Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-19-2012, 04:24 AM   #1
Site Supporter
Jean Poitiers's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lost in translation ...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,502
Advice and/or input for the DA 50-200 WR

Bonjour,

Need some advice here ...

I have and really like my DA 18-55 WR for my K-5, ... thus, I think that I will soon supplement it with a DA 50-200 WR. (NB: DA 18-135 WR is a bit "too rich" for my tastes/budget, as much as I would like to have it ...) Has anyone used this lens extensively and what do you realy think about it ?

I'd like the extra range (beyond 135mm) and I do tend to shoot a lot in the 100 to 200 range. Please note that I have read the PF in-depth review plus the users' reviews as well, thus I have a good idea of the "limitations" of this lens.

There's a 50€ instant in-store rebate until the end of March at Phox Photo in France, plus I have another additional rebate voucher which would reduce the retail price by +30% ... thus I think that I'll go for it (also because this price would be less than I could get it someday out of the States, etc.)

Any input would be appreciated ... merci d'avance, J Frog


Last edited by Jean Poitiers; 02-19-2012 at 06:00 AM.
02-19-2012, 04:51 AM   #2
Pentaxian
Mareket's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Chester
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 719
All I know is that it's shunned and everyone favours the 55-300. From what I hear I'd HIGHLY recommend stumping up the extra cash for the 55-300. It's not a huge amount extra to pay, but you're getting better build, better IQ, 100 extra mm and I'm assuming it'll be faster at 100-200 than the 50-200.

Plus you'd save more with that 30% discount if it's a more expensive lens :P

Though it isn't weather resistant, which may or may not make or break the deal for you. The 50-200 is probably lighter as well.

Then again you say you can't afford the 18-135, which isn't that much more expensive than the 55-300, so I'd go with the 50-200. You'll like the light weight and weather sealing, and assuming you shoot at around f/8, it'll most likely be optically great too.

I personally love the styling of the DA WR lenses ^_^ maybe try them out if you can? see which feels better.

Last edited by Mareket; 02-19-2012 at 04:58 AM.
02-19-2012, 06:02 AM   #3
Veteran Member
causey's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arlington, VA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,758
I bought a DA 50-200 about two years ago. Didn't like it--but I liked the kit lens. I thought the 50-200 was too soft, and I sold it. A year later I got my K-x with the DA L 50-200. Same conclusion--sold it again. The DA 55-300 is much better than the 50-200, and optically better than the kit lens, which is decent compared to the 50-200.
02-19-2012, 06:11 AM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Prague
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,198
Get 50-200 if you want a light and small telephoto that could be expendable.
I bought it as I didn't expect it to be stellar. It was not. But it is as good as the F70-210/4-5.6 and more practical.

02-19-2012, 06:49 AM   #5
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 151
The DA 50-200 is a decent lens for the price. Mine always seemed to me to be significantly better than a friend's budget Sigma 70-300 for example.

The 55-300 is better, and like anybody else it seems, I eventually exchanged my 50-200 for one.
So, if you really need WR or the longer lens just doesn't fit the budget, you could do worse than the 50-200.
02-19-2012, 09:38 AM - 1 Like   #6
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
I actually think the DA 50-200mm WR is the perfect travel telephoto. A lot more compact and lighter than the DA 55-300mm and if you get a good copy it can really deliver nice images. Focus is quicker than the DA 55-300mm and camera shake isn't that much an issue when shooting up to 200mm plus it has WR. That's why I still keep the DA 50-200mm WR even though I have the DA 55-300mm.
02-19-2012, 10:55 AM   #7
Site Supporter
Jean Poitiers's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lost in translation ...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,502
Original Poster
"WR" & travel lens usage ...

QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
I actually think the DA 50-200mm WR is the perfect travel telephoto. A lot more compact and lighter than the DA 55-300mm and if you get a good copy it can really deliver nice images. Focus is quicker than the DA 55-300mm and camera shake isn't that much an issue when shooting up to 200mm plus it has WR. That's why I still keep the DA 50-200mm WR even though I have the DA 55-300mm.
Bonjour creampuff,

Thanks and my thinking was that a new DA 50-200 WR would be a "travel type" telephoto ... a bit to replace my Sigma DC 18-200 that I never use now. I don't think that I will miss the lower end focal range since I plan to carry the DA 18-55 WR in my case, as well as maybe my DA 35/2.4 or my A 50/1.7. The 18-55 will obviously be for closer subjects ... plus it has some good close focus capacity.

I, rather my wife I should say, has a DA 55-300 on her K-r, and it's a very good lenses, but a bit too large and no WR. The WR is really an important aspect for me ... real deal breaker. Yes, the 55-300 will probably have better IQ, etc. but it's not for the wet/dirty environments that I sometimes frequent.

Hopefully, I will get a good copy and find my "bonheur" ... Allez et merci encore - J Frog

Last edited by Jean Poitiers; 02-19-2012 at 11:12 AM.
02-19-2012, 10:59 AM   #8
Site Supporter
Jean Poitiers's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lost in translation ...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,502
Original Poster
Merci

QuoteOriginally posted by mano Quote
The DA 50-200 is a decent lens for the price. Mine always seemed to me to be significantly better than a friend's budget Sigma 70-300 for example.

The 55-300 is better, and like anybody else it seems, I eventually exchanged my 50-200 for one.
So, if you really need WR or the longer lens just doesn't fit the budget, you could do worse than the 50-200.
Thanks for your input mano ... as I just wrote the WR aspect is important for me.

Seems like I'm going in the "opposite" direction (as usual) ... from a "wife procured" 55-300 to a 50-200 WR.

Salut, J

02-19-2012, 11:05 AM   #9
Site Supporter
Jean Poitiers's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lost in translation ...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,502
Original Poster
The shunned lens ..

QuoteOriginally posted by Mareket Quote
All I know is that it's shunned and everyone favours the 55-300. ... .
Merci Mareket,

This is why I wrote this post because this lens seems to be so shunned ... OK, for the reviews are not stellar nor perfect, but I hope that it will be up to my exceptions for this category of WR. Thanks again for your input, and yes the DA 55-300 is really good ... just ask my wife who has been squatting it forever. Enough said ...

Allez et merci encore, J

Last edited by Jean Poitiers; 02-19-2012 at 11:12 AM.
02-19-2012, 11:09 AM   #10
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,512
My daughter has the 50-200 (original non-WR metal mount version) and I've borrowed it quite often until I recently got the 55-300. The 55-300 is obviously one step up, but it's also quite a bit heavier and more expensive. For the price and given the small size and low weight, the DA50-200 is a very decent lens IMHO.
02-19-2012, 11:35 AM   #11
Pentaxian
Mareket's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Chester
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 719
There's always the 60-250 f/4... :P

But yeah, it's small, light, WR and optically 'good enough', The WR is a big deal for you, and there isn't another light WR tele zoom available, so go for it, regardless of optical quality.
02-19-2012, 11:58 AM   #12
Site Supporter
Jean Poitiers's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lost in translation ...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,502
Original Poster
OK - thanks, but then again ...

QuoteOriginally posted by Mareket Quote
There's always the 60-250 f/4... :P

But yeah, it's small, light, WR and optically 'good enough', The WR is a big deal for you, and there isn't another light WR tele zoom available, so go for it, regardless of optical quality.
The DA* 60-250 f/4 ... Oui, I could buy that (lists at "only" a 1200 w/4 year warranty)

Then again it would trigger "WWIII" inside the household ... plus my instant death and/or divorce, all at the same time!

Thanks again, I'll probably go for it ... the DA 50-200 WR that is to say ... Merci encore - J
02-19-2012, 04:48 PM   #13
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
I've yet to see a side by side comparison between the 50-200 and 55-300 that gives me any reason to believe the difference in opitcal quality is enough to make up for the rather large difference in size and weight, or of course the WR.
02-20-2012, 08:49 AM   #14
Pentaxian
Mareket's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Chester
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 719
I think the extra reach of the 55-300 is why people take it instead of the 50-200, even if it's heavier, non WR and not optically dissimilar. If you need that reach you don't really have a choice do you?

And there's a certain stigma held against kit lenses, even though Pentax's are absolutely fantastic. Some people want to appear like more advanced photographers by having a bigger lens, a role which the 55-300 can fill quite handily.
02-20-2012, 01:30 PM   #15
Site Supporter
Jean Poitiers's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lost in translation ...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,502
Original Poster
Merci Marc

QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
I've yet to see a side by side comparison between the 50-200 and 55-300 that gives me any reason to believe the difference in opitcal quality is enough to make up for the rather large difference in size and weight, or of course the WR.
Thanks for your input ... greatly appreciated.

Salut, J
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!
advice, da, input, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, price, range, rebate, slr lens, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The other LBA (Lens Buying Advice) Tamron/Sigma 70-200, Pentax 50-135, or 60-250? JinDesu Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 08-22-2011 10:42 AM
New here...advice, comments on KX and 50/200 lens... george c Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 01-20-2010 12:25 PM
70-200/2.8 lenses - novice needing advice adamkean Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 02-05-2009 04:38 PM
Seek advice: $200+ K110D repair - trade-in? TreeHuggerDoug Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 07-22-2008 10:02 AM
Advice please: Have K10D - Pentax 50-200 + teleconverter or Sigma 70-300 APO DG? pax1231 Pentax DSLR Discussion 24 03-31-2007 08:42 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:04 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