[kedavid]

I have searched and read many of the posts here regarding telephoto lenses for the Pentax K5. Many folks have given pros and cons of the 60-250/4, sigmas, DA200 and 300.
Not having any camera shops that sell Pentax gear around, I thought I would pose the question this way: if you have ever
used the Canon 70-200/4, which lens for Pentax would be closest in image quality and/or overall versatility.

Thanks in advance!

[Adam]

I wrote an article on this exact topic last week. You don't want the 60-250 or primes, but rather:

Fast Sports Zoom Lenses for Pentax | Sigma 70-200mm vs. Tamron 70-200mm vs. Pentax FA* 80-200mm F2.8

[wlachan]

DA*60-250/4 or Sigma 100-300/4? I have the EF70-200/4L IS, the AF is so fast I cannot imagine anything Pentax can hope to match or even close. Then again, this L lens is so unique even Nikon fans are moaning for one. Get the Canon if that's what you really need cos there is no alternative. Optically my FA*200/2.8 is equal but not better, the Canon has better bokeh.

Now the warning. The section that mounts the collar is actually plastic and can be knocked into 1/2. Just take good care of it if you will ever own one.

[elho_cid]

DA*60-250/4 or Sigma 100-300/4? I have the EF70-200/4L IS, the AF is so fast I cannot imagine anything Pentax can hope to match or even close.

It's not that fast. It's the usual fast. EF70-200/4 IS is a great tele lens, I know it quite well. We had it borrowed on our last vacation. I prefered it over Sigma 70-200 HSM II that a fellow pentaxian brought to that vacation.
Imagine Sigma 180 macro on K-5. It is faster than this L lens on EOS 30D.

[kedavid]

I wrote an article on this exact topic last week. You don't want the 60-250 or primes, but rather:

Fast Sports Zoom Lenses for Pentax | Sigma 70-200mm vs. Tamron 70-200mm vs. Pentax FA* 80-200mm F2.8

Would the non-OS, HSM version of the Sigma lens work as well, since there is stabilization in the K5 body? It is considerably cheaper.

[elho_cid]

I didn't have opportunity yet to try the 70-200HSMII on K-5 but on K10D it seemed slower to catch focus than screw drive lenses or the DA*50-135. But K-5's AF is totally different so it may work well. The Nikon version of non-OS Sigma 70-200 was extremely fast.

[kedavid]

I wrote an article on this exact topic last week. You don't want the 60-250 or primes, but rather:

Fast Sports Zoom Lenses for Pentax | Sigma 70-200mm vs. Tamron 70-200mm vs. Pentax FA* 80-200mm F2.8

The pentax 80-200 is for sale on bay for about $1400 and beyond- supply and demand, I guess. Is that unreasonable price?

[Ubuntu_user]

Yes, the Sigma 70-200mm HSM II is reasonably fast, not quite as fast as the Sigma 50-150mm though. If you don't plan on shooting at f/2.8 then that lens (HSM II) would be a great option for you.
Or if you want more range, go for the Sigma 100-300mm f/4. I've heard that it is a stellar lens.

[elho_cid]

At this price point I'd rather look at the DA*60-250. The photozene.de review of it was very positive.

[borno]

Imagine Sigma 180 macro on K-5. It is faster than this L lens on EOS 30D.

A macro lens on a pentax body, faster than a canon lens with ring AF motor on a canon body? I have my doubt's.
I had the non- is 70-200mm f4 when I had a 40d and the focus was very, very fast.

[kenyee]

"Canon 70-200/4, which lens for Pentax would be closest in image quality and/or overall versatility."

I see everyone mentioning speed, but you didn't mention speed...
The 70-200/4 is sharp wide open. The 60-250 is decently sharp wide open but much sharper stopped down, but it's bigger and gives you more zoom range. The 70-200/4 is small enough to take as a vacation lens (I think Art Wolfe uses it this way). The 60-250 is slightly lighter than a 70-200/2.8 but roughly the same size. The 60-250 is also weather sealed.

So really...it depends what you're looking for...I can tell you I use my 60-250 more than I expected...

[kedavid]

"Canon 70-200/4, which lens for Pentax would be closest in image quality and/or overall versatility."

I see everyone mentioning speed, but you didn't mention speed...
The 70-200/4 is sharp wide open. The 60-250 is decently sharp wide open but much sharper stopped down, but it's bigger and gives you more zoom range. The 70-200/4 is small enough to take as a vacation lens (I think Art Wolfe uses it this way). The 60-250 is slightly lighter than a 70-200/2.8 but roughly the same size. The 60-250 is also weather sealed.

So really...it depends what you're looking for...I can tell you I use my 60-250 more than I expected...

Yes, speed is not the primary thing I am after. The canon70-200/4 was just s great overall lens that provided decent reach when needed, but if cropped, the image quality was still very good. I have my sights on the 60-250 or the sigma 100-300 at his point.

[nater]

If you don't mind a push-pull zoom, there was the Sigma 75-200mm f/3.8 autofocus lens. Works great on current bodies, all metal build, good optics, but you'll have to find it used. Some reviews here in the forum:

Sigma 75-200 F3.8 Autofokus Lens Reviews - Pentax Third-Party Lens Review Database

[elho_cid]

A macro lens on a pentax body, faster than a canon lens with ring AF motor on a canon body? I have my doubt's.
I had the non- is 70-200mm f4 when I had a 40d and the focus was very, very fast.

I'm quite prudent about saying very fast after handling Nikon D3 with some best Nikkors. And that was some years after I condemned D80 with 18-200 for extremely slow focus speed.

The AF speed is matter of lens and body combination. 40D has newer AF module vs the 30D and also the K-5 is very capable. Sigma 180 is not an usual macro lens and thanks to IF design it operates very fast on screw drive.
So not all the Pentax bodies are slow and not all the Canons are fast. For example the 1000D is no speed deamon and nobody can expect it to have 1D class performance, no matter what lens.

[kenyee]

Yes, speed is not the primary thing I am after. The canon70-200/4 was just s great overall lens that provided decent reach when needed, but if cropped, the image quality was still very good. I have my sights on the 60-250 or the sigma 100-300 at his point.

Sounds like the right choices based on your criteria. AFAIK, the Sigma 100-300 is heavier than the 60-250 if that matters (weight was the other nice thing about Canon's 70-200/4)...