[guillermovilas]

No problem with IQ indeed , only problem left is it's size and weight

Do you mostly shoot handheld ???

[Mike.P®]

No problem with IQ indeed , only problem left is it's size and weight

Do you mostly shoot handheld ???

I always shoot handheld .. even for macro.
Bought a decent tripod 2 years ago and have used it once.

The 60-250mm is certainly easier to use due to it's smaller size but the AF speed is it's let down imo .. although I found it much better on the K-7 (which I have just sold).

[Digitalis]

The 60-250mm is certainly easier to use due to it's smaller size

the Pentax 60-250mm f/4 at 250mm is actually pretty much the same length as the sigma 100-300mm f/4.

[guillermovilas]

the Pentax 60-250mm f/4 at 250mm is actually pretty much the same length as the sigma 100-300mm f/4.

Good to know , thanks

By the way , great country to live in , i lived in Canberra from 72 to 76

[Mike.P®]

the Pentax 60-250mm f/4 at 250mm is actually pretty much the same length as the sigma 100-300mm f/4.

I actually meant weight

The Pentax is about 20% lighter I believe.

[deadwolfbones]

Fantastic pictures you made there , did you use a monopod or were they all made handheld ?
Because i use to own this lens too and it was real heavy , i sold it because at that time i didn't have any use for it.I can't imagine holding it around the circuit for hours
That's why i'm seriously considering the Pentax 60-250mm f/4 , it's 300gr lighter , much much shorter and it makes sublime pictures too

Now that i have a new bunch of rider friends i regularly go see them at the Zolder circuit just 6 miles from where i live ( Zolder is in Belgium and sadly it's the place where the famous F1 driver Gilles Villeneuve lost he's life ).

The thing is that there are wires all around the circuit , can't get a good view or reach from a close distance , thinking of using a ladder but that could be dangerous , i see that's the advantage you had with your pictures , looks like you had plenty of close access

These were all handheld (maybe a few resting on the inflatable blue barriers). The Sigma is a heavy lens (especially when paired with the D700 and grip, with the D3 grip battery), but it's not unmanageable. Helps build muscle.

I do have some advantages... the track is small and lets me get close to the action without a press pass. I also live in the desert, which means bright sunshine virtually all the time. That said, I feel like I could use the Sigma in most situations and get great results.

p.s., I'm familiar with Zolder. Really cool circuit.

[Digitalis]

The Pentax is about 20% lighter I believe.

oh it's 20% lighter? big flipping deal.

with this kind of image quality the extra weight is worth it, plus you will never have to worry about SDM failiure.

---

Last edited by Digitalis; 04-29-2011 at 05:18 AM.

[Lowell Goudge]

In my opinion in shooting motor sports, unless you are camped at a spot where the only shot is one particular focal length a zoom is much more practical than a prime. if you are so far away that zoom does not matter, then all you are getting is snapshots anyway.

Depending on what zoom you get, the options are quite variable.

If someone told me tomorrow to go out and take motor sport shots, I would go with my Sigma APO70-200F2.8EX (non DG non macro) and the 1.4x and 2x sigma TCs.

I would prefer this over a 100-300 or 130-400 zoom only because If I don't need the reach I have F2.8 and that is important.

The first generation Sigma zoom is a great lens and I would recommend getting one used over a new HSM version because of the ability to use TCs. There are no HSM TCs available at this time.

On this version of lens (and I use it for wildlife also) I find no noticible loss of IQ when using the TCs. There are many other forum members who also have this lens and produce great results consistently with it.

You could go with another makers 70-200 as well, and use a TC, but you would need someone else to comment on performance.

[Mike.P®]

oh it's 20% lighter? big flipping deal.

with this kind of image quality the extra weight is worth it, plus you will never have to worry about SDM failiure.

Ummm, if you actually read my posts I was agreeing with you that the Sigma 100-300mm f4 is the better choice

Just saying it's slightly heavier as this seems to be a concern for the OP.

[Digitalis]

Ummm, if you actually read my posts I was agreeing with you that the Sigma 100-300mm f4 is the better choice Just saying it's slightly heavier as this seems to be a concern for the OP.

well I suggest the OP man up. unless he chooses to end up with a 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 slow as hell consumer zoom lens. a 20% difference in weight is a bit trivial.

though on more practical concerns the tripod collar on the DA 60-250 is actually really well designed, I wish sigma lenses had that detachable foot on them, instead of that annoying ring..because those tripod collar feet could be made to be interchangeable between longer lenses. Providing we ever see lenses longer than 300mm

[jpzk]

Why did you sell you're Sigma 100-300/4 just because of the weight
So that's just my point , if i decide not to go for this lens it will be only because of it's size and weight and then i could choose between both Pentax , 300/4 & 60-250/4.
Knowing what it's mainly for ( motorbikers on circuit ) why would the 300/4 be better then the versatile 60-250/4
The 300/4 : 1.07kg and 184mm long
The 60-250/4 : 1.230kg and 167mm long

Tests say the 60-250/4 is excellent and as good if not better then prime lenses at all focals , sharp wide open .
What makes me doubt is no one has this lens , it doesn't sell and you hardly read anything on any forums about it's great performance.
On the other end there are plenty of 300/4 owners and plenty of great comments everywhere , for many this is the ultimate Pentax long range tele

You may find it strange but the main reason I did sell it (the Sigma) WAS because of the size and weight. I do walk, climb, and trek in some tricky trails and off-trail areas; on slippery rocks and deep woods .... the smaller lens is great. Oh! I had forgotten: the DA*300/4 is weather sealed.
I have no clue about the 60-250 (I never owned it nor tried it) but when it came out I almost became tempted to get that. Then I realized that I was losing 50mm reach; maybe not a big deal for some, but to me, yes.

Don't forget: a quality tele zoom lens, either the Pentax DA*60-230 or the Sigma 100-300/4, is very versatile in the sense that you might sometimes want get closer to the subject while a prime 300mm might not allow you to.

Best of luck in deciding what you'd like!

JP

[Digitalis]

..very versatile in the sense that you might sometimes want get closer to the subject while a prime 300mm might not allow you to.

the sigma 100-300mm f/4 has a minimum focusing distance of 1.8 metres which absolutely sucks in comparison to the DA*300mm f/4 which has a MFD of 1m

[deadwolfbones]

Dunno how much motorsports shooting you'd do closer than 1.8m, though.

[pacerr]

Consider picking up a used Tamron/ProMaster or Sigma 70-300/F4-5.6 (and maybe a 1.4X TC) to experiment with. For a minimal investment (which you could recover later if you wished) you'd have hands-on experience in what works for your shooting style and locations.

Then you could upgrade with confidence in your decision and have the patience to wait for that great bargain deal.

I found it useful to visit the track when no one was present. You'll find vantage points and lines-of-sight you can't imagine while in the crowd during a race.

H2

[guillermovilas]

I just came up with another option which could solve the 2 main problems which are REACH & WEIGHT

I've allready got a pentax 50-135mm f/2.8 so i'd buy a Pentax 200mm f/2.8 with a Teleconverter

I'd then have a 200mm f/2.8 & 280mm f/4 for a small size of 134mm long and 825gr heavy.

What do you think about this option
I've never used a teleconverter before , i suppose it will work with AF at 280mm
Which converter to buy and will the IQ still match the Sigma at 300mm