Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-24-2011, 01:23 AM   #16
Veteran Member
Tommot1965's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Perth Western Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,026
Original Poster
you can all argue the toss about this and that, but id still like a ultra sharp F2.8 70-200 even if it does cost $2500 au ...and not have to rely on sigma or tamron .....

if I ever get another body to complement the K5...I might go canon just to have access to these longer FL lenses...Pentax have fantastic limited Primes in their arsenal...but what else...? 2 F2.8 SDM lenses that have a not so good reputation for reliability or F4 zooms......

if the 80-200 Fa* is so good...why in hell did the silly buggers stop making them...also the FA* 85mm...now we have a used market for those lenses thats out of control cost wise .....

dont get me wrong.I love my Pentax K5..but the lack of choice in longer FL lenses is now becoming apparent to me

03-24-2011, 01:34 AM   #17
Senior Member
sajah's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Korea
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 275
QuoteOriginally posted by ironlionzion Quote
And if photography was only about absolute image quality, we'd all be with canon/nikon.
The general consensus is that Pentax lacking in AF department, some long lenses and a FF body. So, that would be, in my opinion, reasons for me (note I dont use "we") to be all over Canon / Nikon.

There are many things that affect image quality and IMHO I don't think Pentax lacking at all. When I see photos taken from my friends Canon & Nikon cameras I don't see them as better or worse than mine (as far as absolute image quality, not technical stuffs), they're just somewhat 'different'. I have Sony NEX-5 and I notice that too. Even though it shares same sensor with my K-x.

You may think that Canon / Nikon has better absolute image quality and for some other reason you're staying with Pentax, but when you use "we", don't be surprised to get lots of contra responds, because everyone is different and also you're kinda off the general mainstream AFAIK.
03-24-2011, 02:21 AM   #18
Veteran Member
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
QuoteOriginally posted by ironlionzion Quote
Really? Photography is all about absolute image quality? Or are you saying Pentax has better image quality than Canon and Nikon?
Define "absolute image quality".

Personally I found that my K-5 at ISO 80, with the FA* 80-200 attached, will deliver photographic results that are easily on par with both the Nikon D7000 and Canon 7D equipped with the same pro-grade glass. I will not say "better" because that's not easily quantifiable. However, the K-5 will definitely show less noise at base ISO and have a higher dynamic range. So all in all, if I think what you mean with "absolute image quality" down to the pixel level, I think Pentax wins here.

However... even then the differences are small. And you may be looking at more than just image quality, such as build quality (Pentax is on par), size (Pentax is smaller), speed (the 7D is a true sport shooter's/birders camera), availability of fast glass (Nikon & Canon win here).

The demise of the FA* line is a sad story, really. Back in the late 80's and early 90's, Pentax was very successful on the compact camera market. They used the profits to design some very serious glass. It was a very bold statement. However, Pentax never really had pro-grade bodies and as a result not many FA*'s were sold. In today's market it would be too expensive to re-release the FA*'s as new D-FA* designs.
03-24-2011, 03:35 AM   #19
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,620
Based on what I've read, it sounds like you may have bought into the wrong system imo.
And before I go on, I'd like to say that you are not alone in this. Plenty of people buy into Pentax for some appeal or another, but I think it's quite obvious that Pentax's niche is not at the long end of the telephoto side of things.

The question now is whether or not you can justify switching systems to get what you're after. Because its quite doubtful that Pentax will react with a Canon 70-200 L equivalent any time soon.

However, based on what I've seen, I'd think the new Sigma 70-200/2.8 comes in close enough to offer a descent crop factor. And tbh, I'm not sure how much difference it truly makes if the lens if made by Pentax or not in the end(if it works, it works).

On a side note, I've been seriously considering the Sigma 70-200/2.8 for my K-5 for indoor sports shooting. Looks like it might just do the trick.

03-24-2011, 05:22 AM   #20
Veteran Member
Tommot1965's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Perth Western Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,026
Original Poster
John
Im fickle..blow hot and cold..since Ive been looking at long lenses..I now want one of these

300mm F2.8 EX APO DG HSM - Super Telephoto Lenses - SigmaPhoto.com

LOL

nah Im good mate...I might try that canon lens out next time Im in the shop..take a few images home and pixel peep for an hour or two, just to see if the DXO rating mean anything in real life..apart from the 5DII , canon bodies don't float me boat...so it would be a expensive proposition to change now.....

after taking some surfing {bodyboarding} shots that other day..I now think I need a longer FL...next week it will be studio flashes..LMAO.

my humble sigma 70-200 HSM II got these...im pretty happyish
50% crop


have you tried the OS version Yet ?
03-24-2011, 05:44 AM   #21
Veteran Member
ironlionzion's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 409
QuoteOriginally posted by sajah Quote
You may think that Canon / Nikon has better absolute image quality and for some other reason you're staying with Pentax
Pentax is a lot more affordable, and there are a lot of other reasons that Asahiflex mentioned: size, iso performance, build quality. I'm not gonna argue about image quality in terms of sharpness, contrast, etc, as I don't have any tests sitting in front of me. I agree that Pentax has made some of the best lenses out there, but I guess the one of main difference between Pentax and Canon/Nikon is that C/N produce a pro grade lens in almost every focal length.

Another huge benefit of of Pentax is this forum. It's definitely one of the main reasons I chose pentax. I'm sure most of you realize it, but having access to a huge database of information and the help of thousands of people is quite an asset.
03-24-2011, 06:04 AM   #22
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
Well, I'm bit confused now. In one post it's: 135 (on APS-C) is not long enough. In another: 5DII floats my boat (possibly with the L70-200 you are on about). Now what sense does that make?!? 135mm on APSC will give you (just about) the same as 200 on FF. So you would't gain reach and since that's what you are after, I just don't get what you are on about...

On thw topic, with current trend of Pentax bodies I don't think 70(80)-200/2.8 would make sense. Too long for casual shooters, too short for birders. It's big lens and on K-7/5 or K-x/r it simply feels weird. Sigma used to do 100-300/4 which on film FF would be what you get from 70-200/2.8 in terms of FOV/DOF. And you know what? They didn't sell many of them until APSC digital came around when suddenly the focal length made lot of sense. Personally I think 50-135 or Sigma 50-150 make a lot of sense. Just shame most folks don't appreciate it. In a way, this whole "we need 70-200 lens" reminds me of "we need cheap 50 lens". What for?!?...
03-24-2011, 10:07 AM   #23
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,008
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
Well, I'm bit confused now. In one post it's: 135 (on APS-C) is not long enough. In another: 5DII floats my boat (possibly with the L70-200 you are on about). Now what sense does that make?!? 135mm on APSC will give you (just about) the same as 200 on FF. So you would't gain reach and since that's what you are after, I just don't get what you are on about...

On thw topic, with current trend of Pentax bodies I don't think 70(80)-200/2.8 would make sense. Too long for casual shooters, too short for birders. It's big lens and on K-7/5 or K-x/r it simply feels weird. Sigma used to do 100-300/4 which on film FF would be what you get from 70-200/2.8 in terms of FOV/DOF. And you know what? They didn't sell many of them until APSC digital came around when suddenly the focal length made lot of sense. Personally I think 50-135 or Sigma 50-150 make a lot of sense. Just shame most folks don't appreciate it. In a way, this whole "we need 70-200 lens" reminds me of "we need cheap 50 lens". What for?!?...
I agree. If I were to buy a Sigma 70-200, it would be for the faster autofocus, not because of the focal length. Using full frame lenses on an APS-C camera body defeats the purpose of having the smaller sensor. If the 50-135 had reasonably quick auto focus, it would be the perfect wedding/portrait lens (I still love it).

03-24-2011, 11:00 AM   #24
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,812
Yeah it would be great if Pentax cound step up and make a 70-200, especially considering how much success sigma is seeing with lenses that fill Pentax's gaps.
03-24-2011, 12:24 PM   #25
Veteran Member
Reportage's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 739
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Yeah it would be great if Pentax cound step up and make a 70-200, especially considering how much success sigma is seeing with lenses that fill Pentax's gaps.
I am expecting a lot of sales of the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 though.

with Sigma 2x tele, thats almost 600mm f/5.6 which for the price is one heck of a range.
03-24-2011, 01:53 PM   #26
Veteran Member
Tommot1965's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Perth Western Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,026
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
Well, I'm bit confused now. In one post it's: 135 (on APS-C) is not long enough. In another: 5DII floats my boat (possibly with the L70-200 you are on about). Now what sense does that make?!? 135mm on APSC will give you (just about) the same as 200 on FF. So you would't gain reach and since that's what you are after, I just don't get what you are on about...

On thw topic, with current trend of Pentax bodies I don't think 70(80)-200/2.8 would make sense. Too long for casual shooters, too short for birders. It's big lens and on K-7/5 or K-x/r it simply feels weird. Sigma used to do 100-300/4 which on film FF would be what you get from 70-200/2.8 in terms of FOV/DOF. And you know what? They didn't sell many of them until APSC digital came around when suddenly the focal length made lot of sense. Personally I think 50-135 or Sigma 50-150 make a lot of sense. Just shame most folks don't appreciate it. In a way, this whole "we need 70-200 lens" reminds me of "we need cheap 50 lens". What for?!?...
you know..I hadnt even given that a thought about the increased FOV with a 35mm sensor and the resulting shorter FL with a 200mm lens..thanks for reminding me......I suppose my mindset was if at 200mm its ultra sharp, then I could crop in really tight to get that longer FL perspective..

QuoteOriginally posted by Reportage Quote
I am expecting a lot of sales of the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 though.

with Sigma 2x tele, thats almost 600mm f/5.6 which for the price is one heck of a range.
Im interested to know how well the dedicated tele converters work with the longer FL lenses..is it a case of two lens in one..but the longer one being slower, particularly in the case of the sigma 300mm prime, cause if there was no drop of in image quality with the extender or AF performance , and the only trade off for extra reach was two stops..then I want it one

QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Yeah it would be great if Pentax cound step up and make a 70-200, especially considering how much success sigma is seeing with lenses that fill Pentax's gaps.
aint that the truth..

Iver been reading reviews of the FA* 300MM...Marc Langille said in his review that it was still available as a special order..that was in 2007..is that still the case?..

I notice his purchase price in the review was $3000..I think its just sold to clinton for $3600...nothing wrong in that..just a crazy pentax world...supply and demand is a fickle thing
03-24-2011, 02:11 PM   #27
Veteran Member
jolepp's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Finland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,196
An interesting bit here about the Sigma 1.4x TC working (very well, it seems ) with the Tamron 70-200 1:2.8:

Tamron SP AF 70-200 mm f/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO review - Image resolution - Lenstip.com

I suppose the Canon version of the Sigma TC also has the protruding front element?
03-24-2011, 02:48 PM   #28
Banned




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Williston, VT
Posts: 268
Am I missing something here? What's wrong with the DA* 200m F2.8? Much smaller and lighter than a 70-200mm, excellent image quality, and reasonably priced. Perhaps not the greatest AF speed in the world (%$%#&$ SDM crap), but still light years ahead of the 50-135mm.

QuoteOriginally posted by ironlionzion:
And if photography was only about absolute image quality, we'd all be with canon/nikon.
Holy crap what a clueless comment.
03-24-2011, 06:50 PM   #29
Veteran Member
ironlionzion's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 409
Besides the max aperture of 4 vs 2.8, why isn't the DA* 60-250 a substitute for the 70-200? It would seem to me like the added range would be a welcome benefit as well.

Sorry for hijacking the thread. It was a small side comment-I didn't realize how many people would be offended. If I am truly mistaken, and lenses like Nikon's 200mm $6,000 f/2 or even their $1,700 f/4 version are outmatched by our DA*200, then we are truly getting some sweet deals. I honestly think we Pentax users get awesome quality for the money. I just find it hard to believe the lenses Nikon/Canon offer for $500-3,000 more aren't slightly better.
03-24-2011, 07:54 PM   #30
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,008
QuoteOriginally posted by ironlionzion Quote
Besides the max aperture of 4 vs 2.8, why isn't the DA* 60-250 a substitute for the 70-200? It would seem to me like the added range would be a welcome benefit as well.

Sorry for hijacking the thread. It was a small side comment-I didn't realize how many people would be offended. If I am truly mistaken, and lenses like Nikon's 200mm $6,000 f/2 or even their $1,700 f/4 version are outmatched by our DA*200, then we are truly getting some sweet deals. I honestly think we Pentax users get awesome quality for the money. I just find it hard to believe the lenses Nikon/Canon offer for $500-3,000 more aren't slightly better.
I think most people agree that Pentax is lacking in "long" lenses -- particularly longer than 100 mm. At the same time, the limiteds are pretty special and unmatched (in their own way) by anything offered by Nikon/Canon currently.

If you want to talk history, the FA* 200 macro is one of the greatest lenses of all time, by any maker. Unfortunately, it is not still offered new and they seldom come up on the used market.
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!
canon, fov, k-mount, lens, os, pentax, pentax lens, slr lens, version
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax zoom similar to canon 70-200 f4 kedavid Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 03-01-2011 05:31 AM
For Sale - Sold: EX+++ Canon EF USM 100mm f/2.0 Fast Portrait Lens, Worldwide Shipping wallyb Sold Items 1 12-01-2009 11:23 AM
Wheres the best buy on K10d davedjk Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 01-26-2008 03:02 AM
For Sale - Sold: Canon Rebel XT/350D, Sigma 18-200, Canon 50mm (more)… Duh_Vinci Sold Items 14 02-01-2007 01:14 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:13 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