Is It Worth The Extra Money??

Fl_Gulfer · 05-09-2011, 10:15 AM

I'm having trouble trying to deceide between the DA 55-300 or the DA* 60-250.
Is it really worth the money to go for the 60-250? I'm wanting to get a longer zoom than the DA 18-135.

Thanks.

**manishved** · 05-09-2011, 10:31 AM

Of course, the 60-250 is a DA * (much better optics) and its f4 all the way.

Chaos_Realm · 05-09-2011, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer

I'm having trouble trying to deceide between the DA 55-300 or the DA* 60-250.
Is it really worth the money to go for the 60-250? I'm wanting to get a longer zoom than the DA 18-135.

Thanks.

I'd say it depends, If you need then weather resistance and High AF speeds then by all means DA* 60-250 is the way to go, and you'll kick yourself if you don't.

On the other hand if these arent that important, I'd back the DA 55-300. It performs well in the IQ department performance per dollar far out ways the DA* from what I have read. And to top it off you get an extra 50mm on the FL.
I personally went for the sigma 70-200 F2.8 to shoot indoor sports, but I do find it a bit too short at times.

PS: How does your Vivitar 120-600 go? if you find the time you should try posting a review as there are none yet.

Skog · 05-09-2011, 10:50 AM

The da 55-300 is excellent for the money. However, it has a noisy AF, and is a bit slow. I bought the da 55-300 first but ended up with the da*300 after about 6 month. If you'r ok with the image quality of the 18-135, then the 55-300 will be super for you. If you like the silent af of the 18-135, then the 55-300 will be a disappointment hehe

dgaies · 05-09-2011, 10:54 AM

Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer

I'm having trouble trying to deceide between the DA 55-300 or the DA* 60-250.
Is it really worth the money to go for the 60-250? I'm wanting to get a longer zoom than the DA 18-135.

Certainly the 60-250 is the better lens, but depending on what you're looking for, it might not be the better choice.

I have both at the moment and the difference in size (and cost) is quite significant. The 60-250 certainly isn't the kind of lens you're going to want to hang around your neck. I tried that on a short hike yesterday and it wasn't too comfortable

The 55-300, on the other hand, is pretty compact and lightweight (especially given its range and reach). Again, no question the AF, build and optics are better on the 60-250, but there's a stiff price to pay in terms of size and cost.

REM · 05-09-2011, 01:09 PM

Agree with all points mentioned above. I have the 55-300mm and I really like it. Yes it is variable aperature and noisy/hunts but the performance for the price is great. I'm sure the 60-250 is better optically, but that lens is a monster in price and in size compared to the 55-300. Since I have been used to small primes I decided to go with the 55-300mm.

KxBlaze · 05-09-2011, 07:24 PM

It's only worth the money if you really think it will benefit you. Like others have said the IQ and AF will be much better on the DA* but the 55-300 is a great lens for the $. I would start with a used 55-300 to see if it meets your needs. You might find that it does everything you need and you can save a ton of money. If you find that it's doesn't then you can sell the 55-300 and upgrade to the DA*.

Fl_Gulfer · 05-09-2011, 07:51 PM

Does anyone have a 60-250 and a K-5 or K-7 they can mount it to and take a photo of it so I can see how big it is?
Thanks for all the great info.

dgaies · 05-09-2011, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer

Does anyone have a 60-250 and a K-5 or K-7 they can mount it to and take a photo of it so I can see how big it is?
Thanks for all the great info.

Sure. Give me a minute and I'll do it right now.

InlawBiker · 05-09-2011, 08:09 PM

You have to understand market segmentation to answer this question. If you have to ask if you need it then you probably don't. Just my opinion!

dgaies · 05-09-2011, 08:15 PM

Here are a few shots of a K-5 with the 18-55, 55-300 and 60-250 for comparison.

twitch · 05-09-2011, 08:23 PM

Just be aware that the barrel of the 60-250 extends a long way @ 250mm. It's almost comically big (to my eyes, but then I'm use to a 55-300)

dgaies · 05-09-2011, 08:24 PM

Originally posted by twitch

Just be aware that the barrel of the 60-250 extends a long way @ 250mm. It's almost comically big (to my eyes, but then I'm use to a 55-300)

I'll take some fully extended shots too

dgaies · 05-09-2011, 08:32 PM - **1 Like**

Here are the 55-300 and 60-250 at full extension

twitch · 05-09-2011, 08:42 PM

Thanks for posting those samples, the 60-250 actually didn't extend as much as what I thought (not that's it's small though).

05-09-2011, 10:15 AM	#1
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054	Is It Worth The Extra Money?? I'm having trouble trying to deceide between the DA 55-300 or the DA* 60-250. Is it really worth the money to go for the 60-250? I'm wanting to get a longer zoom than the DA 18-135. Thanks.

05-09-2011, 08:15 PM	#11
dgaies Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Maryland / Washington DC Posts: 3,917	Here are a few shots of a K-5 with the 18-55, 55-300 and 60-250 for comparison. Last edited by dgaies; 05-09-2011 at 08:26 PM.

05-09-2011, 08:32 PM - 1 Like	#14
dgaies Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Maryland / Washington DC Posts: 3,917	Here are the 55-300 and 60-250 at full extension Last edited by dgaies; 05-09-2011 at 08:45 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is the pentax 100mm macro wr worth the money	pentaxk10duser	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	12-22-2013 11:57 AM
worth the extra cost?	SouthernOracle	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	02-22-2011 03:25 PM
Is the extra $ on the FA77mm worth it over the DA70mm?	rustynail925	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	71	05-13-2010 08:40 AM
is the k-7 worth and extra $700	pfcapture	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	12-30-2009 09:04 PM
Is the new DA* 55 worth the money??	Pioneer	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	09-02-2009 12:49 PM

05-09-2011, 10:31 AM	#2
manishved Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: N. Calif Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,651	Of course, the 60-250 is a DA * (much better optics) and its f4 all the way.

05-09-2011, 10:47 AM	#3
Chaos_Realm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Melbourne, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,251	Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer I'm having trouble trying to deceide between the DA 55-300 or the DA* 60-250. Is it really worth the money to go for the 60-250? I'm wanting to get a longer zoom than the DA 18-135. Thanks. I'd say it depends, If you need then weather resistance and High AF speeds then by all means DA* 60-250 is the way to go, and you'll kick yourself if you don't. On the other hand if these arent that important, I'd back the DA 55-300. It performs well in the IQ department performance per dollar far out ways the DA* from what I have read. And to top it off you get an extra 50mm on the FL. I personally went for the sigma 70-200 F2.8 to shoot indoor sports, but I do find it a bit too short at times. PS: How does your Vivitar 120-600 go? if you find the time you should try posting a review as there are none yet.

05-09-2011, 10:50 AM	#4
Skog Inactive Account Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 167	The da 55-300 is excellent for the money. However, it has a noisy AF, and is a bit slow. I bought the da 55-300 first but ended up with the da*300 after about 6 month. If you'r ok with the image quality of the 18-135, then the 55-300 will be super for you. If you like the silent af of the 18-135, then the 55-300 will be a disappointment hehe

05-09-2011, 10:54 AM	#5
dgaies Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Maryland / Washington DC Posts: 3,917	Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer I'm having trouble trying to deceide between the DA 55-300 or the DA* 60-250. Is it really worth the money to go for the 60-250? I'm wanting to get a longer zoom than the DA 18-135. Certainly the 60-250 is the better lens, but depending on what you're looking for, it might not be the better choice. I have both at the moment and the difference in size (and cost) is quite significant. The 60-250 certainly isn't the kind of lens you're going to want to hang around your neck. I tried that on a short hike yesterday and it wasn't too comfortable The 55-300, on the other hand, is pretty compact and lightweight (especially given its range and reach). Again, no question the AF, build and optics are better on the 60-250, but there's a stiff price to pay in terms of size and cost.

05-09-2011, 01:09 PM	#6
REM Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 78	Agree with all points mentioned above. I have the 55-300mm and I really like it. Yes it is variable aperature and noisy/hunts but the performance for the price is great. I'm sure the 60-250 is better optically, but that lens is a monster in price and in size compared to the 55-300. Since I have been used to small primes I decided to go with the 55-300mm.

05-09-2011, 07:24 PM	#7
KxBlaze Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,602	It's only worth the money if you really think it will benefit you. Like others have said the IQ and AF will be much better on the DA* but the 55-300 is a great lens for the $. I would start with a used 55-300 to see if it meets your needs. You might find that it does everything you need and you can save a ton of money. If you find that it's doesn't then you can sell the 55-300 and upgrade to the DA*.

05-09-2011, 07:51 PM	#8
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054 Original Poster	Does anyone have a 60-250 and a K-5 or K-7 they can mount it to and take a photo of it so I can see how big it is? Thanks for all the great info.

05-09-2011, 08:04 PM	#9
dgaies Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Maryland / Washington DC Posts: 3,917	Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer Does anyone have a 60-250 and a K-5 or K-7 they can mount it to and take a photo of it so I can see how big it is? Thanks for all the great info. Sure. Give me a minute and I'll do it right now.

05-09-2011, 08:09 PM	#10
InlawBiker Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Seattle, WA Photos: Gallery Posts: 123	You have to understand market segmentation to answer this question. If you have to ask if you need it then you probably don't. Just my opinion!

05-09-2011, 08:23 PM	#12
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Just be aware that the barrel of the 60-250 extends a long way @ 250mm. It's almost comically big (to my eyes, but then I'm use to a 55-300)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-09-2011, 08:24 PM	#13
dgaies Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Maryland / Washington DC Posts: 3,917	Originally posted by twitch Just be aware that the barrel of the 60-250 extends a long way @ 250mm. It's almost comically big (to my eyes, but then I'm use to a 55-300) I'll take some fully extended shots too

05-09-2011, 08:42 PM	#15
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Thanks for posting those samples, the 60-250 actually didn't extend as much as what I thought (not that's it's small though).