Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-21-2010, 11:26 PM   #16
Pentaxian
Miguel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Near Seattle
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,697
QuoteOriginally posted by patriotap Quote
would the f4 be ok on the da* for night sports? or forgo that and just go with the 2.8
It's gonna be a camera capability issue more than anything. I've not used the K-5, but if you can squeeze acceptable quality out of the higher ISOs, than go for it. The common wisdom is f2.8, but the cameras then weren't performing magic as these brand new ones seem to. Test it out on traffic in streets lighted similarly as the stadium you're shooting at.

Personally I never go beyond f5.6 for sports in general to isolate action from the distracting backgrounds. My preference would be f4-4.5. I enjoyed the quality of the DA* indoors (events, not sports) at f4.5 a lot. I found f2.8 to be the weakest aperture, but usable.


M

11-21-2010, 11:33 PM   #17
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,957
From among Pentax's current offerings, I'd say it's this one:

Pentax Zoom Telephoto 60-250mm f/4 ED DA* SDM Autofocus 21750

The F4 should be adequate for night photography on the K-5.

In general, either the FA* 300 or FA* 250-600mm.
SMC Pentax-FA* 300mm F2.8 ED [IF] Lens Reviews - Pentax Lens Review Database
SMC Pentax-FA* 250-600mm F5.6 ED [IF] Lens Reviews - Pentax Lens Review Database

I don't recommend the 600mm F4, as it's simply too long without the shorter zoom range.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

11-21-2010, 11:50 PM   #18
Senior Member
patriotap's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Jersey
Photos: Albums
Posts: 159
Original Poster
Thanks Adam, Ive been looking at the da* 60-250 and the Sigma 7-200, reading reviews and such.

Just hard to decide, the sigma is getting good reviews for its AF speed and being a 2.8 vs the DA* f4.
11-21-2010, 11:53 PM   #19
Senior Member
patriotap's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Jersey
Photos: Albums
Posts: 159
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Miguel Quote
It's gonna be a camera capability issue more than anything. I've not used the K-5, but if you can squeeze acceptable quality out of the higher ISOs, than go for it. The common wisdom is f2.8, but the cameras then weren't performing magic as these brand new ones seem to. Test it out on traffic in streets lighted similarly as the stadium you're shooting at.

Personally I never go beyond f5.6 for sports in general to isolate action from the distracting backgrounds. My preference would be f4-4.5. I enjoyed the quality of the DA* indoors (events, not sports) at f4.5 a lot. I found f2.8 to be the weakest aperture, but usable.


M
Hmmm interesting. If I were to go with the da* then I guess I could get rid of my 55-300 and da* 50-135

11-22-2010, 12:03 AM   #20
Pentaxian
Miguel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Near Seattle
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,697
QuoteOriginally posted by patriotap Quote
Hmmm interesting. If I were to go with the da* then I guess I could get rid of my 55-300 and da* 50-135
Depends on what you need a mid-to-long zoom for. The DA* 50-135mm is nuts and bolts for events and portraits even. It's lighter and less bulky than the DA* 60-250mm. They may overlap some, but that f2.8 is very useful.

If it's outdoor sports, especially soccer, you do need serious length. The goal is to fit the player bodies into about 2/3 of the frame. You can crop, but the more you slice the more soft the image.

M
11-22-2010, 12:35 AM   #21
Senior Member
patriotap's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Jersey
Photos: Albums
Posts: 159
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Miguel Quote
Depends on what you need a mid-to-long zoom for. The DA* 50-135mm is nuts and bolts for events and portraits even. It's lighter and less bulky than the DA* 60-250mm. They may overlap some, but that f2.8 is very useful.

If it's outdoor sports, especially soccer, you do need serious length. The goal is to fit the player bodies into about 2/3 of the frame. You can crop, but the more you slice the more soft the image.

M
Not doing any events or portraits, just looking at indoor and outdoor sports. Dont think I need the 50-135 for indoor and the 60-250 could do both. The 55-300, wouldnt be needed either, not into wildlife shots.

Leaning towards the 60-250.......
11-22-2010, 02:01 AM   #22
Pentaxian
Arpe's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,330
QuoteOriginally posted by patriotap Quote
Thanks Adam, Ive been looking at the da* 60-250 and the Sigma 7-200, reading reviews and such.
All things being equal I'd get the Sigma plus a 1.4x TC. BUT nobody makes TC that's completely reliably compatible with HSM (Sigma's high speed motor). I currently use an older non-HSM Sigma 70-200, usually with the 1.4x TC on if it's daytime, so that gives a 105-280 with f4 of light. I have to use f2.8 for the night games so take the TC off- so check your lighting, though with the K-5 it would appear that you may be able to bump up the ISO to compensate for lack of f2.8 if you only have f4.

My understanding from reading here is that Pentax's SDM is quite slow, so check that out.

If you see my website I do this quite a lot, and the mere fact that there isn't an HSM TC out there has me looking at other brands. So before you lay down lots of dosh be sure you want to stick with Pentax. If this is just fun, you'll be fine. If you want to get serious with it, consider all alternatives.
11-22-2010, 05:35 AM   #23
Pentaxian
8540tomg's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,444
I'm a prime sort of guy and I prefer them for most situations. I shoot a fair bit of high school footbal from the sidelines and I like the 200mm focal length. I use an old K 200/2.5 and get pretty good results. I played the game for many years and I can aticipate the action fairly well. I know manual focus without AE is not everyone's cup of tea but it can be done.





The A* 200/2.8 would make things easier with its A setting and offers the same great sharpness as the K 200/2.5. If you don't like MF I would seriously consider the DA* 200/2.8. I suspect this will be my next lens purchase. For shooting football from the sidelines I really like the 200mm focal length.

Jose Bautista gets ready to take a cut at a Blue Jays - Rays game last summer. Terrible lighting as the dome was closed that day.



Not much good for birding but great for football and baseball.

Have fun

Tom G


Last edited by 8540tomg; 11-22-2010 at 10:55 AM. Reason: typo
11-22-2010, 03:11 PM   #24
Senior Member
patriotap's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Jersey
Photos: Albums
Posts: 159
Original Poster
Well, the $ DID burn right through my pocket...imagine that!

I ordered the DA* 60-250, will be here tomorrow, Im shooting some football thanksgiving day so will see how it works!

Check in the marketplace on friday, if you see a "Like New" da* 60-250, you will know how it went!
11-22-2010, 03:42 PM   #25
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 809
Wow, you make decisions quickly. Good luck with the 60-250, I've heard great things about it. I'm sure you will like it. For me, I've been shooting some sports, and when thinking about the 60-250, I always thought that it's not long enough for outdoor sports, and not fast enough for indoor. With the K-5, I think the concern about it being fast enough for indoor is greatly mitigated. I actually bought a Sigma 100-300 f4, and absolutely love it. One of the fastest focusing lenses I have. When doing soccer on a big field, I would love longer still. There are also times where when the action comes at your 100 isn't wide enough too though. Definitely not a great choice for most situations indoors. The 60-250 will help that. The 60-250 seems like a more practical lens for general shooting situations because of the big range, and being able to go down to 60. You may itch for more length, but you would if you had a 300 too! Enjoy, I hope it works out well.
11-22-2010, 04:11 PM   #26
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
Good luck with your DA*60-250, it sounds like a fantastic lens. I wouldn't sell the DA*50-135 though as it has the extra stop and is smaller, at least wait a few months and see if you ever use it. The 55-300 though is redundant (other than for a travel tele option maybe??).
11-22-2010, 04:15 PM   #27
Senior Member
patriotap's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Jersey
Photos: Albums
Posts: 159
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jake14mw Quote
Wow, you make decisions quickly. Good luck with the 60-250, I've heard great things about it. I'm sure you will like it. For me, I've been shooting some sports, and when thinking about the 60-250, I always thought that it's not long enough for outdoor sports, and not fast enough for indoor. With the K-5, I think the concern about it being fast enough for indoor is greatly mitigated. I actually bought a Sigma 100-300 f4, and absolutely love it. One of the fastest focusing lenses I have. When doing soccer on a big field, I would love longer still. There are also times where when the action comes at your 100 isn't wide enough too though. Definitely not a great choice for most situations indoors. The 60-250 will help that. The 60-250 seems like a more practical lens for general shooting situations because of the big range, and being able to go down to 60. You may itch for more length, but you would if you had a 300 too! Enjoy, I hope it works out well.
Yep, I dont like to be in that "analysis paralysis " mode to long! I decided mostly on the 60-250, because of the weather sealing. since one of the main reasons I got the pentax camera to begin with. Wouldnt have made too much sense to have a weather sealed camera out in inclimate weather the lens couldnt be.

So I can now have my da* 16-50 on one body and the da* 60-250 on another out in any kind of weather.

I have a TC, so maybe using that later may give me alittle more "reach" if I need it at some point.

At least thats my logic to come to this point!

Another is that the one stop difference will hopefully be made up with the K5 able to hit higher ISO.

The only "unknown" is how fast the AF speed is and accuracy, but since Im just getting started, I can test it and see at the level Im at anyway.

Last edited by patriotap; 11-22-2010 at 04:48 PM.
11-22-2010, 04:34 PM   #28
Pentaxian
Arpe's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,330
Let us know how you get on, inside and outside.

How great would a 60-250/f2.8 be ?
11-22-2010, 04:57 PM   #29
Senior Member
patriotap's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Jersey
Photos: Albums
Posts: 159
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
Good luck with your DA*60-250, it sounds like a fantastic lens. I wouldn't sell the DA*50-135 though as it has the extra stop and is smaller, at least wait a few months and see if you ever use it. The 55-300 though is redundant (other than for a travel tele option maybe??).
I used it once for an american soccer game, didnt like the reach that much so I switched to my 55-300. I used it one other time for a parade, which it was nice for that, but the 60-250 can do that also. Other than those 2 times, I havent used it.
11-22-2010, 05:20 PM   #30
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
QuoteOriginally posted by patriotap Quote
I used it once for an american soccer game, didnt like the reach that much so I switched to my 55-300. I used it one other time for a parade, which it was nice for that, but the 60-250 can do that also. Other than those 2 times, I havent used it.
I guess it should go then, no point in owning a lens you dont use no matter how good it is.
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, lens, pentax lens, slr lens, sports
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
lens for sports sub5runner Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 11-06-2010 08:48 PM
Sports Lens Help ecwoj Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 05-28-2010 07:01 PM
Sports Lens - which one is best? roguez Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 11-18-2009 10:59 AM
Sports lens EAD Studios Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 08-25-2008 08:37 AM
Better lens for indoor sports - or maybe not? WMBP Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 04-23-2007 03:07 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:42 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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