Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-08-2012, 10:53 AM   #16
Veteran Member
joe.penn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,902
Original Poster
That's a nice shot Ron! westmill, been looking at the mft charts for weeks now - lol

Phil, the bigma was on my list, my only concern is under "dirty/dim" lighting conditions - obviously the high ISO capabilities of the bodies can overcome this, I do however hate it when loss of detail happens due to noise around detailed edges.

QuoteOriginally posted by Phil1 Quote
On an edit: I noticed a screw drive Bigma for sale with some picture examples and comments that might be of interest. No connection with seller.
I actually posted a reply on that thread a few days, was peaking at that for another bird lens...

03-08-2012, 11:08 AM   #17
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 813
If you are talking about outdoor sports, I would definitely suggest the Sigma 100-300 f4 for extra reach. It's not manufactured for Pentax any more, so you would have to find it on the used market, which is tough because those of us that have them never want to part with them. I've used both the Tamron and Sigma 70-200, they are both great in their own ways, and I still have the Sigma, but for outdoor events, it's always the 100-300, the f4 doesn't hurt you outdoors, especially with the K-5. I've never used the 60-250. I'd love to have it as a do it all lens, but the funny thing is, for sports I've never considered it. Too slow for indoors, not long enough for outdoors. If you don't want to go used though, it seems like an attractive choice. Weather sealing comes in handy.
03-08-2012, 11:16 AM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,292
My hobby experience with the Bigma has been rather good in most all conditions. Like all these things the compromises we have to make are usually determined by how much cash you have to spend. Fortunately most all big field sports are in long-day spring and summer months. (Day light savings switch is next Sunday). So dusk level low light will be late in the game and afternoon. Then you can crank up the ISO. I have used it a few times at night games with high school level field lighting with the ISO up and managed a few keepers.

What does bother me about the Bigma is the large internal lens volume when used in dusty conditions. The lens expands so much for the longer focal lengths I am concerned about it inhaling dust during high winds and certain sports like auto rally and rally cross. That seems to be my personal bogey man to worry about with it.

There are certainly better and faster quality lenses for field sports but usually more money.
03-08-2012, 11:17 AM   #19
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by joe.penn Quote
Thanks for all the info guys - the AF speed isn't an issue as I shoot MF near exclusively anyways; which brings me to another plus for the 60~250 as it will allow for CIF without taping contacts as I would have to with the Tamron.

What about the DA*200? Any of you guys had any experience with it? Obviously I would lose the convenience of the zoom, but I would gain a little in IQ - Yes|No?

Why not an older SMC from the M or A days if you shoot MF nearly exclusively? An M*300 gets you f4 at around $600-700.

03-08-2012, 11:40 AM   #20
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
Why not an older SMC from the M or A days if you shoot MF nearly exclusively? An M*300 gets you f4 at around $600-700.
True, if Joe's only going to shoot MF then an M/A*300/4 wouldn't be a bad option. That said, the DA*300 has other advantages (besides AF) over the M/A* including superior optics, a shorter MFD and weather seals. You can get a used DA*300 for about $850-900 or a new one for around $1100. A used M*300 goes for around $300-400 and a used A*300 for around $500-600, so certainly you can save a decent amount of money going with either of those two options.

Joe, if you want to try out the DA*300, just let me know
03-08-2012, 11:49 AM   #21
Veteran Member
westmill's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Stoke on Trent
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,146
QuoteOriginally posted by joe.penn Quote
westmill, been looking at the mft charts for weeks now - lol
Heyyyy a lot longer than weeks lol
Who else you going trust ? the guy that goes to bed and takes his lens to bed for comfort ? Ha ha
03-08-2012, 05:01 PM   #22
Veteran Member
joe.penn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,902
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
Joe, if you want to try out the DA*300, just let me know
Dan, I may take you up on that offer.
03-08-2012, 05:52 PM   #23
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by joe.penn Quote
Dan, I may take you up on that offer.
Just let me know, and don't forget to specify if you want it with or without 1.7x AF-A

03-08-2012, 07:03 PM   #24
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
Just let me know, and don't forget to specify if you want it with or without 1.7x AF-A
Tease
03-08-2012, 07:34 PM - 1 Like   #25
Veteran Member
stormtech's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In the boonies (NW Penna)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,670
I've been through this thought process a few times now (Pentax 60-250, Sigma 70-200, Tammy 70-200) and never arrive at a decision.

There is such a great comparative review of 3 other lenses on the site (Pentax 16-50, Sigma 17-50, Tammy 17-50) - I wish there was a similar comparative review for the long trio.
02-03-2014, 06:11 AM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 402
QuoteOriginally posted by stormtech Quote
I've been through this thought process a few times now (Pentax 60-250, Sigma 70-200, Tammy 70-200) and never arrive at a decision.

There is such a great comparative review of 3 other lenses on the site (Pentax 16-50, Sigma 17-50, Tammy 17-50) - I wish there was a similar comparative review for the long trio.
Yes indeed , that would be a great and much appreciated comparison.
Here is one of the tamron 70-200 and the pentax 80-200 Fast Sports Zoom Lenses for Pentax - 70-200mm Sigma & Tamron - PentaxForums.com
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!
field, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens, sports
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
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
Sigma 18-250 vs Tamron 18-200 vs Sigma 18-200 5150ds Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 04-11-2011 05:00 PM
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
60-250/4 vs. a 70-200/2.8 for portraits/sports kenyee Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 11-26-2009 06:55 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:06 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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