Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-17-2011, 06:36 AM   #1
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 16
Seeking telephoto? lens advice

Help! I having reading and reading trying to decide the best way to go with a lens for a (soon to be purchased) k7. I am getting the kit lens with it since that's only $50 more. It's been years since I have used anything but a point and shoot due to money/family/etc.

But now my oldest child is heading in high school sports and I want some GOOD pictures!

I will be shooting:
wrestling, usually can get near the mat but sometimes from stands
football, evening/night under the lights

Money is an issue! Will I need 2 different lenses? I think the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 looks great but that's a lot of money for me so I want to check in to see if anyone has a better suggestion.

Any advice is appreciated.

03-17-2011, 07:57 AM   #2
Veteran Member
Wombat's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 901
The brilliant thing about buying a Pentax DSLR is that you can use any lens Pentax ever made, as well as 3rd party gear, so you can get some really excellent lenses for quite reasonable prices. The K7 isn't brilliant in low-light situations, so for best results for the football games you'll want reasonably fast lenses, which don't come cheap in zooms, even second-hand. There are several ways you could go. You could just buy a cheap zoom, such as the Sigma 70-300, and learn to use software to address the noise problem. If you're up for it, you could buy one or two older manual primes, eg. M series 100mm, 135mm or 200mm. They'll give you very good results if you don't mind a totally manual lens and having to swap them over from time to time. You could look for an older mid-range zoom (though good ones aren't as plentiful as they used to be). Or you could wait a while and save up for something like the DA 55-300.
The bottom line is, of course, that you get what you pay for. The K7 can produce stunning photos if you put really good glass on it, and pretty ordinary ones if the lenses aren't up to it. If you're on a limited budget and you're interested enough to learn how to use them well, I'd look at the second-hand market. Decide on a maximum amount you want to spend, then browse through the Lens Review section in this Forum and get a feel for what's available in the older mid-range zooms or primes. Once you've got one or two lenses in mind go rat around in school fetes, jumble sales, pawnshops, EBay etc. Also browse the Photographic Equipment for Sale section elsewhere on the Forum.
My 2c. Hope it helps. Happy hunting.
BTW, I notice you haven't yet bought the K7. You might want to reconsider and instead get a K-x or K-r, which will give you much better low-light performance.
03-17-2011, 08:34 AM   #3
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 16
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Wombat Quote
BTW, I notice you haven't yet bought the K7. You might want to reconsider and instead get a K-x or K-r, which will give you much better low-light performance.
Eekk! Don't give me another reason to question the k7 decision. My main reasons for that choice is the weather resistance and toughness. Plus I like that it can use ALL the lenses.

Thanks for your input, though, it helps to hear information from users not just charts.
03-17-2011, 09:11 AM   #4
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,428
QuoteOriginally posted by thestampinglady Quote
Eekk! Don't give me another reason to question the k7 decision. My main reasons for that choice is the weather resistance and toughness. Plus I like that it can use ALL the lenses.

Thanks for your input, though, it helps to hear information from users not just charts.
The K-x uses the same lenses the K-7 does.

Did you read "Looking for a fast sports zoom comparison" above? The Tamron is a good choice. You may not know it, but low-light sports is generally the most expensive type of photography. The K-x saves a few bucks that you can apply to a "good" lens. The Pentax 55-300 would be a cheaper choice for daylight shots, but not for night shots.

03-17-2011, 11:11 AM   #5
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
I have a K-x and a K-7.

As much as I would like to use the K-7 in the gym, I prefer the K-x due to it's fine high ISO image capabilities.

With the K-x I can crank the ISO up and get away with not-so-fast tele zooms and still use fast shutter speeds to freeze the motion.

I recently picked up a fast zoom but have yet to try it in the gym.
I expect it might let me get away with using the K-7.

(I don't really have time to spend on much PP so my preferences might differ if I did.)
03-17-2011, 01:56 PM   #6
Veteran Member
Tommot1965's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Perth Western Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,026
QuoteOriginally posted by thestampinglady Quote
Help! I having reading and reading trying to decide the best way to go with a lens for a (soon to be purchased) k7. I am getting the kit lens with it since that's only $50 more. It's been years since I have used anything but a point and shoot due to money/family/etc.

But now my oldest child is heading in high school sports and I want some GOOD pictures!

I will be shooting:
wrestling, usually can get near the mat but sometimes from stands
football, evening/night under the lights

Money is an issue! Will I need 2 different lenses? I think the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 looks great but that's a lot of money for me so I want to check in to see if anyone has a better suggestion.

Any advice is appreciated.
aint that the truth...

The K7 is a very good unit..the K5 is two stops better in high ISO ability, I cant speak for the KR/KX as Ive never owned one....

as long as you don't venture past 3200 iso and some denoise software , with a K7 you will be ok..6400iso is not worthwhile.

as for lens...either the tammy or the sigma HSM II..the sigma has HSM af motor..and is faster , makes capturing fast moving sports easier ...

sharpness and IQ , the tammy is better than the Sigma..wide open..at F4 and smaller theres nothing in it..although I do feel the tammy does render the image with better contrast etc ...Read..better IQ

so ask yourself the question..does faster AF appeal. or better wide open?

with the type of photos you are after..I would not even look at a lower spec Zoom..as you wont be pleased with the resulting shutter speeds at the long end .
03-17-2011, 04:57 PM   #7
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 16
Original Poster
Thanks for everyone's input. yes, I did read the
QuoteOriginally posted by SpecialK Quote
"Looking for a fast sports zoom comparison" above
(a few times) and now with your comments have gone back.

I think I will wait and save for the Sigma 70-200 HSM --5 months till football season! If I don't get that much saved, I will get the Tamron. It seems I could spend a few hundred dollars and have to upgrade later 'cause I'm not happy so I may as well save that money for the lens I want.

I appreciate the input.
03-18-2011, 12:57 AM   #8
Veteran Member
Tommot1965's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Perth Western Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,026
QuoteOriginally posted by thestampinglady Quote
Thanks for everyone's input. yes, I did read the (a few times) and now with your comments have gone back.

I think I will wait and save for the Sigma 70-200 HSM --5 months till football season! If I don't get that much saved, I will get the Tamron. It seems I could spend a few hundred dollars and have to upgrade later 'cause I'm not happy so I may as well save that money for the lens I want.

I appreciate the input.
at the moment there are two sigma HSM lenses available...the HSM II, that can be had for about $750 US...or the HSM OS...which I think is about 1200 US...check B&H for up to date pricing.

if you get the OS..im led to believe that it is the pick of the crop and exceeds the tammy in image sharpness wide open... not many people have this lens , so its hard to get any feedback...but Id like one

03-18-2011, 05:40 AM   #9
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 16
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Tommot1965 Quote
at the moment there are two sigma HSM lenses available...the HSM II, that can be had for about $750 US...or the HSM OS...which I think is about 1200 US...check B&H for up to date pricing.

if you get the OS..im led to believe that it is the pick of the crop and exceeds the tammy in image sharpness wide open... not many people have this lens , so its hard to get any feedback...but Id like one
Thanks for the clarification. I had seen there were 2 but did not realize the price difference. Thought I was looking at 1000+ no matter what.
03-18-2011, 03:56 PM   #10
Veteran Member
Tommot1965's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Perth Western Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,026
No Probs

If you can afford it...the Sigma OS is the way to go IMHO..that and a K7 would be a awesome combo
03-20-2011, 07:15 PM   #11
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
@thestampinglady

I had a chance to use the Sigma 70-200 HSM II on my K-x in a high school gym this weekend at a dance+drill competition.

I had the camera in shutter priority mode usually at 1/400 to 1/500, with ISO set at 3200. Aperture fluctuated anywhere from 2.8 to 4 depending where the subjects were.

I was pleased with the results. I haven't done any PP on these shots, they are jpgs from the camera.

I am certain the output from the K-7 would have required significant noise reduction at these settings, but I did not bring it along to test that theory.

More samples are in the set
CADTD Championships 2011 - a set on Flickr






Last edited by crewl1; 03-20-2011 at 07:36 PM.
03-20-2011, 07:28 PM   #12
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
If it isn't apparent the dancers are moving quite rapidly, so the faster shutter speeds were needed to stop the action. The girl in the first shot above is in a spinning rotation as evident from here skirt and hair.

As I am a newbie this next shot was typical in that I was not anticipating a jump so my framing was off. (Practice, practice, practice...)

03-21-2011, 01:07 AM   #13
Veteran Member
KxBlaze's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,594
The DA(L) 55-300 is a very good lens. The DAL is around $200 and the DA around $275, both used. If that is a bit much you can go with the Tamron 70-300 for about $160 new and $100 used. I have the Tamron and find it to render some really good photos. The biggest complaint (maybe my only complaint) is the CA (purple fringing), other than that the lens is really sharp, produces very good color, has a 1:2 macro setting, has an aperture ring, and is cheap.
03-22-2011, 06:30 AM   #14
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 16
Original Poster
Thanks KxBlaze! I woke up this am deciding that I was going to have to get a zoom lens NOW and save up later for that super-duper Sigma. Since I am changing from a point and shoot, I probably won't be that picky for a few months--just happy to have the zoom capability. But it is still daunting to choose a lens even at the $200-300 range without a little user recommendation so i appreciate your reply.
03-22-2011, 01:42 PM   #15
Veteran Member
Ben_Edict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SouthWest "Regio"
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by thestampinglady Quote
Thanks KxBlaze! I woke up this am deciding that I was going to have to get a zoom lens NOW and save up later for that super-duper Sigma. Since I am changing from a point and shoot, I probably won't be that picky for a few months--just happy to have the zoom capability. But it is still daunting to choose a lens even at the $200-300 range without a little user recommendation so i appreciate your reply.
I would really recommend not to waste your money now with a cheaper lens. Indoor sports is the most demanding application. Personally I would save the money on the camera body and get the K-r instead of the K-7 and then add a fast zoom. Fast zooms will not only give sharper photographs (as they allow shorter expsoure times), but will also make focusing easier under dim light, be it AF or MF. I never leave the house without my old Sigma 70-200/2.8...

Ben
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!
advice, k-mount, lens, money, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Telephoto lens - need advice Jaroslaw83 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 07-30-2010 12:42 PM
Zoom telephoto lens advice Gary G Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 04-17-2010 10:45 AM
Telephoto Lens Advice Caat Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 24 12-30-2009 02:18 PM
Seeking advice on scanning negatives ismaelg Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 10 06-05-2009 12:47 AM
Seeking advice on telephoto lenses ismaelg Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 04-29-2009 08:25 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:46 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