DA* 300. Why not just Sigma 100-300/4?

borno · 06-21-2011, 08:49 PM

I had both for a while, and the DA was excellent up close while the sigma had some blur up close. The pentax worked excellent with the 1.7x afa, but other tc's would hunt. The sigma/ 1.7x afa had some compatibility issues on mine and with a kenko 1.5x it worked good, but the SR would not be set optimally for the focal length. I liked both lenses a lot and didn't want to sell either, but finally decided to sell the pentax first. Too bad there isn't a nice TC that would work well with sdm and screw drive. I don't think either one would disappoint.

Pentaxor · 06-21-2011, 09:40 PM

Originally posted by DanielT74

My guess without having owned either of the two lenses is

1. bokeh
2. WR
3. weight/size

I've noticed most of the birders here have the DA*300 which is probably better wide open and has a better bokeh. But I am wondering - has anyone looked carefully at both of those lenses and is there really much going for DA* 300 apart from size/weight?

personally, I would rather get the Sigma for versatility. both are great lenses but I hate to carry some considerable weight and long lens along with me. if I was so anal about IQ, I'd definitely choose the Sigma. as of the moment, I'm pretty much happy on using my 55-300. the lens may not be as good as the other two lenses, but boy, it's IQ is more than enough to get a good image of the subject. the other perks that I like about that lens is it can go low at 55mm which is really handy, lesser MFD distance which is another plus, and is shorter and lighter than the other two lenses. lastly, it is 3-4x cheaper.

DanielT74 · 06-21-2011, 09:47 PM

I wasn't really happy with the 55-300 at 300mm but maybe that was my lack of skill or unreasonable expectations. I found images to be fairly flat and lacking in detail. Sure it is very very handy for its size and range.

Pentaxor · 06-22-2011, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by DanielT74

I wasn't really happy with the 55-300 at 300mm but maybe that was my lack of skill or unreasonable expectations. I found images to be fairly flat and lacking in detail. Sure it is very very handy for its size and range.

I didn't say it can perform miracles. I just said that it is enough to produce a good image (especially at the far end of the focal length) which doesn't mean spectacular. as I said, if one is really into details and great resolution, the other two lenses are the choice to go for. personally, I would choose the Sigma. anyway, had you gotten yourself a copy already?

borno · 06-22-2011, 05:36 AM

I forgot another downside to the sigma is no full time manual focus, you have to move the focus ring back and forth. Not a real big deal, but something else to fool with especially if you like to AF with the back button.

reeftool · 06-22-2011, 06:42 AM

I.m in the market for an AF long lens. I currently own an M300/4 and it is incredibly sharp,even wide open. From all I've heard about the DA 300, it is even better so it would be hard to argue against it. Having the versatility of a long zoom is pretty much something I have got used to so if I had to make a choice of either/or, I would probably opt for the zoom. The M fits my needs actually pretty well as I do most of my bird and wildlife shooting from a kayak and always have brush, grass, and other obstructions in the way that play havoc with auto focus. My current inclination is to keep the M and get a Tamron or Sigma 70-200/2.8 for an AF zoom.

**apisto** · 06-22-2011, 06:57 AM

I have the Sigma 100-300 for Nikon mount. I have had, and hope to have again the Pentax DA*300. My non scientific observations are that the DA has better IQ than the Sigma at 300mm -- better bokeh by a noticeable amount, and the DA has better sharpness and contrast by a little.

The zoom range of the sigma is terribly convienent, especially since the IQ is so good through the whole range.

However the size and weight of the lenses makes a difference to me too. When part of a 2 person zone defense to multiple children at the zoo, the DA is much more pleasant to carry around.

GeneV · 06-22-2011, 07:36 AM

The older I get, the more I appreciate savings in size and weight--even over some speed.

Pentaxor · 06-22-2011, 08:12 AM

Originally posted by GeneV

The older I get, the more I appreciate savings in size and weight--even over some speed.

how about cost?

DogLover · 06-22-2011, 08:22 AM

Originally posted by DanielT74

I wasn't really happy with the 55-300 at 300mm but maybe that was my lack of skill or unreasonable expectations. I found images to be fairly flat and lacking in detail. Sure it is very very handy for its size and range.

That was pretty much my feelings, as well. The 55-300 is an outrageous bargain of a lens and better than it has any right to be for it's price and size, but ultimately, it left me wanting at the long end. I made the just-in-time decision to get the Sigma (when they were discontinued) and have been happy with it ever since, even though it means more of a commitment of both money and carrying weight. I found it to be worth it to me.

GeneV · 06-22-2011, 11:45 AM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

how about cost?

Other than this last year, getting older has actually improved my ability to afford things I don't need.

Pentaxor · 06-22-2011, 01:33 PM

Originally posted by GeneV

Other than this last year, getting older has actually improved my ability to afford things I don't need.

how I envy thou. my ability to afford things was much better last year. I can't remember exactly how many good deals I let slip by this year due to important financial commitments. I just wished those deals were offered last year and had been able to get them. eventhough I could buy them, I just couldn't right now.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nikon D7000 + 70-300 VR vs. Pentax K5 + Sigma 100-300	highyellow1	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	41	05-06-2011 07:40 AM
FA* 300 mm f4,5 or Sigma 100-300 f4	mgbirder	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	02-12-2011 07:42 PM
Tamron adaptall 300/2.8 or Sigma 100-300/4	pinholecam	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	11-07-2009 05:52 AM
Wildlife & sports tele: DA*300 vs Sigma 100-300 f4	dspdx	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	08-28-2008 09:27 PM

06-21-2011, 08:49 PM	#16
borno Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: md-usa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,580	I had both for a while, and the DA was excellent up close while the sigma had some blur up close. The pentax worked excellent with the 1.7x afa, but other tc's would hunt. The sigma/ 1.7x afa had some compatibility issues on mine and with a kenko 1.5x it worked good, but the SR would not be set optimally for the focal length. I liked both lenses a lot and didn't want to sell either, but finally decided to sell the pentax first. Too bad there isn't a nice TC that would work well with sdm and screw drive. I don't think either one would disappoint.

06-21-2011, 09:40 PM	#17
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by DanielT74 My guess without having owned either of the two lenses is 1. bokeh 2. WR 3. weight/size I've noticed most of the birders here have the DA300 which is probably better wide open and has a better bokeh. But I am wondering - has anyone looked carefully at both of those lenses and is there really much going for DA 300 apart from size/weight? personally, I would rather get the Sigma for versatility. both are great lenses but I hate to carry some considerable weight and long lens along with me. if I was so anal about IQ, I'd definitely choose the Sigma. as of the moment, I'm pretty much happy on using my 55-300. the lens may not be as good as the other two lenses, but boy, it's IQ is more than enough to get a good image of the subject. the other perks that I like about that lens is it can go low at 55mm which is really handy, lesser MFD distance which is another plus, and is shorter and lighter than the other two lenses. lastly, it is 3-4x cheaper.

06-21-2011, 09:47 PM	#18
DanielT74 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,377 Original Poster	I wasn't really happy with the 55-300 at 300mm but maybe that was my lack of skill or unreasonable expectations. I found images to be fairly flat and lacking in detail. Sure it is very very handy for its size and range.

06-22-2011, 12:13 AM	#19
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by DanielT74 I wasn't really happy with the 55-300 at 300mm but maybe that was my lack of skill or unreasonable expectations. I found images to be fairly flat and lacking in detail. Sure it is very very handy for its size and range. I didn't say it can perform miracles. I just said that it is enough to produce a good image (especially at the far end of the focal length) which doesn't mean spectacular. as I said, if one is really into details and great resolution, the other two lenses are the choice to go for. personally, I would choose the Sigma. anyway, had you gotten yourself a copy already?

06-22-2011, 05:36 AM	#20
borno Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: md-usa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,580	I forgot another downside to the sigma is no full time manual focus, you have to move the focus ring back and forth. Not a real big deal, but something else to fool with especially if you like to AF with the back button.

06-22-2011, 06:42 AM	#21
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,555	I.m in the market for an AF long lens. I currently own an M300/4 and it is incredibly sharp,even wide open. From all I've heard about the DA 300, it is even better so it would be hard to argue against it. Having the versatility of a long zoom is pretty much something I have got used to so if I had to make a choice of either/or, I would probably opt for the zoom. The M fits my needs actually pretty well as I do most of my bird and wildlife shooting from a kayak and always have brush, grass, and other obstructions in the way that play havoc with auto focus. My current inclination is to keep the M and get a Tamron or Sigma 70-200/2.8 for an AF zoom.

06-22-2011, 06:57 AM	#22
apisto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Minnesota Posts: 588	I have the Sigma 100-300 for Nikon mount. I have had, and hope to have again the Pentax DA*300. My non scientific observations are that the DA has better IQ than the Sigma at 300mm -- better bokeh by a noticeable amount, and the DA has better sharpness and contrast by a little. The zoom range of the sigma is terribly convienent, especially since the IQ is so good through the whole range. However the size and weight of the lenses makes a difference to me too. When part of a 2 person zone defense to multiple children at the zoo, the DA is much more pleasant to carry around.

06-22-2011, 07:36 AM	#23
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	The older I get, the more I appreciate savings in size and weight--even over some speed.

06-22-2011, 08:12 AM	#24
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by GeneV The older I get, the more I appreciate savings in size and weight--even over some speed. how about cost?

06-22-2011, 08:22 AM	#25
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by DanielT74 I wasn't really happy with the 55-300 at 300mm but maybe that was my lack of skill or unreasonable expectations. I found images to be fairly flat and lacking in detail. Sure it is very very handy for its size and range. That was pretty much my feelings, as well. The 55-300 is an outrageous bargain of a lens and better than it has any right to be for it's price and size, but ultimately, it left me wanting at the long end. I made the just-in-time decision to get the Sigma (when they were discontinued) and have been happy with it ever since, even though it means more of a commitment of both money and carrying weight. I found it to be worth it to me.

06-22-2011, 11:45 AM	#26
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Pentaxor how about cost? Other than this last year, getting older has actually improved my ability to afford things I don't need.

06-22-2011, 01:33 PM	#27
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by GeneV Other than this last year, getting older has actually improved my ability to afford things I don't need. how I envy thou. my ability to afford things was much better last year. I can't remember exactly how many good deals I let slip by this year due to important financial commitments. I just wished those deals were offered last year and had been able to get them. eventhough I could buy them, I just couldn't right now.