Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-09-2011, 10:15 AM   #1
Veteran Member
Fl_Gulfer's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida Gulf
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,033
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, 10:31 AM   #2
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: N. Calif
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,535
Of course, the 60-250 is a DA * (much better optics) and its f4 all the way.
05-09-2011, 10:47 AM   #3
Site Supporter
Chaos_Realm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,248
QuoteOriginally posted by Fl_Gulfer Quote
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
Senior Member




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
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Fl_Gulfer Quote
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
Veteran Member
KxBlaze's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,594
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
Veteran Member
Fl_Gulfer's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida Gulf
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,033
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
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Fl_Gulfer Quote
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
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, 08:15 PM   #11
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

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, 08:23 PM   #12
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

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)
05-09-2011, 08:24 PM   #13
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
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, 08:32 PM - 1 Like   #14
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

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.
05-09-2011, 08:42 PM   #15
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

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).
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!
da, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:45 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