which zoom lens for portrait???

hll · 11-09-2007, 12:17 PM

i generally use my 50 mm prime for indoor shoots, but for outdoor i think i need a zoom lens between 50-150 or maximum 50-200 mm. my dream is of course a da* 50-135 pentax but i am just a student...
so except it (da*) i found 55-200 sigma
70-300 sigma (don'T need 300 mm and need 50 mm, not 70mm)
70-300 sigma apo
70-300 tamron
50-200 pentax
70-300 quantaray

i know i can't expect much from these 200 dollar-lenses, but as far as i know there is no lens which has the price between 200 and 1000$....
photozone.de says 50-200 pentax sucks. i wish it would be as good as 18-55....
which one do you recommend me ??? iq is my first preference...

RBellavance · 11-09-2007, 12:22 PM

Regardless of what Photozone.de says, the DA50-200 does not suck. It is at least the equal of the DA18-55. Do a few searches here and on DPReview, you'll find plenty of great images taken with it, and favorable comments.

Bramela · 11-09-2007, 12:49 PM

I support RBellavance fully. Ignore the review you refer to. The 50-200 is a very useful lens and has many great qualities. I just dont know where some of these cowboy reviewers get their info.
As stated, have a look at some of the great photos posted on this Forum to see some of the excellent results from this lens.

hll · 11-09-2007, 12:52 PM

so you both recommend me 50-200 among all of them, am i right???

hinman · 11-09-2007, 01:08 PM

Originally posted by hll

so you both recommend me 50-200 among all of them, am i right???

My reaction to photozone.de
Photozone.de Pentax DA 50-200 review - Hin's Tech Corner

Some samples:

(with picasa shadow, highlight, b&w)

some indoor portraits without flash

Maybe I get a decent copy. But I think in general, there are people noticing the various issues on corner sharpness. But many here are others in the forum can attest that the lens is quite good for the price and it is both lightweight and versatile. And I prefer it most time over the kit's lens as I can zoom in from a farther distance in wildlife and my with my boys in the outdoor shooting.

And for kit's lens replacement, I have this blog post for thoughts:

Pentax Protrait Lens - Hin's Tech Corner

Thanks,
Hin

and · 11-09-2007, 01:32 PM

Indeed I have been very impressed by the optic performance and the bokeh of the 50-200 time and time again, I think its a very nice lens and its so affordable and also very small and lightweight. A great buy imo. It also does very well with a good closeup filter for flower shots

RBellavance · 11-09-2007, 01:49 PM

The first two images in the following thread:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/10973-pollen-gatherers.html

were taken with the DA50-200. The first one is even wide open (f/5.6 @ 200mm). Both were slightly cropped and had a small amount of USM applied after resizing (0.3 radius, 50 amount, 0 threshold IIRC).

hll · 11-09-2007, 04:29 PM

thank you, i appreciate all your help.
yes, except the test in photozone.de i have never read a bad comment on DA and you support them, too.
now which one do u suggest among these lenses?? for portraits, all i need is a better IQ....

Groundloop · 11-09-2007, 07:53 PM

I've done some very informal portraits with the DA 50-200, and it's more than adequate in that application. My copy starts to lag when I zoom out past 150mm or so, and I always try to stop down to f8 - f11. I'll be doing a more controlled portrait shoot this Sunday (mostly as a test of the $1.80 Gary Fong clone that I made for my 540FGZ), and I was planning on using the DA 50-200 for most of it, though I'll also try my SMC-A 50mm f1.7, both with and without a Tamron 1.4x TC.

In your original post you state that you don't need 300mm, but do need 50mm for portraits, so it looks like you've narrowed your choices already. I have no experience with the Sigma 55-200, so if you have the chance to try it with the DA 50-200 side by side, take it, and let your eyes be the judge.

All that being said, if I could justify (to myself) owning the the DA*50-135, I'd be all over that like me on a pint of Guinness!

Fritz · 11-09-2007, 09:01 PM

IMHO the IQ of the DA 50-200mm is better then the DA 18-55mm. It's a nice lens, especially for the price. The only real downside that I have seen is it's a little on the slow side (max f4.0). The lens is compact, light, and handles very nicely. What more could you want in an inexpensive lens!

hll · 11-10-2007, 02:20 AM

thank you, hinman, RBellavance, fritz, Groundloop, bremela... i really appreaciate your help...
but it doesn't mean i ended the thread, go on guys...
i am now persuaded that DA is an excellent lens for the money, but anyone beats her in the class???

Chako · 11-10-2007, 04:18 AM

I have both the DA 50-200 and the Tamron 70-300 lenses.

I know quite a few people will tell you that if you compare the Tamron 70-300 to the Sigma 70-300, the Tamron will have higher IQ but at the cost of purple fringing.

If you are at all interested in taking photos of birds and other forms of subject matter that may contrast somewhat with the background, stay well away from the Tamron unless you don't mind fixing each and every photo. I like to shoot birds and have found that my post process time has increased to such an extent that I now dislike the Tamron. I have nicknamed the lens The Purple Monster. 1:2 macro is great for small insects. Just don't shoot them on a white flower lol.

Likewise, I have seen some photos of the Sigma APO version, and couldn't say the photos were any better then the Tamrons, but they did appear to seem worst overall. When people state that the Tamron has higher IQ, believe them. That is the tradeoff between these two lenses. I probably would love the Tamron except for my subject matter always highlights the deficiencies of the glass.

Now for the Pentax DA 50-200. That lens is a true gem for the price. It excels at everything I throw at it. The IQ is great along with the colours, and best of all, no purple fringing that I can detect for the type of photography I love to do. My only wish was that the lens extended to the 300mm range. I sometimes have to pinch myself when I consider how cheap they sell this little beauty. I can state without any doubts, that Canon (my other system) has no comparable glass for so low a price.

I cannot comment on the others as I have no experience with them.

Cheers.

hll · 11-10-2007, 04:27 AM

chako, thank you very much. your review is completely helpful to me... i now think i should prefer the DA... is there anyone does not agree with him??? (don't misunderstand chako, i am just curious

)

kjao · 11-10-2007, 05:23 AM

I find Tamron 28-75/2.8 very good for portraits. The equivalent field of view is approx 42~113, so good for half-body and head shots. You should be able to find a 2nd-hand copy for around $300.

cheers
Kenny

hll · 11-10-2007, 05:39 AM

i know that it is very good lens, but i want to shoot children outside without getting their attention, that is why i need more focal lenght than 75....thank you kenny, i think tamron should create an 18-70 option or something like that....

11-09-2007, 12:17 PM	#1
hll Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: new york Photos: Gallery Posts: 297	which zoom lens for portrait??? i generally use my 50 mm prime for indoor shoots, but for outdoor i think i need a zoom lens between 50-150 or maximum 50-200 mm. my dream is of course a da* 50-135 pentax but i am just a student... so except it (da*) i found 55-200 sigma 70-300 sigma (don'T need 300 mm and need 50 mm, not 70mm) 70-300 sigma apo 70-300 tamron 50-200 pentax 70-300 quantaray i know i can't expect much from these 200 dollar-lenses, but as far as i know there is no lens which has the price between 200 and 1000$.... photozone.de says 50-200 pentax sucks. i wish it would be as good as 18-55.... which one do you recommend me ??? iq is my first preference...

11-09-2007, 01:08 PM	#5
hinman Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fremont, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,473	DA 50-200 is my favorite in the bag Originally posted by hll so you both recommend me 50-200 among all of them, am i right??? My reaction to photozone.de Photozone.de Pentax DA 50-200 review - Hin's Tech Corner Some samples: (with picasa shadow, highlight, b&w) some indoor portraits without flash Maybe I get a decent copy. But I think in general, there are people noticing the various issues on corner sharpness. But many here are others in the forum can attest that the lens is quite good for the price and it is both lightweight and versatile. And I prefer it most time over the kit's lens as I can zoom in from a farther distance in wildlife and my with my boys in the outdoor shooting. And for kit's lens replacement, I have this blog post for thoughts: Pentax Protrait Lens - Hin's Tech Corner Thanks, Hin

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-X zoom & portrait lens in 1	HoBykoYan	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	6	03-30-2010 02:43 PM
Best studio portrait zoom?	muhozol	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	01-21-2010 07:50 PM
Looking for "Crazy sharp" portrait zoom lens	ScannerBrightly	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	29	01-20-2009 03:05 AM
Is the Pentax - 75-300mm F4.5-5.8 SMCP-FA J AL Zoom Lens a good budget zoom?	Kornbread	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	01-16-2009 03:45 PM
Is zoom on 85-105 good for portrait?	hinman	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	09-02-2007 02:42 AM

11-09-2007, 12:22 PM	#2
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	Regardless of what Photozone.de says, the DA50-200 does not suck. It is at least the equal of the DA18-55. Do a few searches here and on DPReview, you'll find plenty of great images taken with it, and favorable comments.

11-09-2007, 12:49 PM	#3
Bramela Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Newcastle Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,284	I support RBellavance fully. Ignore the review you refer to. The 50-200 is a very useful lens and has many great qualities. I just dont know where some of these cowboy reviewers get their info. As stated, have a look at some of the great photos posted on this Forum to see some of the excellent results from this lens.

11-09-2007, 12:52 PM	#4
hll Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: new york Photos: Gallery Posts: 297 Original Poster	so you both recommend me 50-200 among all of them, am i right???

11-09-2007, 01:32 PM	#6
and Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,476	Indeed I have been very impressed by the optic performance and the bokeh of the 50-200 time and time again, I think its a very nice lens and its so affordable and also very small and lightweight. A great buy imo. It also does very well with a good closeup filter for flower shots

11-09-2007, 01:49 PM	#7
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	The first two images in the following thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/10973-pollen-gatherers.html were taken with the DA50-200. The first one is even wide open (f/5.6 @ 200mm). Both were slightly cropped and had a small amount of USM applied after resizing (0.3 radius, 50 amount, 0 threshold IIRC).

11-09-2007, 04:29 PM	#8
hll Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: new york Photos: Gallery Posts: 297 Original Poster	thank you, i appreciate all your help. yes, except the test in photozone.de i have never read a bad comment on DA and you support them, too. now which one do u suggest among these lenses?? for portraits, all i need is a better IQ....

11-09-2007, 07:53 PM	#9
Groundloop Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Toronto, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 236	I've done some very informal portraits with the DA 50-200, and it's more than adequate in that application. My copy starts to lag when I zoom out past 150mm or so, and I always try to stop down to f8 - f11. I'll be doing a more controlled portrait shoot this Sunday (mostly as a test of the $1.80 Gary Fong clone that I made for my 540FGZ), and I was planning on using the DA 50-200 for most of it, though I'll also try my SMC-A 50mm f1.7, both with and without a Tamron 1.4x TC. In your original post you state that you don't need 300mm, but do need 50mm for portraits, so it looks like you've narrowed your choices already. I have no experience with the Sigma 55-200, so if you have the chance to try it with the DA 50-200 side by side, take it, and let your eyes be the judge. All that being said, if I could justify (to myself) owning the the DA*50-135, I'd be all over that like me on a pint of Guinness!

11-09-2007, 09:01 PM	#10
Fritz Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Tillamook, OR Posts: 1,222	IMHO the IQ of the DA 50-200mm is better then the DA 18-55mm. It's a nice lens, especially for the price. The only real downside that I have seen is it's a little on the slow side (max f4.0). The lens is compact, light, and handles very nicely. What more could you want in an inexpensive lens!

11-10-2007, 02:20 AM	#11
hll Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: new york Photos: Gallery Posts: 297 Original Poster	thank you, hinman, RBellavance, fritz, Groundloop, bremela... i really appreaciate your help... but it doesn't mean i ended the thread, go on guys... i am now persuaded that DA is an excellent lens for the money, but anyone beats her in the class???

11-10-2007, 04:18 AM	#12
Chako Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sault Ste Marie, Ont, Canada. Posts: 563	I have both the DA 50-200 and the Tamron 70-300 lenses. I know quite a few people will tell you that if you compare the Tamron 70-300 to the Sigma 70-300, the Tamron will have higher IQ but at the cost of purple fringing. If you are at all interested in taking photos of birds and other forms of subject matter that may contrast somewhat with the background, stay well away from the Tamron unless you don't mind fixing each and every photo. I like to shoot birds and have found that my post process time has increased to such an extent that I now dislike the Tamron. I have nicknamed the lens The Purple Monster. 1:2 macro is great for small insects. Just don't shoot them on a white flower lol. Likewise, I have seen some photos of the Sigma APO version, and couldn't say the photos were any better then the Tamrons, but they did appear to seem worst overall. When people state that the Tamron has higher IQ, believe them. That is the tradeoff between these two lenses. I probably would love the Tamron except for my subject matter always highlights the deficiencies of the glass. Now for the Pentax DA 50-200. That lens is a true gem for the price. It excels at everything I throw at it. The IQ is great along with the colours, and best of all, no purple fringing that I can detect for the type of photography I love to do. My only wish was that the lens extended to the 300mm range. I sometimes have to pinch myself when I consider how cheap they sell this little beauty. I can state without any doubts, that Canon (my other system) has no comparable glass for so low a price. I cannot comment on the others as I have no experience with them. Cheers.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-10-2007, 04:27 AM	#13
hll Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: new york Photos: Gallery Posts: 297 Original Poster	chako, thank you very much. your review is completely helpful to me... i now think i should prefer the DA... is there anyone does not agree with him??? (don't misunderstand chako, i am just curious )

11-10-2007, 05:23 AM	#14
kjao Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 423	I find Tamron 28-75/2.8 very good for portraits. The equivalent field of view is approx 42~113, so good for half-body and head shots. You should be able to find a 2nd-hand copy for around $300. cheers Kenny

11-10-2007, 05:39 AM	#15
hll Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: new york Photos: Gallery Posts: 297 Original Poster	i know that it is very good lens, but i want to shoot children outside without getting their attention, that is why i need more focal lenght than 75....thank you kenny, i think tamron should create an 18-70 option or something like that....