Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-15-2012, 09:46 AM   #16
Pentaxian
littledrawe's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Red Rock
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,434
QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
I have been very pleased with the output from my Sigma EX 70-200 f2.8 II HSM. Acceptable wide open, very fast focus and good handling for live music in some high-pressure shoots.
Some examples....
Not sure who that is in your first shot but she seems a little out of place with some of the other subjects.

04-15-2012, 10:15 AM   #17
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 892
Original Poster
... the 80-200/2.8 class of lenses became even more interesting for APS-C cameras as it was for full frame. I think Pentax is missing out here. Pricewise the FA 80-200 would probably blow the budget comparing it to current Pentax lenses.
04-15-2012, 10:50 AM   #18
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
A friend and i both showed up to take pictures for a local outdoor play production about a year back. He with a new Canon 70-200 (? i think that was the range), me with my pentax 50-135. I talked to him later and noticed that he had taken his new zoom off. Why? i asked. He said that the short end was too long for the setting.

The 50-135 is very useful for a lot of cityscapes and i even get a lot of nice landscapes from it. I use the 50 end a lot, 70 a lot and 135 a lot. If you're into wildlife or bigger events, then i could see the longer zoom, but the shorter zoom is perfect for what i do.

The only negative on the 50-135, is the sdm on it is a bit slow, but i seem to get by and preset sometimes, other times its fast enough. SDM reliability, i think pentax has the problem figured out as the rates of sdm problem are trending down on every lens per Adams recent poll. I have sdm on this zoom (3 years no problems), the 300 (3 years no problems), and also a DA17-70 (which has a fast sdm response by the way) which i just bought recently.

From all accounts the Sigma 50-150 is just as good. The old version was smaller like the 50-135, but the new Sigma 50-150 is in the same large housing, apparently, as their 70-200. I have neither of the latter.

Good luck with choosing -its always difficult
04-15-2012, 06:21 PM   #19
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,624
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
Not that I noticed on my k-x, so on a k-5 should be much better. I'll post some seriously low light shots later tonight when I get home. It's not great for sports, but it will lock focus pretty well in low light. I'm talking ISO 2000, F2.8, 1/30s.
Here's an example:



ISO 1000, F2.8, 1/30s - I focused on the glasses. See full size link below:

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6053/6256443604_2a4c9bb4f5_o.jpg

It may be ISO 1000, but I had to bump the exposure by at least 1EV in post processing (and then do some serious denoising, which you can see in the full size shot). So the Tamron can hit focus in low-light. It's not as good for faster moving shots in low-light because it does focus slower.

04-15-2012, 11:52 PM   #20
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,249
QuoteOriginally posted by Mareket Quote
Is pic number three the Meshuggah singer?
Yep. They put on a good show.
04-16-2012, 12:02 AM   #21
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,249
QuoteOriginally posted by littledrawe Quote
Not sure who that is in your first shot but she seems a little out of place with some of the other subjects.
That's Abbe May; Australian indie guitarist/singer/songwriter. She opened up the main stage at this year's Big Day Out.

Yes, the rest are all on the heavier side (Jay Wally from Frenzel Rhomb, Jens Kidman from Meshuggah, Marilyn Manson and Corey Taylor of Slipknot repsectively) , but I go to all sorts of gigs.

But the photos were chosen to show off off the capabilities of the lens, not catalogue my musical tastes
04-16-2012, 03:10 PM   #22
Pentaxian
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,439
I use also Sigma use a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 HSM II, but mostly for sports.

One example taken in really shitty lighting at maximum zoom:
Pentax K-5, 1/640, F3.2, 200mm and ISO 6400



Just go through my different sports sets on flickr and some other ones to find more shots. Note that most of them are just standard photoshoped in Lightroom with only slight adjustment in exposure, contrast, whitebalance and maybe cropping due to having to uploads loads of pics quickly after the games.
04-16-2012, 03:30 PM - 1 Like   #23
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,599
If you can find a copy used, the older sigma 70-200 F/2.8 not HSM not macro, is a very good lens. I have it and love it. It's acceptably sharp at 2.8 and has good contrast and color rendition, and unlike a lot of Sigmas, it's very flare free.

NaCl(but like all the long 2.8 zooms it's big and heavy)H2O

04-16-2012, 03:34 PM   #24
Pentaxian
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,439
QuoteOriginally posted by NaClH2O Quote
If you can find a copy used, the older sigma 70-200 F/2.8 not HSM not macro, is a very good lens. I have it and love it. It's acceptably sharp at 2.8 and has good contrast and color rendition, and unlike a lot of Sigmas, it's very flare free.

NaCl(but like all the long 2.8 zooms it's big and heavy)H2O
If I remember correctly that variant is a bit lighter than the newer ones, correct?
04-20-2012, 09:21 AM   #25
Junior Member
guppy350's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: guernsey
Photos: Albums
Posts: 40


This is an image I took with my tamron... the bokeh is to die for!!!

Last edited by guppy350; 04-20-2012 at 09:23 AM. Reason: Image did not show up correctly.
04-20-2012, 09:29 AM   #26
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,168
QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
That's Abbe May; Australian indie guitarist/singer/songwriter. She opened up the main stage at this year's Big Day Out.

Yes, the rest are all on the heavier side (Jay Wally from Frenzel Rhomb, Jens Kidman from Meshuggah, Marilyn Manson and Corey Taylor of Slipknot repsectively) , but I go to all sorts of gigs.

But the photos were chosen to show off off the capabilities of the lens, not catalogue my musical tastes
If you shoot a lot of bigger shows 70-200 is a good length, but if you shoot a mix that puts you in clubs a 50-135 will be more flexible (long enough just barely for big venue shoots though you may end up cropping some shots) but wide enough that you won't ned to change lenses in a throng a a club)

Personally I'd opt the Sigma paired with a 24-70 sigma. with 2 bodies and it covers 95% of shooting situations at shows (I do shoot my 24-70 almost exclusively at smaller shows, At bigger shows if I have Pit access I still shoot that lens but will have a 200 on my second body for closeups like your messhugah shot
04-22-2012, 09:37 PM   #27
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Shrewsbury, NJ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 108
If you want a great 80-200mm 2.8 lens that is sharp wide open and focuses fast, don't discount the Tokina AT-X 828AF PRO 80-200mm F2.8. If you don't mind the weight, it is an excellent lens. Have never seen a comparison between it and any of the other three, but wish someone would do it. Also, the Tokina is much more reasonable and it will last a lifetime. It's built so well, it could clobber the others in a street fight.
04-22-2012, 10:09 PM   #28
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,249
QuoteOriginally posted by reed_page Quote
It's built so well, it could clobber the others in a street fight.
Now in some of the mosh pits I've been in, THAT would be a real advantage
04-23-2012, 07:35 AM   #29
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,314
QuoteOriginally posted by NaClH2O Quote
If you can find a copy used, the older sigma 70-200 F/2.8 not HSM not macro, is a very good lens. I have it and love it. It's acceptably sharp at 2.8 and has good contrast and color rendition, and unlike a lot of Sigmas, it's very flare free.

NaCl(but like all the long 2.8 zooms it's big and heavy)H2O
I have the non DG version, the DG version has additional coatings on the rear element to stop non existant reflections off the sensor.

This lens plays very well with sigma's 1.4x and 2x TCs
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!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens, tamron, tele
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tele zoom for motor sports Dudley Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 11 10-04-2011 10:55 PM
Tele Zoom Comparative IQ Question raymeedc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 05-06-2011 03:21 PM
Newbie question - Prime f1.4/1.8 or small tele zoom f2.8 Pretender Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 02-08-2010 05:12 AM
manual focus tele zoom jkglogau Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 03-06-2009 09:02 AM
Wide & Tele Zoom Lens ugaarguy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 01-26-2007 09:47 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:50 PM. | 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