The great 2.8 zoom debate!!!!

twitch · 05-29-2011, 04:47 PM

Originally posted by Twin-Reverb

I guess I didn't give enough info. So here it is...
My priorities are fast and ACCURATE auto focus with decent range. While I'm not looking to shoot wildlife a football field away, I would like more mm if I can get them. I would like weather sealing but not at the expense of IQ. I shoot a lot of indoor events with terrible lighting.
Also, since several of you have mentioned the DA* F4 60-250mm, how good is it for terrible indoor lighting?

Sigma 70-200 seems the best fit, here's why
1) HSM is faster than both SDM and tamron screw drive
2) sound like you need 200mm rather than 135 or 150 as you say reach is important
3) f/4 is simply too slow for "terrible indoor lighting"

Problem is you don't get weather sealing with that sigma (I think), but then it's a matter of relative priorities between indoor (where a f2.8 zoom excels) and outdoor (where a f4 zoom is fast enough and you get weather sealing in the 60-250)

JHD · 05-29-2011, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by Frogfish

Depending on what your primary use is : Sigma 50-150/2.8 (no longer in production but a superb lense, very sharp, fast and quiet AF [/URL]

Otherwise if you don't need the extra 20mm on the wider side (more useful IMO) and do need the extra 50mm reach then the Tamron 70-200/2.8. I checked this lense out recently and will be getting one. The AF was more than acceptable, and this was in a dimly lit corridor, not at all noisy though not silent, and IQ was superb.

BANG ON! If you can find a Sigma 50-150, that would be your best option. The Tamron 70-200 is a great lens but it weighs a fair bit more and is considerably bigger. I can't recommend the Pentax 50-135 because the SDM is painfully slow and is notoriously unreliable. To make matters worse, Pentax does not stand behind their lenses like Sigma and Tamron do with a warranty that inspires confidence.

JHD · 05-29-2011, 05:11 PM

Originally posted by Twin-Reverb

I guess I didn't give enough info. So here it is...
My priorities are fast and ACCURATE auto focus with decent range. While I'm not looking to shoot wildlife a football field away, I would like more mm if I can get them. I would like weather sealing but not at the expense of IQ. I shoot a lot of indoor events with terrible lighting.

Looks like Sigma is your only option. Either the 50-150 (the new OS version should be available now) or the 70-200.

selar · 05-29-2011, 06:28 PM

Faced with the same choice I got the Sigma 70-200 HSM II. IQ is not worth that much if you dont get the shot in the first place due to sluggish AF. If you want a zoom for photographing sports or fast action in low light conditions, the Sigma 70-200 HSM II is the best option.

Edgar_in_Indy · 05-29-2011, 07:14 PM

Make sure you have a firm grasp on just how big and heavy the 70-200mm lenses are before you pull the trigger. I personally couldn't see myself carrying that log-of-a-lens around on a regular basis, which is why I went with the Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 HSM. It's a shame that Sigma decided to kill the non-OS 50-150mm.

selar · 05-29-2011, 08:28 PM

You either need the 200m @ f2.8 or you don't. If you do, size and weight are not going to be a deciding factor, as theres not much difference between the available choices that are not optically stabilized. One thing, they certainly are not - they are not lenses you would want to carry on a holiday.

JHD · 05-30-2011, 12:19 AM

Originally posted by selar

You either need the 200m @ f2.8 or you don't. If you do, size and weight are not going to be a deciding factor...

Um, there really isn't that much of a difference between 150mm and 200mm. It certainly is nothing compared to the difference between 10mm and 15mm, where people continually trump the size and weight argument.

On long lenses, size and weight is a very real concern; with short lenses size and weight is a weak excuse for the lemmings to follow the leader.

MegaPower · 05-30-2011, 12:28 AM

sigma 70-200mm, since pentax doesn't make a fast 70-200mm with a lens motor.

Frogfish · 05-30-2011, 03:34 AM

Originally posted by selar

You either need the 200m @ f2.8 or you don't. If you do, size and weight are not going to be a deciding factor, as theres not much difference between the available choices that are not optically stabilized. One thing, they certainly are not - they are not lenses you would want to carry on a holiday.

I carry my 50-150 everywhere I go (one of 3 or 4 lenses) - I don't find it heavy at all and it feels, both size and weight-wise, a lot lighter/smaller than the 70-200 - whether there's actually that much difference or not.

**andre-mz5** · 05-30-2011, 04:42 AM

Quote:

Also, since several of you have mentioned the DA* F4 60-250mm, how good is it for terrible indoor lighting?

For terrible indoor lighting you need F2.8 and I also highly recommend a K5 for those circumstances.
If fast and accurate AF is required then from the options you mention the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 HSM II would be your best choice.
Since february 2011 I have the K5+ Sigma 70-200 F2.8 combo and was more than pleased with the results when I shot both an indoor table tennis and an indoor swim cup event. The lighting in the swim arena can only be described as "terrible indoor lighting"
You can find pictures of those shoots in the Post your foto's section.

JHD · 05-30-2011, 07:13 AM

NOTE TO OP

None of these lenses are inexpensive. Unless you can find one at a very attractive price, I would pass on buying one used... especially a Pentax lens and all the more if it has SDM. There's a reason why Sigma and Tamron offer a much longer warranty than Pentax.

frank · 05-30-2011, 06:37 PM

I'd vote for the Sigma 70-200 HSM too, would've got one myself if I didn't have an FA*80-200. Somehow I just don't like the Tamron 70-200/2.8, it feels cheapy...

elpolodiablo · 05-30-2011, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by frank

I'd vote for the Sigma 70-200 HSM too, would've got one myself if I didn't have an FA*80-200. Somehow I just don't like the Tamron 70-200/2.8, it feels cheapy...

I'd say for OP's needs the 2 Sigma HSM zooms, the 50-150 and 70-200 will do just fine. I have the Tamron 70-200 and love it to bits, it does feel a bit cheap on build front and the handling a bit wonky like the cumbersome AF/MF clutch, and a bit front heavy, but I like the result I got from it and it is (comparably)cheap.

Besides, I am a cheapskate and bought all my lenses used, that's one reason I avoid buying anything with SDM/HSM, without warranty these type of lens might be rather expensive to repair if they go wrong. The other thing is that with camera body update the AF speed might improve on the screw drive lenses, not sure on the SDM/HSM type...

TOUGEFC · 05-30-2011, 07:49 PM

For the OP's wishes, I also recomend the 50-150 HSM or 70-200 HSM, all he has to do now is decide if he needs the extra 50mm/kg

of the 70-200.

Edgar_in_Indy · 05-30-2011, 08:28 PM

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

For the OP's wishes, I also recomend the 50-150 HSM or 70-200 HSM, all he has to do now is decide if he needs the extra 50mm/kg

of the 70-200.

I chose the 50-150mm over the 70-200mm for the reasons already pointed out--size and weight. I use it to shoot my kids sports/recitals, etc.

For amateur events, 150mm is usually more than long enough since you are generally able to get quite close to the field/court/stage. And since you are able to get so close and since many of the performances are indoors, the extra width of the 50mm is much more useful than the extra reach of the 200mm would be. It really helps to minimize the number of lens swaps.

The only problem is that the 50-150mm non-OS has been discontinued and is now difficult to obtain. Used copies only rarely appear on eBay, but some people have had success with calling around to find some dealers with a few leftover copies.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The great Prime Debate	Gennatay	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	62	05-29-2011 01:11 AM
Interesting op-ed regarding the health care debate	deadwolfbones	General Talk	15	11-25-2009 07:57 PM
Anybody See the Debate?	Mike Cash	General Talk	6	10-03-2009 04:41 PM
Burst and the Great Sports Debate	ajtour	Photographic Technique	82	06-11-2009 05:41 PM
Prime/Zoom debate and Nikon	gnaztee	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	01-16-2008 08:38 PM

05-29-2011, 04:47 PM	#16
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Originally posted by Twin-Reverb I guess I didn't give enough info. So here it is... My priorities are fast and ACCURATE auto focus with decent range. While I'm not looking to shoot wildlife a football field away, I would like more mm if I can get them. I would like weather sealing but not at the expense of IQ. I shoot a lot of indoor events with terrible lighting. Also, since several of you have mentioned the DA* F4 60-250mm, how good is it for terrible indoor lighting? Sigma 70-200 seems the best fit, here's why 1) HSM is faster than both SDM and tamron screw drive 2) sound like you need 200mm rather than 135 or 150 as you say reach is important 3) f/4 is simply too slow for "terrible indoor lighting" Problem is you don't get weather sealing with that sigma (I think), but then it's a matter of relative priorities between indoor (where a f2.8 zoom excels) and outdoor (where a f4 zoom is fast enough and you get weather sealing in the 60-250)

05-29-2011, 05:07 PM	#17
JHD Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,406	Originally posted by Frogfish Depending on what your primary use is : Sigma 50-150/2.8 (no longer in production but a superb lense, very sharp, fast and quiet AF [/URL] Otherwise if you don't need the extra 20mm on the wider side (more useful IMO) and do need the extra 50mm reach then the Tamron 70-200/2.8. I checked this lense out recently and will be getting one. The AF was more than acceptable, and this was in a dimly lit corridor, not at all noisy though not silent, and IQ was superb. BANG ON! If you can find a Sigma 50-150, that would be your best option. The Tamron 70-200 is a great lens but it weighs a fair bit more and is considerably bigger. I can't recommend the Pentax 50-135 because the SDM is painfully slow and is notoriously unreliable. To make matters worse, Pentax does not stand behind their lenses like Sigma and Tamron do with a warranty that inspires confidence.

05-29-2011, 05:11 PM	#18
JHD Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,406	Originally posted by Twin-Reverb I guess I didn't give enough info. So here it is... My priorities are fast and ACCURATE auto focus with decent range. While I'm not looking to shoot wildlife a football field away, I would like more mm if I can get them. I would like weather sealing but not at the expense of IQ. I shoot a lot of indoor events with terrible lighting. Looks like Sigma is your only option. Either the 50-150 (the new OS version should be available now) or the 70-200.

05-29-2011, 06:28 PM	#19
selar Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,042	Faced with the same choice I got the Sigma 70-200 HSM II. IQ is not worth that much if you dont get the shot in the first place due to sluggish AF. If you want a zoom for photographing sports or fast action in low light conditions, the Sigma 70-200 HSM II is the best option.

05-29-2011, 07:14 PM	#20
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685	Make sure you have a firm grasp on just how big and heavy the 70-200mm lenses are before you pull the trigger. I personally couldn't see myself carrying that log-of-a-lens around on a regular basis, which is why I went with the Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 HSM. It's a shame that Sigma decided to kill the non-OS 50-150mm.

05-29-2011, 08:28 PM	#21
selar Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,042	You either need the 200m @ f2.8 or you don't. If you do, size and weight are not going to be a deciding factor, as theres not much difference between the available choices that are not optically stabilized. One thing, they certainly are not - they are not lenses you would want to carry on a holiday.

05-30-2011, 12:19 AM	#22
JHD Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,406	Originally posted by selar You either need the 200m @ f2.8 or you don't. If you do, size and weight are not going to be a deciding factor... Um, there really isn't that much of a difference between 150mm and 200mm. It certainly is nothing compared to the difference between 10mm and 15mm, where people continually trump the size and weight argument. On long lenses, size and weight is a very real concern; with short lenses size and weight is a weak excuse for the lemmings to follow the leader.

05-30-2011, 12:28 AM	#23
MegaPower Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Hong Kong / Irvine, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 636	sigma 70-200mm, since pentax doesn't make a fast 70-200mm with a lens motor.

05-30-2011, 03:34 AM	#24
Frogfish Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Shanghai Posts: 4,490	Originally posted by selar You either need the 200m @ f2.8 or you don't. If you do, size and weight are not going to be a deciding factor, as theres not much difference between the available choices that are not optically stabilized. One thing, they certainly are not - they are not lenses you would want to carry on a holiday. I carry my 50-150 everywhere I go (one of 3 or 4 lenses) - I don't find it heavy at all and it feels, both size and weight-wise, a lot lighter/smaller than the 70-200 - whether there's actually that much difference or not.

05-30-2011, 04:42 AM	#25
andre-mz5 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Eindhoven Photos: Gallery Posts: 268	Quote: Also, since several of you have mentioned the DA* F4 60-250mm, how good is it for terrible indoor lighting? For terrible indoor lighting you need F2.8 and I also highly recommend a K5 for those circumstances. If fast and accurate AF is required then from the options you mention the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 HSM II would be your best choice. Since february 2011 I have the K5+ Sigma 70-200 F2.8 combo and was more than pleased with the results when I shot both an indoor table tennis and an indoor swim cup event. The lighting in the swim arena can only be described as "terrible indoor lighting" You can find pictures of those shoots in the Post your foto's section.

05-30-2011, 07:13 AM	#26
JHD Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,406	NOTE TO OP None of these lenses are inexpensive. Unless you can find one at a very attractive price, I would pass on buying one used... especially a Pentax lens and all the more if it has SDM. There's a reason why Sigma and Tamron offer a much longer warranty than Pentax.

05-30-2011, 06:37 PM	#27
frank Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,202	I'd vote for the Sigma 70-200 HSM too, would've got one myself if I didn't have an FA*80-200. Somehow I just don't like the Tamron 70-200/2.8, it feels cheapy...

05-30-2011, 07:32 PM	#28
elpolodiablo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,637	Originally posted by frank I'd vote for the Sigma 70-200 HSM too, would've got one myself if I didn't have an FA*80-200. Somehow I just don't like the Tamron 70-200/2.8, it feels cheapy... I'd say for OP's needs the 2 Sigma HSM zooms, the 50-150 and 70-200 will do just fine. I have the Tamron 70-200 and love it to bits, it does feel a bit cheap on build front and the handling a bit wonky like the cumbersome AF/MF clutch, and a bit front heavy, but I like the result I got from it and it is (comparably)cheap. Besides, I am a cheapskate and bought all my lenses used, that's one reason I avoid buying anything with SDM/HSM, without warranty these type of lens might be rather expensive to repair if they go wrong. The other thing is that with camera body update the AF speed might improve on the screw drive lenses, not sure on the SDM/HSM type...

05-30-2011, 07:49 PM	#29
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	For the OP's wishes, I also recomend the 50-150 HSM or 70-200 HSM, all he has to do now is decide if he needs the extra 50mm/kg of the 70-200.

05-30-2011, 08:28 PM	#30
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685	Originally posted by TOUGEFC For the OP's wishes, I also recomend the 50-150 HSM or 70-200 HSM, all he has to do now is decide if he needs the extra 50mm/kg of the 70-200. I chose the 50-150mm over the 70-200mm for the reasons already pointed out--size and weight. I use it to shoot my kids sports/recitals, etc. For amateur events, 150mm is usually more than long enough since you are generally able to get quite close to the field/court/stage. And since you are able to get so close and since many of the performances are indoors, the extra width of the 50mm is much more useful than the extra reach of the 200mm would be. It really helps to minimize the number of lens swaps. The only problem is that the 50-150mm non-OS has been discontinued and is now difficult to obtain. Used copies only rarely appear on eBay, but some people have had success with calling around to find some dealers with a few leftover copies.