Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-10-2010, 04:08 PM   #1
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 764
LBA 60-250mm

I thought I would throw this idea out for discussion since I am considering once again getting rid of my 50-135mm and DA 55-300mm and getting the 60-250mm.
Does anyone have both the 50-135 and the 60-250? If so, I am wondering about the size/weight difference. I like to travel with a Lowepro Classified 160 with my 16-50 and either the 50-135 or the 55-300. Wondering if the 60-250 would be able to fit in that bag comfortably.

Any ideas??

12-10-2010, 04:17 PM   #2
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by GaryH Quote
I thought I would throw this idea out for discussion since I am considering once again getting rid of my 50-135mm and DA 55-300mm and getting the 60-250mm.
Does anyone have both the 50-135 and the 60-250? If so, I am wondering about the size/weight difference. I like to travel with a Lowepro Classified 160 with my 16-50 and either the 50-135 or the 55-300. Wondering if the 60-250 would be able to fit in that bag comfortably.

Any ideas??
I don't have that bag, so I can't help you specifically with that question. However, I do own both the 50-135 and 60-250. I had the 50-135 and 55-300 at one point and decided to replace both with the 60-250... I just never got around to selling the 50-135

The 60-250 is slightly larger than the 50-135 in terms of length and weight. Also, the 60-250 extended out when zoomed a few additional inches. For me personally, the 50-135 fits the K-7/K-5 like a glove and the 60-250 seems a little too big. Not to the point of being an issue or anything, but I just really like the handling of the 50-135. That said, the 60-250 has a fantastic range and I've always been very happy with the IQ wide open throughout the range. If you have any other specific questions about the two lenses, let me know.
12-10-2010, 05:08 PM   #3
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 764
Original Poster
Do you find the IQ of the 60-250 worth the extra weight and $$ over the 55-300 as part of a travel lens kit?
12-10-2010, 05:52 PM   #4
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by GaryH Quote
Do you find the IQ of the 60-250 worth the extra weight and $$ over the 55-300 as part of a travel lens kit?
Well, no question the IQ is superior, but if you're trying to keep the travel kit to a reasonable size then the 60-250 probably isn't the best choice. Usually when I take the 60-250 out, it's for a specific purpose and typically the only lens I end up using. I might also throw the DA15 and/or DA35/40 in my pocket too since they weigh almost nothing, but I guess what I am trying to say is that I don't usually take the 60-250 out as part of a kit as it takes up almost as much room as all my primes put together.

Not sure if that helped or not

12-10-2010, 06:26 PM   #5
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: long island
Posts: 135
Gary, I had both 16--50 and 50--135. I don't have a 60--250, but I did play with one for some time. It's considerably bigger than 50135, and lowepro 160 cannot fit the 16--50 and 60--250 definitely. Actually I am using a 170 and it is just big enough for 16--50 and 50--135 plus a body.

Personally, 16--50 is always on my body, I didn't find 50135 that useful... I know it's likely my problem though. I put the 50135 on only when I need to shoot portraits.
12-10-2010, 07:01 PM   #6
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 764
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by shang Quote
Personally, 16--50 is always on my body, I didn't find 50135 that useful... I know it's likely my problem though. I put the 50135 on only when I need to shoot portraits.
I hear what you are saying about the 50-135. It seems like I either use my 16-50 or my Bigma or the 55-300. I hate for a lens worth $700+ be sitting in the closet when It might be better sacrificed to fund something I might use more. I like you get it out for family events and portraits but not all that often. It is the best glass I have and I hate to part with it for something else I might not use due to size. The 60-250 range seems appealing but for its size and weight, I would probably be better off sticking with the 55-300.....
12-10-2010, 07:43 PM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ankeny, Iowa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 388
I used to travel with DA* 50-135 and DA* 60-250 all the time along with DA* 16-50, plus a few primes. I usually carry one lens hood with me since 50-135 and 60-250 use the same hood....
12-11-2010, 07:21 AM   #8
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 764
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by luke0622 Quote
I used to travel with DA* 50-135 and DA* 60-250 all the time along with DA* 16-50, plus a few primes. I usually carry one lens hood with me since 50-135 and 60-250 use the same hood....
Good idea. Those hoods take up a lot of room in the bag.

12-11-2010, 07:42 AM   #9
Loyal Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,411
For travel, the DA 55-300mm is hard to beat.
12-12-2010, 07:56 AM   #10
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 764
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by dadipentak Quote
For travel, the DA 55-300mm is hard to beat.
I agree. I originally bought it for travel with my 16-50 being my 2nd lens. However, I have been quite pleased with some of the wildlife pics I have taken with it at times when I did not want to haul the Bigma.
12-12-2010, 08:03 AM   #11
Veteran Member
pcarfan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,960
If you decide to get the 60-250, you can save some money with this one I just put up for sale.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/125605-sale-p...t-week-us.html
12-12-2010, 12:19 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,563
Gary,

I don't have the Lowepro, but I do have the 55-300 and the 60-250.
Purchased both lenses the same time, after carefully pixel peeping test shots of these lenses around the store.
The 60-250 is a *very* sharp and good lens.
It is not as fast focusing as the 16-50, but not as slow as the 50-135.
I got the 55-300 for hiking.
During last 3 safaris to Africa took them both, however I ended up carrying the 60-250mm + 1.7AF TC much more than the 55-300.
Also for night shots, the 60-250mm much better than expected.
Yes, it is heavy and yes it is expensive, still a great lens.

See examples here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/114743-da*-60-...at-can-do.html

Bert
12-12-2010, 08:34 PM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 499
The 60-250 is a superb lens, but expect some lugging of it as it's a heavy and big lens. It is my main hiking lens as I find the extra weight well worth the pictures it takes. Add in weather sealing and it's a wonderful lens. Keep in mind, I'm an old infantry guy so packing around 50 pounds doesn't bother me as much as it would my wife. I'd suggest seeing one in a store (if you can find one) so you can compare the lenses side by side for yourself to see if they work for your needs.
12-13-2010, 06:26 AM   #14
New Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tallinn
Posts: 10
I'm sorry, if I'm asking this in the wrong thread, but: the question is the following.
Are your versions of * 60-250 a bit soft at 4.0? Or this is the issue of my patticular lens...
12-14-2010, 07:44 AM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,563
QuoteOriginally posted by Wick Nole Quote
I'm sorry, if I'm asking this in the wrong thread, but: the question is the following.
Are your versions of * 60-250 a bit soft at 4.0? Or this is the issue of my patticular lens...
No, mine is sharper than my DA* 16-50mm over the whole range.
Are you sure you're not suffering of front / back focusing?

- Bert
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!
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
PENTAX 18-250mm VS QUANTARAY 70-300mm@250mm charliezap Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 02-08-2010 11:38 PM
LBA - first images - SMC Pentax-DA 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 volosong Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 1 07-14-2008 11:16 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:22 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