Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-02-2011, 04:28 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Somewhere near the middle...
Posts: 269
Pentax SMC P DA 50-200 mm F/4.0-5.6 Lens: Is it woth it?

I have the opportunity to look at, handle and take a few test shots of thie lens. If its good, I have the option to buy for $80. The questions is whether its worth that, or should I look at something else?

The longest lens I have is a Takumar Bayonet 135/2.5, followed by M100/2.8, and that makes the deer, rabits and occasional Cardinal. I'm likely to mount a bird feeder sometime next year, so that might bring more feathered friends...

Thanks in advance.

(PS: please excuse the typo in the title...)

08-02-2011, 04:56 AM   #2
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 43,686
At that price, it'd say it's worth it. However, the 55-300mm might be better for shots at a distance:

SMC Pentax DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 Lens Review - Introduction

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

08-02-2011, 05:19 AM   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Somewhere near the middle...
Posts: 269
Original Poster
For this price, and its performance at the long end, my reading seems to be telling me to look for an M200/f4 lens instead. At this time, I am using MF lenses almost exclusively.

Just because its well priced, does not mean I absolutely need to get it. I do think its an opprtunity, but I am being drawn to it as strongly as when I came across my M100 or Nokton 58.

Still seeking thoughts. The 55-300 certainly has a more satisfied/pleased crowd, though. Interesting...
08-02-2011, 08:37 AM   #4
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
You've likely read the reviews, which seems to indicate that is would be a decent portrait lens for well-lit lethargic birds centered in the viewfinder. I don't have one and, based on what I've read, I wouldn't buy one. But then, I don't have any lethargic birds in my dark forest.

08-02-2011, 12:57 PM   #5
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Somewhere near the middle...
Posts: 269
Original Poster
I decided to pass on this. Some may call me a fool, but I am a little better informed at the end of this day....

Maybe the 55-300...
08-02-2011, 03:17 PM   #6
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
Its biggest quality is size - it's a small and compact lens. It should also do well against the M200/4. I compared it with the K200/4 and the K showed a bit better microcontrast when shooting a resoluion target, but I liked the DA results better when shooting real objects - colors were more contrasty and it suffered less from CA and blooming around light reflections. So, overall, it's not a bad lens, but I'm still not very happy with it because I find it hard to MF and there are longer zooms that are better than it at 200mm.
08-02-2011, 05:32 PM   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,939
QuoteOriginally posted by subidoc Quote
I decided to pass on this. Some may call me a fool, but I am a little better informed at the end of this day....

Maybe the 55-300...
I had both. The 50-200 was OK on the K100D, but seemed IQ-limited on the K20D (and was sold before the K-5). The 55-300 was a noticeable improvement and good on the K20D, though it too has found a new home (too many long zooms...)
08-02-2011, 08:06 PM   #8
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Oklahoma USA
Posts: 1,503
It all depends on the individual lens you have. I bought the 55-300 with the intent of replacing the 50-200 (and 100-300F), but the 50-200 (and even the much-criticized 100-300F) was clearly superior, so I sent the 55-300 back.

Paul

08-02-2011, 11:23 PM   #9
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by tibbitts Quote
but the 50-200 (and even the much-criticized 100-300F) was clearly superior, so I sent the 55-300 back.
That is surprising. Maybe you had a defective copy of the 55-300.
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!
k-mount, lens, mm f/4.0-5.6, pentax lens, pentax smc, slr lens, smc p da
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Decision Sigma 70 -200 or Pentax SMC FA*star 80-200mm/f2.8 ED IF Lens campdog Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 10-29-2009 10:28 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax-M SMC 50mm f/1.2 K-Mount Lens, Only $200, Worldwide Ship wallyb Sold Items 7 05-17-2009 02:00 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax 6X7 Medium Format SMC Takumar 200/F4 Lens Cheap cousinsane Sold Items 3 03-29-2009 06:41 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:35 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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