[nirVaan]

hi guys generally can you expect the k5 tamon combo to be this fast generally or is this a one really good copy

You Tube

You Tube

[ElJamoquio]

I didn't look at your video, but the complaints about AF speed I attribute to Canon owners with Canon bodies that focus non-premium lenses slowly.

I tried the Tamron, the Sigma, and Pentax 60-250. Optically I liked the Tamron the best. Ignoring the noise, focus-wise seemed a wash between the lenses.

That said I'm not a sports photographer.

[G and T]

I have this same combination and mine focuses just as fast. I have found mine to not only have great optics but also fast focusing speed and accuracy if a little bit noisy.

[nirVaan]

yea but how abt the handling can you like take it with you on a hike

[G and T]

It is a big heavy beast but it is the smallest and lightest in its class. That's the price you pay for a fast 70-200 zoom!

[ElJamoquio]

It's lighter than the pentax or the sigma.

If you want lighter still (very understandable) then you need the 55-300.

[Giklab]

It is SO not lighter than the Pentax. It's about TWICE the weight.

[JinDesu]

It is SO not lighter than the Pentax. It's about TWICE the weight.

Tamron 70-200 F2.8 - 1150g
Pentax FA*80-200 F2.8 - 1510g

If you are referring to the 70-200 F4-5.6 or something, that's a different class of lens.

I walk around regularly with my k-x and the Tamron 70-200 F2.8. I assume the difference between the k-x and k-5 isn't so much to make it insufferable. Keeping it on the shoulder or in the bag for the whole day wasn't much trouble for me, but hanging it around the neck was impossible for long periods of time.

/young male who went to the gym regularly

[Giklab]

Tamron 70-200 F2.8 - 1150g
Pentax FA*80-200 F2.8 - 1510g

If you are referring to the 70-200 F4-5.6 or something, that's a different class of lens.

I walk around regularly with my k-x and the Tamron 70-200 F2.8. I assume the difference between the k-x and k-5 isn't so much to make it insufferable. Keeping it on the shoulder or in the bag for the whole day wasn't much trouble for me, but hanging it around the neck was impossible for long periods of time.

/young male who went to the gym regularly

I get your point. I assumed we were talking about current lenses.
DA* 50-135 2.8 - 685g

[ElJamoquio]

I get your point. I assumed we were talking about current lenses.
DA* 50-135 2.8 - 685g

I don't consider the 50-135 a competitor to the 70-200. I might be in the minority. The closest approximation IMO among current lenses is the 60-250.

[Jodokast96]

That seems a fair bit faster than mine.

[liukaitc]

many people report this thing focus pretty fast on k-5
ironically, screw drive lens focus pretty fast on k-5. maybe faster than those SDM lens, but I am not sure.
at least my 16-50 is not faster than kit lens, and 50-135 is slower than this 70-200

[Frogfish]

I don't consider the 50-135 a competitor to the 70-200. I might be in the minority. The closest approximation IMO among current lenses is the 60-250.

I have the Sigma 50-150/2.8 and I'd definitely consider this a competitor to any 70/80 - 200 and have used it for paid shoots instead of the larger lens, however at 770g it is considerably lighter and goes nearly everywhere with me (except when birding), it is an exceptionally sharp lens too, with fast & silent focusing (HSM). If the OP can find one then it could easily be an option ... though they don't come up for sale very often for a very good reason, they are that good !

[JinDesu]

I have the Sigma 50-150/2.8 and I'd definitely consider this a competitor to any 70/80 - 200 and have used it for paid shoots instead of the larger lens, however at 770g it is considerably lighter and goes nearly everywhere with me (except when birding), it is an exceptionally sharp lens too, with fast & silent focusing (HSM). If the OP can find one then it could easily be an option ... though they don't come up for sale very often for a very good reason, they are that good !

50-150 is a bit closer. The Sigma 50-150 F2.8 is a great lens overall. I would love to have one, but I am pretty used to the 70-200 (especially the 200mm end) so I wouldn't give that up.

[Frogfish]

50-150 is a bit closer. The Sigma 50-150 F2.8 is a great lens overall. I would love to have one, but I am pretty used to the 70-200 (especially the 200mm end) so I wouldn't give that up.

I came this close *finger and thumb barely apart* to buying the T 70-200 but when I looked at the shots side by side against the 50-150 there was almost nothing that a small crop of the Sigma image couldn't reach. The 50mm vs 70mm on the wide end definitely is an added bonus sometimes. Reluctantly the Tamron went back on the shelf as I couldn't justify having both.