Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-27-2011, 07:51 PM   #16
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chicago
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 672
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
Agree with Twitch, Adams article about the sports zooms had me thinking long and hard about whether I should exchange my 50-135 for a 70-200, but in the end it was no. The 50-135 has everything, the 70-200s are all missing something or the other. If Pentax makes a 70-200 like the 50-135, I'll consider it.
I don't think Pentax would do it unless they go full frame.

02-27-2011, 08:00 PM   #17
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
Convince you? I won't try to convince you of anything. Figure out what you need and go for it. Hay, it's only money.
02-27-2011, 08:00 PM   #18
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
psychdoc's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bham
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 944
Re: what iso were you shooting at?

Pic 1: iso 1600, f4, 1/180 sec at 95mm; Pic 2 and 3: iso 1600, f2.8, 1/90 sec at 123mm. I used Noiseware Standard Edition to reduce noise. Not really sure how to use it. But I just open the photo and click the default 'Go' button. And that takes care of noise; for a non-professioanal like me, its more than enough.
02-27-2011, 08:17 PM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 233
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
Convince you? I won't try to convince you of anything. Figure out what you need and go for it. Hay, it's only money.
When I say comvince me, I mean why would you choose x over y.

And I don't know about you but I work very hard for my money, so when you say "hay its only money" its my money that I scrimped for so its kida important to me to select right, I have chosen the 50-135, mainly because I feel I won't lose moey on it if I don't like it.

Thank you to all that posted.

02-27-2011, 08:23 PM   #20
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chicago
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 672
Why not a Sigma 50-150? Gives you a bit more reach, but you still have the normal end.
02-27-2011, 08:28 PM   #21
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 233
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rory Quote
Why not a Sigma 50-150? Gives you a bit more reach, but you still have the normal end.
Is it as sharp as the DA*?
02-27-2011, 08:41 PM   #22
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by The Kurly One Quote
Is it as sharp as the DA*?
The sigma 50-150 is one of the few lenses I haven't tried, but from what I've read and been told it is a very sharp lens, on par with the DA* lenses. The AF is also suppose to be quite a bit faster. It's certainly one of those lenses I would have bought to try out if I didn't have the DA*50-135 (which I just realized is the lens I've owned the longest of all my lenses).
02-27-2011, 08:55 PM - 1 Like   #23
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by The Kurly One Quote
When I say comvince me, I mean why would you choose x over y.
I wouldn't choose either, so it's not my fight.

QuoteQuote:
And I don't know about you but I work very hard for my money, so when you say "hay its only money" its my money that I scrimped for so its kida important to me to select right
"It's only money" is a sardonic comment. I have zero discretionary income; before I can buy stuff, I must sell stuff, so I research each purchase very very carefully. I don't ask for lens-buying advice, because I know I'll get a limited and biased set of responses. Instead, I compile ratings and reviews, and build bang-per-buck tables. And I prefer to recommend decision principles rather than specific lenses.

Then there's responsibility. If I heed advice but make a purchase I don't like, it's *their* fault; if I've crunched the numbers wrong and made a bad choice, it's my own damn fault and I can't blame anyone else. Nobody here convinced me to buy the costly Lil'Bigma 170-500 that I rarely use now, not the cheap Enna Tele-Sandmar 100/4.5 that's on my camera a lot. I make the best of what I have.

Good luck!

02-27-2011, 08:58 PM   #24
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 233
Original Poster
so do you have an opinion other than to tell me to spend my money wisely?
02-27-2011, 10:12 PM   #25
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
NeverSatisfied's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: S.E. Michigan
Posts: 666
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
The sigma 50-150 is one of the few lenses I haven't tried, but from what I've read and been told it is a very sharp lens, on par with the DA* lenses. The AF is also suppose to be quite a bit faster. It's certainly one of those lenses I would have bought to try out if I didn't have the DA*50-135 (which I just realized is the lens I've owned the longest of all my lenses).
There are a few threads on the (older version) Sigma 50-150, but this is the first one that came to mind, by Jsherman:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/53035-sigma-50...-shootout.html
02-28-2011, 02:15 AM   #26
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by The Kurly One Quote
so do you have an opinion other than to tell me to spend my money wisely?
Opinions? Moi? No. Of lenses mentioned here, I have no experience and no favorites. In your situation, I'd probably use a solid old M42 Tokina-made Sears Auto 55-135/3.5 that cost me all of eight bucks. I didn't have to agonize much over that particular purchase.

For lenses I *do* agonize over, my questions here aren't about which alternative is 'better', especially in focal lengths -- FL, AOV, speed are parms I've already set. Asking about 'better' just returns individual opinions based on individual tastes and prejudices. (Ask me about long zooms and I'll recommend an 18-250 because that's what I know, and I like it better than my 18-55 + 60-300 pair.)

Rather, I ask about durability and return rates and overall quality. How likely will a new lens be a turkey that will need to be returned and replaced several times before obtaining a good copy? And I'll ask that AFTER I've read user ratings on several websites, to get aggregate appraisals of any candidates.

So, my opinion: Figure out what you want, and go for it.
02-28-2011, 08:52 AM   #27
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 84
This is a tough question! But I'd still lean towards the DA*50-135. I've shot events from the front and back of a moderate size auditorium and it served me just fine. But you have to figure out how close you are going to be to the action. The other thing is that 50-70mm can be a great range if you want to shoot pictures with two people not just one. The 70-200 is a great range for those tight photos but you might lose something in width.

It also wouldn't hurt to invest in a 1.4x teleconverter. Sure you'll lose a stop of speed to f2.4, and your autofocus might be a bit slow especially with the Kx. But you can get the range of 50-200mm with very little extra effort.

Good luck!
02-28-2011, 11:36 AM   #28
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
NeverSatisfied's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: S.E. Michigan
Posts: 666
QuoteOriginally posted by vandamro Quote
It also wouldn't hurt to invest in a 1.4x teleconverter. Sure you'll lose a stop of speed to f2.4, and your autofocus might be a bit slow especially with the Kx. But you can get the range of 50-200mm with very little extra effort.

Good luck!
I don't think many people have had much luck using a TC on the DA*50-135. I have tried the Tamron 1.4 TC on mine but it does very poorly, even in good light- I think inside an auditorium would be an aggravating experience, at least with that particular combo. For some reason that TC works pretty well on the DA*300, but not for the 50-135 (at least not mine!) Of course the Tamron TC does "play well" with the Tamron zoom.

FWIW I wish Pentax would come out with a new SDM-compatible TC, as they had hinted on their "roadmap" from a few years back...
02-28-2011, 11:55 AM   #29
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by NeverSatisfied Quote
I don't think many people have had much luck using a TC on the DA*50-135. I have tried the Tamron 1.4 TC on mine but it does very poorly, even in good light- I think inside an auditorium would be an aggravating experience, at least with that particular combo. For some reason that TC works pretty well on the DA*300, but not for the 50-135 (at least not mine!) Of course the Tamron TC does "play well" with the Tamron zoom.

FWIW I wish Pentax would come out with a new SDM-compatible TC, as they had hinted on their "roadmap" from a few years back...
+1 to the above.

While the Tamron 1.4x TC "works" with the DA*50-135, it performs very poorly (in terms of AF), regardless of how much light you have. In poor light it would be an aggravating experience as it would take multiple attempts to lock focus, which would be pretty useless for a moving target. Of all the DA* lenses, the 50-135 works the least well with the Tamron TC. For whatever reason, the TC does work well with the DA*300, as well as the 60-250. It also works very well with the Tamron 70-200/2.8, basically giving you a 100-300/4.
02-28-2011, 03:03 PM   #30
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Groucho's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 409
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
The sigma 50-150 is one of the few lenses I haven't tried, but from what I've read and been told it is a very sharp lens, on par with the DA* lenses. The AF is also suppose to be quite a bit faster. It's certainly one of those lenses I would have bought to try out if I didn't have the DA*50-135 (which I just realized is the lens I've owned the longest of all my lenses).
It's worth noting that Sigma has announced an updated version of the 50-150mm, with in-lens stabilization (whoopty-doo) and "completely revised optical design with 21 elements in 15 groups". If one is considering the Sigma version, it may be worth waiting for that, although I would guess that the price will easily rise about the Pentax lens. You may not have a choice; it looks like nowhere has the 50-150mm in stock, at least not in a Pentax mount. BH lists it as discontinued. It's not even listed in any mount (as far as I can tell) at Adorama.

It's also worth reading the reference from this article from lensrentals.com:
QuoteQuote:
With some hesitation we recently tried a few copies of the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8, tested them, rented them for 6 months, and decided we would stock them in quantity, since they seemed great. We ordered 6 more copies and all 6 were horrible, incredibly soft, and went straight back. The Digital Picture found exactly the same thing. We assume (and assumptions are dangerous) that the second set of six came from a different assembly line run than the first few we bought. We’ve had similar experiences with other lenses we bought in batches. For example, of the initial dozen Sigma 150-500s we bought, almost all failed very early and we stopped carrying them. Lots of people at that time reported similar things, but there’s a lot of folks saying that more recent copies don’t have those problems.
There may be a good number of bad copies floating around... or maybe just they just had bad luck... but's it's worth noting. (You can never have enough FUD, right? )

Some may point to SDM failures as being a big danger too, but I would guess that the "silent majority" are not having any problems. My 50-135mm is, oh, probably 3+ years old and works like brand-new, and has some hood scratches and has been thorough soaked a few times... weathersealing alone would make me never want to trade my 50-135mm to 50-150mm. (Please make a sealed 1.4x TC, Pentax!)

As for 50-135mm vs 70-200mm... like some others said, I find the 50-69mm range much more valuable than the 136-200mm range. It amazes me that so many non-Pentax shooters with APS sensor DSLRs haven't realized the advantages of 50-135mm over 70-200mm... not only more flexible, but much smaller and IIRC, about half the weight (I think less than half the weight of the Canon, for example.) This lens alone is a good counterargument for those who dismiss Pentax for having only good primes - the absence of it is a real loss for other makers, IMHO.
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, range, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Super Takumar 135mm & 200mm, Vivitar 135mm, SMC 28mm MSM Sold Items 24 06-13-2010 09:55 PM
please convince me on the DA 50-135mm!!! esman7 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 20 06-02-2009 05:08 PM
Please convince me on getting the DA 50-135mm f2.8 esman7 Photographic Technique 2 05-21-2009 04:02 PM
Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 vs. Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 vs Pentax 50-135mm f/2.8 nah Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 27 12-08-2008 01:03 AM
For Sale - Sold: Make Offers: Haminex 135mm f/2.8, Sears 135mm f/2.8, Super Albinar 100-200mm f inneyeseakay Sold Items 1 06-23-2007 02:05 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:01 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