Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-08-2010, 12:01 AM   #46
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
BYMY141 - that was an excellent result considering not only were you shooting through glass but at 40,000 ISO !! Very impressive.

12-08-2010, 07:24 AM   #47
Pentaxian
Mike.P's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South Coast .. UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,776
K-5 and 60-250mm.





02-10-2011, 04:09 AM   #48
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,933
The 60-250 is simply brilliant piece of equipment. I don't think there would be a lens that could claim to produce better IQ. (Any brand)

Every time I schlepp this lens around during the day I curse its weight, but when I come home and see the pics I got with this lens I am at peace.

Just a few I shot January in Japan.

Greetings from sunny Melbourne

Last edited by Schraubstock; 07-24-2011 at 03:09 AM.
02-10-2011, 04:12 PM   #49
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
Doesn't appear to do too well on the bokeh front?

02-10-2011, 05:22 PM   #50
Veteran Member
StephenMerola's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southeast Wisconsin
Photos: Albums
Posts: 391
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
Doesn't appear to do too well on the bokeh front?
Out of focus areas look good to me. Some backgrounds just can't be tamed.
02-10-2011, 05:23 PM   #51
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
Doesn't appear to do too well on the bokeh front?
QuoteOriginally posted by StephenMerola Quote
Out of focus areas look good to me. Some backgrounds just can't be tamed.
The DA*60-250 does very well with OOF areas.
02-10-2011, 09:54 PM   #52
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,933
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
Doesn't appear to do too well on the bokeh front?
What? It does not? You could have knocked me over with a feather when I read your comment.

Greetings
02-11-2011, 11:08 AM   #53
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by Schraubstock Quote
What? It does not? You could have knocked me over with a feather when I read your comment.

Greetings
Ha Ha .... me too. Looks excellent.

I am undecided (and haven't yet sold the 4 lenses I will soon have up for sale) on the 60-250 vs *300.

Talking to the sales guy (yeah...I know) today and he gave the 60-250 better marks on virtually everything over the 300. Quicker AF ? Yep. Sharper ? Yep. Price ? Yep. I'm really not sure all that's true.

I always had the impression the 300 was sharper, had quicker AF and better bokeh. Doesn't it? Isn't it ?

02-11-2011, 11:15 AM   #54
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
Ha Ha .... me too. Looks excellent.

I am undecided (and haven't yet sold the 4 lenses I will soon have up for sale) on the 60-250 vs *300.

Talking to the sales guy (yeah...I know) today and he gave the 60-250 better marks on virtually everything over the 300. Quicker AF ? Yep. Sharper ? Yep. Price ? Yep. I'm really not sure all that's true.

I always had the impression the 300 was sharper, had quicker AF and better bokeh. Doesn't it? Isn't it ?
I've owned both at one time or another. I currently have the 60-250, although at the moment I am thinking about trading it for a 300.

I will tell you this, the two lenses are pretty close in terms of AF, sharpness and price. However, I would probably disagree with the sales guy on all accounts if you want to split hairs. As I recall the AF speed on the 300 was very fast. The 60-250 is quick, but I think the 300 edges it out a little bit. Same with sharpness; I've never had a complaint about the sharpness of the 60-250, but the 300 is a touch sharper wide open. Both have nice OOF area and to be honest don't recall well enough to judge one over the other. In terms of price, I don't know what your local prices are like, but here the 60-250 is slightly more expensive than the 300 (about $100 more).

Bottom line, all of these factors are close enough that the choice comes down to picking a zoom with a fantastic range vs. a prime with a little more reach. You really can't go wrong with either in terms of IQ, IMO.

Last edited by dgaies; 02-11-2011 at 12:20 PM.
02-11-2011, 11:20 AM   #55
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,260
I don't know if you checked the ratings on this site for both lenses, but the ratings are practically identical with the 60-250 getting the slight edge. The problem with that is that one grumpy person can change the rankings. You have to do that drop the highest and lowest scores for each camera when you do the ratings. I can't remember which lens, but somewhere in the lens review section, someone went on and on about how great a lens was, said they used it all the time, then gave it a 7 out of 10 because of some minor point he found irritating. You can't let one guy like that skew your ratings. So all you can really say is, they are both very good, and everyone who uses them is happy with them.
02-11-2011, 12:12 PM   #56
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
I've owned both at one time or another. I currnently have the 60-250, although at the moment I am thinking about trading it for a 300.

I will tell you this, the two lenses are pretty close in terms of AF, sharpness and price. However, I would probably disagree with the sales guy on all account if you want to split hairs. As I recall the AF speed on the 300 was very fast. The 60-250 is quick, but I think the 300 edges it out a little bit. Same with sharpness; I've never had a complaint about the sharpness of the 60-250, but the 300 is a touch sharper wide open. Both have nice OOF area and to be honest don't recall well enough to judge one over the other. In terms of price, I don't know what your local prices are like, but here the 60-250 is slightly more expensive than the 300 (about $100 more).

Bottom line, all of these factors are close enough that the choice comes down to picking a zoom with a fantastic range vs. a prime with a little more reach. You really can't go wrong with either in terms of IQ, IMO.
That's really interesting reading. Thank you for that. Yes I thought the *300 might (should) edge out the 60-250, it makes sense that it should. It's just that damn excellent range of the zoom that's tempting me !

Here the 60-250 is about US$50 LESS than the *300 (US$1250 vs US$1,300).

Yes Norm - I've seen those ratings and you are right, it is difficult to judge and people will usually rate their lenses high if they like them and trash them if they don't. Or give them a 1 or a 2 if they bought a faulty lense - which doesn't reflect the optical quality at al.
02-11-2011, 12:24 PM   #57
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
That's really interesting reading. Thank you for that. Yes I thought the *300 might (should) edge out the 60-250, it makes sense that it should. It's just that damn excellent range of the zoom that's tempting me !
You're welcome. The excellent range is quite tempting. The only reason I am thinking about making a trade of the 60-250 for the 300 is because I also have the DA*50-135 and the Tamron 70-200/2.8 (both of which I also really like) and I feel the DA*300 would compliment those lenses a bit better than the 60-250 currently does. Now one could argue that I could get rid of all of them and just keep the 60-250, but where's the fun in reducing the number of lenses you own!
02-11-2011, 12:26 PM   #58
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
dgaies : I have both of the TCs you have - do they play nicely with the 60-250 or better with the *300 ?
02-11-2011, 12:37 PM   #59
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
dgaies : I have both of the TCs you have - do they play nicely with the 60-250 or better with the *300 ?
The Pentax 1.7x plays nicely with most lenses as it has its own focusing mechanism. The extra half-stop loss puts the AF closer to the edge since both lenses have a max aperture of f/4, but I don't really recall that being a major issue. Obviously, as you know, the downside if you have to manually focus into the right range before engaging the AF of the 1.7x AF-A.

The Tamron 1.4x is a bit harder to judge. I always felt that it worked pretty well with the DA*300 and the DA*60-250. I say "pretty well" because the focus doesn't always lock on the first try and often a 2nd or 3rd attempt to lock is required. With both lenses you're still using the SDM motor inside the lens.

I haven't done a lot of testing in terms of IQ with the 1.4x and 60-250 (it's not a combo I've used often either), but I do recall checking out the DA*300 + 1.4x back when I had both and felt the IQ held up pretty well. Overall, I'd say that in terms of IQ retention, the DA*300 + TC is probably going to hold up a little better than the DA*60-250/4 @ 250mm + TC. But again, I haven't done a lot of testing of this hypothesis so I wouldn't put too much stock in that answer.

Last edited by dgaies; 02-11-2011 at 12:46 PM.
02-11-2011, 12:44 PM   #60
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
Again very interesting - thanks dgaies. More food for thought !

At present I'm using the Tamron BB 500mm Mirror for my long range shooting (manual focus of course) so having to do that with the AFA doesn't bother me at all since it locks in really fast once you're in the ballpark. My experiences with the Tamron 1.4x on other lenses are identical to yours - it seems to work well with everything - however it does focus hunt a lot.
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!
da* 60-250mm, 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
Which Zoom Lens? "Tamron AF 18-250mm", "Pentax-DA 18-250mm" or "Sigma 18-250mm" hoomanshb Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 07-30-2010 09:50 AM
PENTAX 18-250mm VS QUANTARAY 70-300mm@250mm charliezap Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 02-08-2010 11:38 PM
Air show or should I say Tank Show jbrowning Post Your Photos! 4 10-05-2008 09:59 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:53 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