Field Sports - DA*60~250 [or] Tamron 70~200 [or] Sigma 70~200

joe.penn · 03-07-2012, 03:24 PM

Well, what do you guys think? Which one of the three for general field sports shooting...

JinDesu · 03-07-2012, 03:34 PM

Well, one of the reasons that the Tamron 70-200 is often maligned is because it utilizes the screw drive, which can be noisy. In field sports, that weakness isn't noticed. As far as focus speed vs the Sigma's HSM, I don't know. It's IQ vs the Sigma is generally better though.

No idea how it compares to the 60-250, which is F4, but for outdoors shouldn't be a problem.

SpecialK · 03-07-2012, 03:49 PM

I have only used (and have) the Tamron, which is optically excellent and no noisier than any other screw-drive lens I have. The 60-250 has the advantage of FL with a sacrifice of speed and cost. If you are in the stands, the extra FL may help, but on the sidelines, maybe not so much.

RonHendriks1966 · 03-07-2012, 04:20 PM

Well I had the 60-250 and that is a very nice lens:

DA*60-250mm/f4

I sold it to buy Sigma 70-200mm/f2.8 EX DG OS HSM and that is also a very great lens. I also was in some need to use f3.2 and f3.5 but I like this lens the best at 200mm and f4.

I also bought DA*300mm/f4 since I missed the extra length. The difference between DA*60-250 and DA*300 wasn't big enough, but the step from Sigma to DA* is good. I use two camera body's.

The Sigma is with 200mm/f4 sharper then DA*250mm/f4 and the DA*300mm/f4 is sharper then 250mm/f4.

The Sigma lets a little more light in then both Pentax lenses did (to my feelings, since I didn't measure it precise) so I overexpose the DA* by 1/3th stop to get my image. Offcource this is seen back in either iso or either TAv-setting. Depending on the amount of light available.

westmill · 03-07-2012, 04:33 PM

Thats a tuffy ! but after some thought..... the Pentax 60-250 F4 !!!!!
Assuming you are using the K5 !!!!!
The shorter end of the 60 will be more used than you may think ! plus the extra long end can come into its own !
Top that off with weatherproof for outdoor sports and instant M focus !
The one stop sacrifice....... Hell...... the K5 is damm good at high ISO.

Ubuntu_user · 03-07-2012, 05:17 PM

Yep, I too say the DA* 60-250mm. It seems that when I'm shooting outdoor sports, I tend to shot at f/4 even though I have the capability of f/2.8 (better margin for focus error).

DaveHolmes · 03-07-2012, 05:24 PM

WR and the extra reach would sway the vote for outdoor sports for me too...

Have £1000 on the way (spose to be living on it though...) and going to a race day at Donnington soon... I might be tempted myself... (DAMN!)

I'd recomend a good monopod...

Last edited by DaveHolmes; 03-07-2012 at 05:25 PM. Reason: missed a bit i think important...

L33tGreg · 03-07-2012, 06:54 PM

Sigma 100-300/4?

GaryH · 03-07-2012, 07:53 PM

Pentax DA* 60-250 for sure. Extra range, water resistance.
sharp lens

normhead · 03-07-2012, 08:12 PM

I've got the DA* 60-250, but I still want the Tamron, it's on next year's wish list. We have two shooters in the family so we can carry two long zooms. I'd like the faster lens for use with the Pentax f 1.7 TC which will push it up to 340 @ F5.. with the 60-250 the best I can do is F6.7. A stop faster will add a lot. Not to mention a couple times this year when I really needed the extra stop. The Tamron gets you excellent IQ without breaking the bank. I just hope it works OK with the TC.

joe.penn · 03-08-2012, 06:54 AM

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?

RonHendriks1966 · 03-08-2012, 07:41 AM

Originally posted by joe.penn

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?

I used the DA*200mm for just one event. I returned it, because of slow AF. It has a real long throw. The IQ of that lens wins (in my opinion) from Sigma and DA*60-250, but then again I don't do birds with the obvious tree in backlight where you would find those nice purple roundings.

DA*200 @f3.2

The Biggest advantage is that is a very nice and small lens. I would buy it again when they come with a new version with a faster DC-motor.

westmill · 03-08-2012, 07:48 AM

I think you need this lol
Pentax K Lens Tests

Phil1 · 03-08-2012, 09:49 AM

Personally I think for big field sports (soccer, football, lacrosse etc) 200MM is a little short unless you are fixed on a sideline and stay close. For full field coverage a zoom closer to 500mm is better in my opinion. The size and weight is more and a monopod is needed but you will be able to cover more until the light fades.

I think 200mm is OK for basketball and volleyball etc but a faster lens is best as indoor lighting is frequently edgy.

I use a Bigma for lacrosse and it works well from the stands mid field in good light. Sometimes a little slow on focus and it hunts as the light fades

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.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/176283-sale-s...-ex-bigma.html

RonHendriks1966 · 03-08-2012, 10:48 AM

Originally posted by Phil1

Personally I think for big field sports (soccer, football, lacrosse etc) 200MM is a little short unless you are fixed on a sideline and stay close. For full field coverage a zoom closer to 500mm is better in my opinion. The size and weight is more and a monopod is needed but you will be able to cover more until the light fades.

For this I bought DA*300mm and why I also would like Sigma 120-300mm/f2.8 with 1,4x TC.

And again, looked it up, we have Lacrosse competition overhere, just 6 teams and I'll put it on my to-do-list.

03-07-2012, 03:24 PM	#1
joe.penn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,902	*Field Sports - DA60~250 [or] Tamron 70~200 [or] Sigma 70~200** Well, what do you guys think? Which one of the three for general field sports shooting...

03-08-2012, 07:41 AM	#12
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by joe.penn What about the DA200? 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? I used the DA200mm for just one event. I returned it, because of slow AF. It has a real long throw. The IQ of that lens wins (in my opinion) from Sigma and DA60-250, but then again I don't do birds with the obvious tree in backlight where you would find those nice purple roundings. DA200 @f3.2 The Biggest advantage is that is a very nice and small lens. I would buy it again when they come with a new version with a faster DC-motor. Last edited by RonHendriks1966; 03-09-2012 at 02:34 AM.

03-08-2012, 09:49 AM	#14
Phil1 Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: SoCal Posts: 1,292	Personally I think for big field sports (soccer, football, lacrosse etc) 200MM is a little short unless you are fixed on a sideline and stay close. For full field coverage a zoom closer to 500mm is better in my opinion. The size and weight is more and a monopod is needed but you will be able to cover more until the light fades. I think 200mm is OK for basketball and volleyball etc but a faster lens is best as indoor lighting is frequently edgy. I use a Bigma for lacrosse and it works well from the stands mid field in good light. Sometimes a little slow on focus and it hunts as the light fades 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. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/176283-sale-s...-ex-bigma.html Last edited by Phil1; 03-08-2012 at 09:58 AM.

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

03-07-2012, 03:34 PM	#2
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	Well, one of the reasons that the Tamron 70-200 is often maligned is because it utilizes the screw drive, which can be noisy. In field sports, that weakness isn't noticed. As far as focus speed vs the Sigma's HSM, I don't know. It's IQ vs the Sigma is generally better though. No idea how it compares to the 60-250, which is F4, but for outdoors shouldn't be a problem.

03-07-2012, 03:49 PM	#3
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	I have only used (and have) the Tamron, which is optically excellent and no noisier than any other screw-drive lens I have. The 60-250 has the advantage of FL with a sacrifice of speed and cost. If you are in the stands, the extra FL may help, but on the sidelines, maybe not so much.

03-07-2012, 04:20 PM	#4
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Well I had the 60-250 and that is a very nice lens: *DA60-250mm/f4** I sold it to buy Sigma 70-200mm/f2.8 EX DG OS HSM and that is also a very great lens. I also was in some need to use f3.2 and f3.5 but I like this lens the best at 200mm and f4. I also bought DA300mm/f4 since I missed the extra length. The difference between DA60-250 and DA300 wasn't big enough, but the step from Sigma to DA is good. I use two camera body's. The Sigma is with 200mm/f4 sharper then DA250mm/f4 and the DA300mm/f4 is sharper then 250mm/f4. The Sigma lets a little more light in then both Pentax lenses did (to my feelings, since I didn't measure it precise) so I overexpose the DA* by 1/3th stop to get my image. Offcource this is seen back in either iso or either TAv-setting. Depending on the amount of light available.

03-07-2012, 04:33 PM	#5
westmill Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Stoke on Trent Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,146	Thats a tuffy ! but after some thought..... the Pentax 60-250 F4 !!!!! Assuming you are using the K5 !!!!! The shorter end of the 60 will be more used than you may think ! plus the extra long end can come into its own ! Top that off with weatherproof for outdoor sports and instant M focus ! The one stop sacrifice....... Hell...... the K5 is damm good at high ISO.

03-07-2012, 05:17 PM	#6
Ubuntu_user Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,545	Yep, I too say the DA* 60-250mm. It seems that when I'm shooting outdoor sports, I tend to shot at f/4 even though I have the capability of f/2.8 (better margin for focus error).

03-07-2012, 05:24 PM	#7
DaveHolmes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 1,501	WR and the extra reach would sway the vote for outdoor sports for me too... Have £1000 on the way (spose to be living on it though...) and going to a race day at Donnington soon... I might be tempted myself... (DAMN!) I'd recomend a good monopod... Last edited by DaveHolmes; 03-07-2012 at 05:25 PM. Reason: missed a bit i think important...

03-07-2012, 06:54 PM	#8
L33tGreg Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Charleston, SC Photos: Gallery Posts: 369	Sigma 100-300/4?

03-07-2012, 07:53 PM	#9
GaryH Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Philadelphia, Pa Photos: Gallery Posts: 764	Pentax DA* 60-250 for sure. Extra range, water resistance. sharp lens

03-07-2012, 08:12 PM	#10
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	I've got the DA* 60-250, but I still want the Tamron, it's on next year's wish list. We have two shooters in the family so we can carry two long zooms. I'd like the faster lens for use with the Pentax f 1.7 TC which will push it up to 340 @ F5.. with the 60-250 the best I can do is F6.7. A stop faster will add a lot. Not to mention a couple times this year when I really needed the extra stop. The Tamron gets you excellent IQ without breaking the bank. I just hope it works OK with the TC.

03-08-2012, 06:54 AM	#11
joe.penn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,902 Original Poster	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?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-08-2012, 07:48 AM	#13
westmill Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Stoke on Trent Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,146	I think you need this lol Pentax K Lens Tests

03-08-2012, 10:48 AM	#15
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by Phil1 Personally I think for big field sports (soccer, football, lacrosse etc) 200MM is a little short unless you are fixed on a sideline and stay close. For full field coverage a zoom closer to 500mm is better in my opinion. The size and weight is more and a monopod is needed but you will be able to cover more until the light fades. For this I bought DA*300mm and why I also would like Sigma 120-300mm/f2.8 with 1,4x TC. And again, looked it up, we have Lacrosse competition overhere, just 6 teams and I'll put it on my to-do-list.