400mm prime or zoom

firstshot · 01-09-2011, 09:26 PM

I'm considering a lens in the 400mm, but need advice for either a prime or zoom. For wildlife, birds.

SteveM · 01-09-2011, 09:52 PM

What is your price range? Do you need autofocus? You can always browse the lens database here on the forum to see what options you have. You can also check out the 300mm plus lens club.... https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/55946-300mm-pl...lenses-88.html

clockwork247 · 01-09-2011, 11:37 PM

Originally posted by firstshot

I'm considering a lens in the 400mm, but need advice for either a prime or zoom. For wildlife, birds.

anything above 300 has got to be a zoom if possible... it's just very very hard to get anything with a prime at that range.

DanielT74 · 01-10-2011, 03:03 AM

You can buy my A400/5.6 - it's a stunning lens! I just don't use this kind of telephoto these days.

In my opinion (whether you buy mine or not!) it's the best value for money in terms of quality in the telephoto. I compared it with the FA*300/4.5 and the A400 resolved a lot more detail.

I also have the A*300/2.8 which is a fantastic lens but a massive expensive monster and unless you want to shoot fast action, I don't see a need for it.

Sigma also makes a 150-400mm doesn't it? I know the 100-300/4 is very very good and Bigma 50-500mm is not bad. Otherwise if 300mm is OK for you and you are on a budget, you can go for the trusty Pentax DA 55-300mm which is small and light and great value for money.

Ira · 01-10-2011, 04:40 AM

I only paid $75 for my Takumar 400 5.6 about a year ago, but that was before the Tak boom.

Fully manual, a bazooka, and like everything at 400, you gotta sit her on a tripod.

**Lowell Goudge** · 01-10-2011, 04:59 AM

I have two workable solutions an early sigma APO70-200F2.8EX and 2x sigma TC and a pentax K300F4 plus 1.7x AF tc

Both work very well with the sigma being better on CA than the pentax

garyk · 01-10-2011, 05:23 AM

As a birder, i have only one thing to add. Buy the best you can afford. At 300mm+

Wonderful hobby: Flickr: gary1844's Photostream

**Lowell Goudge** · 01-10-2011, 05:47 AM

Originally posted by garyk

As a birder, i have only one thing to add. Buy the best you can afford. At 300mm+

Wonderful hobby: Flickr: gary1844's Photostream

Just remember. Going from 300 mm to 600 mm at F4 costs about. $6000. Going from 100 feet to 50 feet is free and the end result is the same

There is no substitute for learning the art of getting close to wildlife

DanielT74 · 01-10-2011, 05:51 AM

I didn't get very good results with K300/4 +AF1.7x TC. Have you used this combination Lowell?

jolepp · 01-10-2011, 06:04 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

I have two workable solutions an early sigma APO70-200F2.8EX and 2x sigma TC and a pentax K300F4 plus 1.7x AF tc

Both work very well with the sigma being better on CA than the pentax

Is the current vintage "Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 II EX DG APO macro HSM" gotten worse in comparison then? (I have been kind of casting glances in that direction lately :-)

8540tomg · 01-10-2011, 07:10 AM

Firstshot,

Well there is nothing to choose from in the 400mm range in the current Pentax AF inventory. Long telephoto lenses are a glaring weak point with Pentax. I can offer some advice on the older manual focus Pentax lenses based on my experience. I picked up an old M 400/5.6 a year or so ago for $500 and after some initial trial and error it seems to be working fine for me. It is a big step up from my even older K 300/4. If you don’t mind shooting manually and stopping down it can produce some fine images. The A 400/5.6 can be had for a few hundred more and offers the very desirable A setting. Both are MF, of course, and you will probably have to swap out the original focusing screen to work with these optics. KatzEye screens are very good and there are also less expensive options. Factor this expense into your calculation. You can work with the original screens but they are not very good with manual focus lenses. The M and A 400/5.6 can be used with a monopod or smaller tripod but don’t work very well hand held. The A 400/2.8, a wonderful old lens, is very heavy, expensive and needs a much larger tripod. See the 300mm plus club for further details.

If you are interested in birding I, and many others, consider 400mm to be an entry level lens. Lowell is correct, you can get a lot of great shots by improving your stalking techniques but birding is a lot easier with a longer lens. It’s not always possible to get close and birds are always wary. Teleconverters offer another option. I’m not a big fan of teleconverters as, from my perspective, you loose too much lens speed and, depending on the TC, image quality with them. The better TCs, the 1.4 models in the Pentax line, are also very expensive.

Lens speed with older lenses such as the M or A 400 is also an issue. These lenses are kind of slow. You start at f 5.6 and that is slow enough to start with. Slap a TC on the rear and you are starting at f 11. This might be OK if you are shooting on a bright day and your subject is sitting on a post. In the real world birds like to hide in dark places and f 5.6 just won’t produce much in the way of a decent image as you will have to shoot at high ISO. In addition you also often have to shoot wide open and this brings out the worst in these older lenses in the way of chromatic aberrations and purple fringing. Stopping down helps clear these issues up but you can’t always stop down.

The new K5, with its much higher ISO capabilities, may have changed the game in this regard. If you are shooting with an older camera, IST, K10, K20 or even K7, noisy results at higher ISOs will be a problem. I suspect the K5 will breathe some new life into the older MF Pentax telephoto lenses. Bear in mind if you opt for a 400mm you are entering the super telephoto lens range. These are different animals and will take some time to get used to. Depth of filed is very shallow and even slight vibrations can ruin an image. Be prepared to spend some time getting used to lenses in this range and a lot of initial failures. Be prepared as well for a whole new world of nature photography.

Knowing your price range would help.

Tom G

northcoastgreg · 01-10-2011, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by firstshot

I'm considering a lens in the 400mm, but need advice for either a prime or zoom

Get a prime. The problem with wildlife and birds is usually not that your too close, but that you're too far. This means if you have a zoom, you're likely going to use the lens mostly at the long end of the zoom, where it is usally slow and soft. At the same price point, a super telephoto prime will likely give you better results than a telephoto zoom.

**Lowell Goudge** · 01-10-2011, 04:21 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by jolepp

Is the current vintage "Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 II EX DG APO macro HSM" gotten worse in comparison then? (I have been kind of casting glances in that direction lately :-)

I don't know about the HSM II but some of the intermediate lenses got a little soft at 200 mm. Also there is no TC for the HSM version. IMO the sigma to get is the APO 70-200F2.8 EX non DG non macro. They go used in good shape for about $650.

Also listen to tom and search some of his shots from his 200F2.5. It proves you don't need super long

SpecialK · 01-10-2011, 04:42 PM

We should let the OP give us more info about budget, manual or AF...

jolepp · 01-10-2011, 04:42 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

I don't know about the HSM II but some of the intermediate lenses got a little soft at 200 mm. Also there is no TC for the HSM version. IMO the sigma to get is the APO 70-200F2.8 EX non DG non macro. They go used in good shape for about $650.

Also listen to tom and search some of his shots from his 200F2.5. It proves you don't need super long

Thanks :-) I would have assumed that the Sigma TCs fit and that was part of the plan. Found that HSM II listed for 650€ new so that got me wondering; that sort of thing would seem useful as such in low light (indoor sports and such) and might not be a total disaster with the TC, at least as far as effective aperture goes :-)

01-09-2011, 09:26 PM	#1
firstshot Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Meridian, Idaho Posts: 69	400mm prime or zoom I'm considering a lens in the 400mm, but need advice for either a prime or zoom. For wildlife, birds.

01-10-2011, 07:10 AM	#11
8540tomg Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Waterloo, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,461	Firstshot, Well there is nothing to choose from in the 400mm range in the current Pentax AF inventory. Long telephoto lenses are a glaring weak point with Pentax. I can offer some advice on the older manual focus Pentax lenses based on my experience. I picked up an old M 400/5.6 a year or so ago for $500 and after some initial trial and error it seems to be working fine for me. It is a big step up from my even older K 300/4. If you don’t mind shooting manually and stopping down it can produce some fine images. The A 400/5.6 can be had for a few hundred more and offers the very desirable A setting. Both are MF, of course, and you will probably have to swap out the original focusing screen to work with these optics. KatzEye screens are very good and there are also less expensive options. Factor this expense into your calculation. You can work with the original screens but they are not very good with manual focus lenses. The M and A 400/5.6 can be used with a monopod or smaller tripod but don’t work very well hand held. The A 400/2.8, a wonderful old lens, is very heavy, expensive and needs a much larger tripod. See the 300mm plus club for further details. If you are interested in birding I, and many others, consider 400mm to be an entry level lens. Lowell is correct, you can get a lot of great shots by improving your stalking techniques but birding is a lot easier with a longer lens. It’s not always possible to get close and birds are always wary. Teleconverters offer another option. I’m not a big fan of teleconverters as, from my perspective, you loose too much lens speed and, depending on the TC, image quality with them. The better TCs, the 1.4 models in the Pentax line, are also very expensive. Lens speed with older lenses such as the M or A 400 is also an issue. These lenses are kind of slow. You start at f 5.6 and that is slow enough to start with. Slap a TC on the rear and you are starting at f 11. This might be OK if you are shooting on a bright day and your subject is sitting on a post. In the real world birds like to hide in dark places and f 5.6 just won’t produce much in the way of a decent image as you will have to shoot at high ISO. In addition you also often have to shoot wide open and this brings out the worst in these older lenses in the way of chromatic aberrations and purple fringing. Stopping down helps clear these issues up but you can’t always stop down. The new K5, with its much higher ISO capabilities, may have changed the game in this regard. If you are shooting with an older camera, IST, K10, K20 or even K7, noisy results at higher ISOs will be a problem. I suspect the K5 will breathe some new life into the older MF Pentax telephoto lenses. Bear in mind if you opt for a 400mm you are entering the super telephoto lens range. These are different animals and will take some time to get used to. Depth of filed is very shallow and even slight vibrations can ruin an image. Be prepared to spend some time getting used to lenses in this range and a lot of initial failures. Be prepared as well for a whole new world of nature photography. Knowing your price range would help. Tom G Last edited by 8540tomg; 01-11-2011 at 05:49 AM. Reason: typo

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Which 400mm f2.8 prime? Tamron or Tokina?	jbrothman	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	05-23-2009 07:22 AM
For Sale - Sold: Mitsuki 400mm f/5.6 prime lens for 50mm FA1.4 or 35mm f2	cabstar	Sold Items	8	01-30-2009 02:21 AM
Moon shot with 400mm prime	jbrowning	Post Your Photos!	5	10-23-2007 10:33 PM

01-09-2011, 09:52 PM	#2
SteveM Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,294	What is your price range? Do you need autofocus? You can always browse the lens database here on the forum to see what options you have. You can also check out the 300mm plus lens club.... https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/55946-300mm-pl...lenses-88.html

01-09-2011, 11:37 PM	#3
clockwork247 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 360	Originally posted by firstshot I'm considering a lens in the 400mm, but need advice for either a prime or zoom. For wildlife, birds. anything above 300 has got to be a zoom if possible... it's just very very hard to get anything with a prime at that range.

01-10-2011, 03:03 AM	#4
DanielT74 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,377	You can buy my A400/5.6 - it's a stunning lens! I just don't use this kind of telephoto these days. In my opinion (whether you buy mine or not!) it's the best value for money in terms of quality in the telephoto. I compared it with the FA300/4.5 and the A400 resolved a lot more detail. I also have the A300/2.8 which is a fantastic lens but a massive expensive monster and unless you want to shoot fast action, I don't see a need for it. Sigma also makes a 150-400mm doesn't it? I know the 100-300/4 is very very good and Bigma 50-500mm is not bad. Otherwise if 300mm is OK for you and you are on a budget, you can go for the trusty Pentax DA 55-300mm which is small and light and great value for money.

01-10-2011, 04:40 AM	#5
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	I only paid $75 for my Takumar 400 5.6 about a year ago, but that was before the Tak boom. Fully manual, a bazooka, and like everything at 400, you gotta sit her on a tripod.

01-10-2011, 04:59 AM	#6
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,887	I have two workable solutions an early sigma APO70-200F2.8EX and 2x sigma TC and a pentax K300F4 plus 1.7x AF tc Both work very well with the sigma being better on CA than the pentax

01-10-2011, 05:23 AM	#7
garyk Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 488	As a birder, i have only one thing to add. Buy the best you can afford. At 300mm+ Wonderful hobby: Flickr: gary1844's Photostream

01-10-2011, 05:47 AM	#8
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,887	Originally posted by garyk As a birder, i have only one thing to add. Buy the best you can afford. At 300mm+ Wonderful hobby: Flickr: gary1844's Photostream Just remember. Going from 300 mm to 600 mm at F4 costs about. $6000. Going from 100 feet to 50 feet is free and the end result is the same There is no substitute for learning the art of getting close to wildlife

01-10-2011, 05:51 AM	#9
DanielT74 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,377	I didn't get very good results with K300/4 +AF1.7x TC. Have you used this combination Lowell?

01-10-2011, 06:04 AM	#10
jolepp Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Finland Photos: Albums Posts: 3,196	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge I have two workable solutions an early sigma APO70-200F2.8EX and 2x sigma TC and a pentax K300F4 plus 1.7x AF tc Both work very well with the sigma being better on CA than the pentax Is the current vintage "Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 II EX DG APO macro HSM" gotten worse in comparison then? (I have been kind of casting glances in that direction lately :-)

01-10-2011, 11:00 AM	#12
northcoastgreg Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Northern Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,173	Originally posted by firstshot I'm considering a lens in the 400mm, but need advice for either a prime or zoom Get a prime. The problem with wildlife and birds is usually not that your too close, but that you're too far. This means if you have a zoom, you're likely going to use the lens mostly at the long end of the zoom, where it is usally slow and soft. At the same price point, a super telephoto prime will likely give you better results than a telephoto zoom.

01-10-2011, 04:21 PM - 1 Like	#13
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,887	Originally posted by jolepp Is the current vintage "Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 II EX DG APO macro HSM" gotten worse in comparison then? (I have been kind of casting glances in that direction lately :-) I don't know about the HSM II but some of the intermediate lenses got a little soft at 200 mm. Also there is no TC for the HSM version. IMO the sigma to get is the APO 70-200F2.8 EX non DG non macro. They go used in good shape for about $650. Also listen to tom and search some of his shots from his 200F2.5. It proves you don't need super long

01-10-2011, 04:42 PM	#14
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	We should let the OP give us more info about budget, manual or AF...

01-10-2011, 04:42 PM	#15
jolepp Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Finland Photos: Albums Posts: 3,196	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge I don't know about the HSM II but some of the intermediate lenses got a little soft at 200 mm. Also there is no TC for the HSM version. IMO the sigma to get is the APO 70-200F2.8 EX non DG non macro. They go used in good shape for about $650. Also listen to tom and search some of his shots from his 200F2.5. It proves you don't need super long Thanks :-) I would have assumed that the Sigma TCs fit and that was part of the plan. Found that HSM II listed for 650€ new so that got me wondering; that sort of thing would seem useful as such in low light (indoor sports and such) and might not be a total disaster with the TC, at least as far as effective aperture goes :-)