2007, 07:42 AM   #13
Pentaxian
hinman's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fremont, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,427
I like the two pictures you posted

Maybe I have untrained eyes and I am new to my dSLR. I would prefer the color, sharpness and contrast with 17-70 but it does not have the long focal range of the DA 50-200.

I really like my DA 50-200 for its color, bokeh and sharpness. And I like especially for its light weight and its very useful focal range. Again, I have untrained eyes and I returned my 1st copy for failing focus lock at 50mm for distant and infinity objects. I hope you don't mind me posting many pictures.

Here are few sample shot form DA 50-200 that I like

#1



#2 (indoor and outdoor at long focal range)




#3


#4 chasing my boy, running and shooting at the same time


#5 indoor portraits around 50-90 range


#6 Hiking


#7 bokeh


#8 Contrast


#9 Sharpness


And I have few posts on my liking and photozone.de review concerns on the lens.

color:
Color from Pentax DA 50-200 - Hin's Tech Corner

concern on photozone.de
Photozone.de Pentax DA 50-200 review - Hin's Tech Corner

portraits using da 50-200
Portraits with Pentax DA 50-200 - Hin's Tech Corner

Thanks,
Hin

Last edited by hinman; 09-02-2007 at 08:03 AM.
09-02-2007, 08:23 AM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Wales, UK
Posts: 645
Original Poster
Thanks again everyone for the info / assistance.

As I mentioned I'll give the 50-200 a few more goes in better lighting - I took a lot of shots & have quite a few out of focus. This is more likely a result of my inexperience with tele-photo photography. The lighting was low & I was shooting a full zoom quite a lot - as good as the Image Stabilisation on the camera is it can't compensate with shutter speeds that are too low to freeze motion !!

As soon as I get chance I'll repost on my next results

simon
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!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
18-200+mm lens recommendations varian Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 11-03-2010 05:18 AM
For Sale - Sold: Tokina 80-200/2.8 KA; K 135/2.5; M 200/4; Tamron 70-150/2.8 soft thomasxie Sold Items 6 02-26-2010 11:08 AM
Recommendations in 50-200 zoom range Arpe Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 09-11-2006 05:11 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:35 AM. | 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