Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-11-2011, 09:24 PM   #31
Site Supporter
Fl_Gulfer's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida Gulfer
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,052
Camera Labs :: View topic - Pentax DA* 60-250mm f/4 ED (IF) SDM User Review comparing the 60-250 to the 50-135

12-11-2011, 09:46 PM   #32
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by drougge Quote
I haven't had my 50-135 long, and I don't have (and have never had) the 60-250, so I'm not the best person to be answering this probably, but you inspired me to plot both the FL's I use, and the apertures. From this I can probably conclude that the 60-250 would be a bad replacement for me. But most people probably stop down more. (And I suspect the statistics will go more towards that for me too, I've just been doing too much low light hand held stuff since I got it.)

That's a pretty healthy FL spread.. I'm obviously not thinking enough about what I want to do when I shoot. I haven't plotted my Apertures though and I think it'd be more interesting to plot aperture against ratings in LR to get an idea of where your most successful shots come from.
12-11-2011, 09:52 PM   #33
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by GaryH Quote
I have the DA*60-250 and the DA*300. I sold my 50-135 to help fund the 60-250 and have never looked back. The 60-250 is so much more versatile for me with its additional range and I could not justify keeping both with the overlap. I use the 60-250 with the AFA 1.7x for travel when I might want extra reach. It works very nicely. I still have not sold the 300mm because I like the ability to have a lightweight 500mm+ package that is easy to carry. In my opinion, you could easily get rid of a few lenses without noticing a lot of need for the missing ones.
If you look at my MTF charts a few posts back you can see that from about 115mm up the DA60-250 its better than the 50-135. It's also better than the DA200. The DA 300 is not as sharp on the edge as the FA300 4.5 and the 60-250 isn't either... it IS sharper in the middle though. IOW, it would have been OK to keep the 50-135 as a 50-115 lens and use the 60-250 from there on up. Just because the range is there doesn't mean you're obliged to use it when something better is available. I'm thinking of the 60-250 more as a DA200 replacement... and maybe all 3 lenses if It goes well.

I am expecting a Tamron 1.4x TC to arrive any day this week and I'll be trying that on my lenses to see if it's worth using and thus possible might change the way I'm thinking.
12-11-2011, 09:52 PM   #34
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Fl_Gulfer Quote
Thanks for that

The version of the 50-135 in those 'test' seems pretty soft as mine looks nothing like those and is pin sharp. Also, his 100% crops of blue sky are a joke right? I mean.. WT....?


Last edited by bossa; 12-11-2011 at 09:58 PM.
12-11-2011, 10:10 PM   #35
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by GaryH Quote
In my opinion, you could easily get rid of a few lenses without noticing a lot of need for the missing ones.
Was this comment meant for me specifically or was it a general comment? Regardless, I do have a few lenses that I probably shouldn't have bought and need to rationalize my setup. Based on my pie charts I could get by with about 4 primes.

EDIT: Actually, 8-16, 31mm, 50mm, 77mm, 90macro, 200 & 300. That'd pretty much cover what I'm doing with the zoom lens anyway. So that's 6 primes and one wide angle zoom.

Last edited by bossa; 12-11-2011 at 10:17 PM.
12-12-2011, 02:55 AM   #36
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
QuoteOriginally posted by drougge Quote
I haven't had my 50-135 long, and I don't have (and have never had) the 60-250, so I'm not the best person to be answering this probably, but you inspired me to plot both the FL's I use, and the apertures. From this I can probably conclude that the 60-250 would be a bad replacement for me. But most people probably stop down more. (And I suspect the statistics will go more towards that for me too, I've just been doing too much low light hand held stuff since I got it.)
wow, that is the perfect lens for you!
12-12-2011, 08:03 AM   #37
Loyal Site Supporter
drougge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Malmö
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 787
QuoteOriginally posted by bossa Quote
That's a pretty healthy FL spread.. I'm obviously not thinking enough about what I want to do when I shoot. I haven't plotted my Apertures though and I think it'd be more interesting to plot aperture against ratings in LR to get an idea of where your most successful shots come from.
I don't have the data (not rating my pictures, except tagging a few as "good"), but if you do it sounds like a good idea. (About half are <F4 for those tagged, in my case.)

QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
wow, that is the perfect lens for you!
I need (well, want) other lenses, the graphs are for that lens only. I should maybe have specified. But it does fit me quite well, it's true.
12-12-2011, 10:00 AM   #38
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by bossa Quote
If you look at my MTF charts a few posts back you can see that from about 115mm up the DA60-250 its better than the 50-135. It's also better than the DA200. The DA 300 is not as sharp on the edge as the FA300 4.5 and the 60-250 isn't either... it IS sharper in the middle though. IOW, it would have been OK to keep the 50-135 as a 50-115 lens and use the 60-250 from there on up. Just because the range is there doesn't mean you're obliged to use it when something better is available. I'm thinking of the 60-250 more as a DA200 replacement... and maybe all 3 lenses if It goes well.

I am expecting a Tamron 1.4x TC to arrive any day this week and I'll be trying that on my lenses to see if it's worth using and thus possible might change the way I'm thinking.
Its good to hear that the 60-250 is so great. But its not for me. If i were allowed only one lens, it would be the 50-135. Whenever its on the camera, i get some good shots. I don't do long range bird or wildlife shooting. More city scapes or landscapes or indoor plays. I've bought a DA 55-300 for infrequent long shots, as its far easier to carry in size and weight than my DA300. These days, my camera bag often contains the 50-135, DA21, DA35, or perhaps the Tamron 28-75 or the Sigma 10-20. I'm interested in the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-f4 to overlap the 50-135.

Its not that my desired lenses is better or worse than the OP's, i can see we shoot different sets of images.

Weight is becoming more important to me. I would note that the 50-135 plus the 55-300 together only weigh slightly more than the 60-250. The 50 end of the 50-135 is important to me. Someday i hope that Pentax issues a 50-135 V2 with SDM2 for faster focusing and lower the 50 end to 24, if possible. Best feature of the existing lens is the super optics, which i consider as good as any of my primes.

12-12-2011, 12:34 PM   #39
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
I keep lusting after the 60-250 but I have to wonder if I really need it. I have the Sigma 50-150/2.8 and the DA*300 and rarely do I find the need for something to fill the 150-300 gap, wide though it seems.
12-12-2011, 01:40 PM   #40
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
I keep lusting after the 60-250 but I have to wonder if I really need it. I have the Sigma 50-150/2.8 and the DA*300 and rarely do I find the need for something to fill the 150-300 gap, wide though it seems.
Yep, i think its more important that one has lenses they enjoy shooting with, than have every numerical possibility covered. If its not in one's camera bag on a regular basis, that might be a hint
12-12-2011, 01:47 PM   #41
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
QuoteOriginally posted by bossa Quote
Thanks for that

The version of the 50-135 in those 'test' seems pretty soft as mine looks nothing like those and is pin sharp. Also, his 100% crops of blue sky are a joke right? I mean.. WT....?
I think those are meant to show the amount of vignetting. Sorta hard to follow, but you can see it lighten up as you go into F8+.
12-12-2011, 01:55 PM   #42
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
Original Poster
My intent was to try and replace all three lenses but after looking over the shots I've taken with all of my lenses the 50-135 is clearly the best along with the FA* 300 F/4.5. With PP the DA*200 is also pretty nice. I was also thinking about weight when I posed the question and the bag can be very heavy if I get overly enthusiastic. I was also trying to combine the long end to maybe replace just the 200 & 300 - the long end of the 60-250 is actually pretty good. Between 80-200 it's quite good @ F/4 and at F5.6 to F8 it's great all the way through. I'd be happy with a decent 150-450 lens that was at F4 but the Sigma rep's in those focal lengths aren't really good enough. I guess I'm stuck with what I have. I too like shooting Cityscapes and so it's pretty important to have something that's sharp into the corners. But the 60mm at F4 on the 60-250 is pretty soft on the edges from what I've seen so I can't imagine it completely displacing the 50-135.
12-12-2011, 02:18 PM   #43
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
I think those are meant to show the amount of vignetting. Sorta hard to follow, but you can see it lighten up as you go into F8+.
Of course.. thanks.
12-13-2011, 12:04 AM   #44
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
Original Poster
What about considering the Sigma 150-500 as a range extender beyond the DA*50-135? Anyone?
12-13-2011, 04:56 AM   #45
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,796
QuoteOriginally posted by bossa Quote
What about considering the Sigma 150-500 as a range extender beyond the DA*50-135? Anyone?
that lens would be way too slow. Bear in mind that when manually focusing a sigma lens the focus ring turns the opposite direction to pentax lenses.
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, lenses, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA* 80-200 or DA* 60-250 or DA* 50-135+ Tamron 70-200/2.8 malakola Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 11-09-2013 06:31 AM
For Sale - Sold: DA* 16-50mm/2.8, 50-135/2.8, 200/2.8, 300/4, DA 12-24/4, 18-50, 50-200, K10D Albert Siegel Sold Items 15 08-14-2010 08:51 AM
Superzoom comparison? Tamron 28-200 vs Pentax 18-250 vs Sigma 28-300 etc JayR Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 03-10-2010 12:40 PM
Sigma 70-200 & 100-300 for DA 60-250 OrenMc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 01-05-2010 06:17 PM
Tamron 70-200 to replace my DA*50-135? NeverSatisfied Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 33 03-22-2008 01:05 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:43 PM. | 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