Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

dmoisuk · 10-20-2010, 10:24 PM

Thank You all. I bought it this morning. Let the fun begin. Results so far good. I am sure it will get even better as I get used to it.

**Marc Langille** · 10-21-2010, 05:59 PM

Originally posted by G_Money

The last FA 250-600 I saw went for around $7,000 on eBay. That's over 4X the newest OS Bigma. A DA* 60-250 is a little more than a Bigma, but is only half the reach. If you can really find an FA 250-600 for a little more than a Bigma, please notify me. I'll buy every one that you can find at that price.

Agreed on that price for the FA 250-600 = I'll take two at $2000 each, thank you!

Originally posted by dmoisuk

Thought second hand might not be that expensive. A little more is a relative term.

BTW, the last FA* 250-600/5.6 I saw on Ebay sold for $7650, which is approx. MSRP:

The above lens was in excellent condition, except for the hood having scuff lines on it. I can honestly say that mine is in a bit better cosmetic condition - basically mint. There is one scuff on the foot of the tripod collar, not noticeable. The lens barrel and optics are pristine, the hood has a super tiny scuff mark on it.

Not sure why he had a Tamron 112mm filter on it - paranoid about dinging the front element?? It's not part of the FA* 250-600/5.6 lens' optical design, yet the FA* 600/4 had a filter...

Go figure - it's in the pamphlets... and confirmed with Ron, who owns both the FA* 600/4 and FA* 250-600/5.6.

Putting that aside, the Sigma options appear to be fine choices at much less cost.

Regards,
Mar

stevebrot · 10-21-2010, 06:16 PM

Marc,
Don't post stuff like that. I hate when I want things that I can't have!

Steve

**Marc Langille** · 10-21-2010, 06:30 PM

I did say mine was nearly mint, right? There is a tiny scuff mark on the hood...

No change since this shot:

Besides, this is good for your self control exercises...

Cheers.
Marc

opiet70 · 10-21-2010, 06:34 PM

Originally posted by Marc Langille

I did say mine was nearly mint, right? There is a tiny scuff mark on the hood...

Besides, this is good for your self control exercises...

Cheers.
Marc

Bloody tease...

dmoisuk · 10-21-2010, 06:44 PM

Originally posted by opiet70

Bloody tease...

Will you take $50 (fifty) bucks?

**dadipentak** · 10-21-2010, 06:44 PM

Originally posted by MRRiley

HEAVY, dangerous to people in front of you & HEAVY!

On the plus side, nobody blocks Riley from a shot and lives to tell the tale :~)

**Marc Langille** · 10-21-2010, 06:49 PM

No, this is teasing....

From left to right, DA50-200 for size reference, then FA* 80-200/2.8, FA* 200/4 macro, FA* 300/2.8, then the FA* 250-600/5.6. Click on the image below to load it into a new tab/window, then click on the image again to resize it correctly:

Besides, you need to know how big a lens really is. I find it funny that people think the Bigma and the 300/2.8 lenses (which are similar in weight at 5.5lbs), are "big and heavy". The FA* 250-600 is almost 21'' long with the hood extended and weight 12.75lbs. It's all relative!

Cheers,
Marc

My apologies to the OP for (temporarily) hijacking this thread... sorry.

**Marc Langille** · 10-21-2010, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by dadipentak

On the plus side, nobody blocks Riley from a shot and lives to tell the tale :~)

I suspect you are right. I'm not small either, but I'm just saying that you're probably on the money with Mike being in the winners circle...

dmoisuk · 10-21-2010, 08:25 PM

Originally posted by Marc Langille

No, this is teasing....

From left to right, DA50-200 for size reference, then FA* 80-200/2.8, FA* 200/4 macro, FA* 300/2.8, then the FA* 250-600/5.6. Click on the image below to load it into a new tab/window, then click on the image again to resize it correctly:

Besides, you need to know how big a lens really is. I find it funny that people think the Bigma and the 300/2.8 lenses (which are similar in weight at 5.5lbs), are "big and heavy". The FA* 250-600 is almost 21'' long with the hood extended and weight 12.75lbs. It's all relative!

Cheers,
Marc

My apologies to the OP for (temporarily) hijacking this thread... sorry.

Tell us what the other lenses are?

**Marc Langille** · 10-21-2010, 08:30 PM

Originally posted by dmoisuk

Tell us what the other lenses are?

Hi Doug,

The listed lenses are described from left to right and you quoted them in your response. I am not sure what you are asking - is it about that row of lenses shown in my last image post or something else? I'll be happy to clarify once you let me know.

Regards,
Marc

dmoisuk · 10-22-2010, 08:06 AM

Originally posted by Marc Langille

Hi Doug,

The listed lenses are described from left to right and you quoted them in your response. I am not sure what you are asking - is it about that row of lenses shown in my last image post or something else? I'll be happy to clarify once you let me know.

Regards,
Marc

Sorry missed that part of the post.

Nice collection. Use them all?
Thanks

dmoisuk · 10-22-2010, 08:31 AM

**Marc Langille** · 10-22-2010, 03:20 PM

Originally posted by dmoisuk

Sorry missed that part of the post.

Nice collection. Use them all?
Thanks

The FA* 80-200/2.8 was sold late last year since it wasn't being used and it funded the rather expensive Gitzo GT3541XLS carbon fiber tripod and Wimberley WH-200 gimbal head. I still own the other lenses. I've not really done much macro of late, but that's because I spent a lot of time involved in birding photography with the FA* 250-600/5.6.

Also own the DA 12-24, so my only gap in the FL range is 24-50mm and 200-250mm. I may eventually buy another zoom to cover that range. Otherwise I have it covered from 12-600mm!

Cheers,
Marc

dmoisuk · 10-22-2010, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by Marc Langille

The FA* 80-200/2.8 was sold late last year since it wasn't being used and it funded the rather expensive Gitzo GT3541XLS carbon fiber tripod and Wimberley WH-200 gimbal head. I still own the other lenses. I've not really done much macro of late, but that's because I spent a lot of time involved in birding photography with the FA* 250-600/5.6.

Also own the DA 12-24, so my only gap in the FL range is 24-50mm and 200-250mm. I may eventually buy another zoom to cover that range. Otherwise I have it covered from 12-600mm!

Cheers,
Marc

My Pentax 18 - 250 is awesome Hardly ever take it off!

10-21-2010, 05:59 PM	#17
Marc Langille Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NW Arkansas, USA Posts: 4,710	Originally posted by G_Money The last FA 250-600 I saw went for around $7,000 on eBay. That's over 4X the newest OS Bigma. A DA* 60-250 is a little more than a Bigma, but is only half the reach. If you can really find an FA 250-600 for a little more than a Bigma, please notify me. I'll buy every one that you can find at that price. Agreed on that price for the FA 250-600 = I'll take two at $2000 each, thank you! Originally posted by dmoisuk Thought second hand might not be that expensive. A little more is a relative term. BTW, the last FA* 250-600/5.6 I saw on Ebay sold for $7650, which is approx. MSRP: The above lens was in excellent condition, except for the hood having scuff lines on it. I can honestly say that mine is in a bit better cosmetic condition - basically mint. There is one scuff on the foot of the tripod collar, not noticeable. The lens barrel and optics are pristine, the hood has a super tiny scuff mark on it. Not sure why he had a Tamron 112mm filter on it - paranoid about dinging the front element?? It's not part of the FA* 250-600/5.6 lens' optical design, yet the FA* 600/4 had a filter... Go figure - it's in the pamphlets... and confirmed with Ron, who owns both the FA* 600/4 and FA* 250-600/5.6. Putting that aside, the Sigma options appear to be fine choices at much less cost. Regards, Mar Last edited by Marc Langille; 10-21-2010 at 06:29 PM.

10-22-2010, 08:31 AM	#28
dmoisuk Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Regina, Saskatchewan Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26 Original Poster	Bigma Howls At Moon

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wanted - Acquired: Sigma 50-500mm (BigMa) or 150-500mm	Malsi	Sold Items	0	03-01-2010 06:01 AM
Sigma 50-500mm Versus Five Star 500mm	Nowhere Matt	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	02-26-2010 12:56 PM
Sigma 50-500mm vs 150-500mm or Pentax DA 55-300mm with 1.4 TC?	mikejustice	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	12-18-2009 07:59 PM
Sigma 50-500mm or sigma 150-500mm??	stormcloud	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	10-30-2009 05:20 AM

10-20-2010, 10:24 PM	#16
dmoisuk Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Regina, Saskatchewan Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26 Original Poster	Thank You all. I bought it this morning. Let the fun begin. Results so far good. I am sure it will get even better as I get used to it.

10-21-2010, 06:16 PM	#18
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Marc, Don't post stuff like that. I hate when I want things that I can't have! Steve

10-21-2010, 06:30 PM	#19
Marc Langille Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NW Arkansas, USA Posts: 4,710	I did say mine was nearly mint, right? There is a tiny scuff mark on the hood... No change since this shot: Besides, this is good for your self control exercises... Cheers. Marc

10-21-2010, 06:34 PM	#20
opiet70 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dallas, TX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 499	Originally posted by Marc Langille I did say mine was nearly mint, right? There is a tiny scuff mark on the hood... Besides, this is good for your self control exercises... Cheers. Marc Bloody tease...

10-21-2010, 06:44 PM	#21
dmoisuk Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Regina, Saskatchewan Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26 Original Poster	Originally posted by opiet70 Bloody tease... Will you take $50 (fifty) bucks?

10-21-2010, 06:44 PM	#22
dadipentak Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Baltimore, Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,590	Originally posted by MRRiley HEAVY, dangerous to people in front of you & HEAVY! On the plus side, nobody blocks Riley from a shot and lives to tell the tale :~)

10-21-2010, 06:49 PM	#23
Marc Langille Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NW Arkansas, USA Posts: 4,710	No, this is teasing.... From left to right, DA50-200 for size reference, then FA* 80-200/2.8, FA* 200/4 macro, FA* 300/2.8, then the FA* 250-600/5.6. Click on the image below to load it into a new tab/window, then click on the image again to resize it correctly: Besides, you need to know how big a lens really is. I find it funny that people think the Bigma and the 300/2.8 lenses (which are similar in weight at 5.5lbs), are "big and heavy". The FA* 250-600 is almost 21'' long with the hood extended and weight 12.75lbs. It's all relative! Cheers, Marc My apologies to the OP for (temporarily) hijacking this thread... sorry.

10-21-2010, 06:55 PM	#24
Marc Langille Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NW Arkansas, USA Posts: 4,710	Originally posted by dadipentak On the plus side, nobody blocks Riley from a shot and lives to tell the tale :~) I suspect you are right. I'm not small either, but I'm just saying that you're probably on the money with Mike being in the winners circle...

10-21-2010, 08:25 PM	#25
dmoisuk Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Regina, Saskatchewan Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26 Original Poster	Originally posted by Marc Langille No, this is teasing.... From left to right, DA50-200 for size reference, then FA* 80-200/2.8, FA* 200/4 macro, FA* 300/2.8, then the FA* 250-600/5.6. Click on the image below to load it into a new tab/window, then click on the image again to resize it correctly: Besides, you need to know how big a lens really is. I find it funny that people think the Bigma and the 300/2.8 lenses (which are similar in weight at 5.5lbs), are "big and heavy". The FA* 250-600 is almost 21'' long with the hood extended and weight 12.75lbs. It's all relative! Cheers, Marc My apologies to the OP for (temporarily) hijacking this thread... sorry. Tell us what the other lenses are?

10-21-2010, 08:30 PM	#26
Marc Langille Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NW Arkansas, USA Posts: 4,710	Originally posted by dmoisuk Tell us what the other lenses are? Hi Doug, The listed lenses are described from left to right and you quoted them in your response. I am not sure what you are asking - is it about that row of lenses shown in my last image post or something else? I'll be happy to clarify once you let me know. Regards, Marc

10-22-2010, 08:06 AM	#27
dmoisuk Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Regina, Saskatchewan Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26 Original Poster	Originally posted by Marc Langille Hi Doug, The listed lenses are described from left to right and you quoted them in your response. I am not sure what you are asking - is it about that row of lenses shown in my last image post or something else? I'll be happy to clarify once you let me know. Regards, Marc Sorry missed that part of the post. Nice collection. Use them all? Thanks

10-22-2010, 03:20 PM	#29
Marc Langille Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NW Arkansas, USA Posts: 4,710	Originally posted by dmoisuk Sorry missed that part of the post. Nice collection. Use them all? Thanks The FA* 80-200/2.8 was sold late last year since it wasn't being used and it funded the rather expensive Gitzo GT3541XLS carbon fiber tripod and Wimberley WH-200 gimbal head. I still own the other lenses. I've not really done much macro of late, but that's because I spent a lot of time involved in birding photography with the FA* 250-600/5.6. Also own the DA 12-24, so my only gap in the FL range is 24-50mm and 200-250mm. I may eventually buy another zoom to cover that range. Otherwise I have it covered from 12-600mm! Cheers, Marc

10-22-2010, 03:48 PM	#30
dmoisuk Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Regina, Saskatchewan Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26 Original Poster	Originally posted by Marc Langille The FA* 80-200/2.8 was sold late last year since it wasn't being used and it funded the rather expensive Gitzo GT3541XLS carbon fiber tripod and Wimberley WH-200 gimbal head. I still own the other lenses. I've not really done much macro of late, but that's because I spent a lot of time involved in birding photography with the FA* 250-600/5.6. Also own the DA 12-24, so my only gap in the FL range is 24-50mm and 200-250mm. I may eventually buy another zoom to cover that range. Otherwise I have it covered from 12-600mm! Cheers, Marc My Pentax 18 - 250 is awesome Hardly ever take it off!

Sigma 50-500mm

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!