[Buschmaster]

Well, here is my dilemma...

Today I was shooting my pup playing frisbee. I was using my K20D (My main workhorse) and my Tamron 70-300 3.5-5.6. There are two main issues... First, the lens doesn't focus quite quickly enough. Sure, there are some ways around this, but ideally I could get faster focus. The second is that the lens is fairly slow. So I'd like something 2.8, and I'm fairly flexible on focal length. I would be using it to shoot my pup, my nephew and niece at soccer games, stuff like that.

Weather seals would be nice, 2.8 would be nice...

Crap. I'm not sure I can afford a lens like this. Any thoughts?

The 100 Macro might be a good candidate, but it doesn't have HSM, does it? And it sure is a lot considering the 77 LTD is cheaper and 1.8 instead of 2.8...

Pretty much any of these lenses I'd HAVE to find used anyway... But still. I want to start looking just to see if there is something out there to help me out.

As far as faster focusing, HSM would help, and wouldn't the new K-30 as well? I think I'll hold off until that either drops in price or I can get one second hand to upgrade my body. Should be a nice step up from the K20D, which will probably be relegated to backup duty.

[sterretje]

May I suggest that you have a look at which focal lengths you've used for the shots that you like of the pup and the soccer. 100mm might do for your pup, but I suspect it to be be way too short for soccer.

I've only done some sports photography once; outdoors, good weather, baseball. No need for a f/2.8 lens under those conditions.

[Buschmaster]

Baseball on a nice weather day is much easier, I agree. My Tamron was great for that. Heck, my Tamron wasn't even horrific for indoor basketball in a professional level arena.

Unfortunately, in Minnesota soccer season for the kids also seems to be the same time it is ALWAYS raining.

I'll look at yesterday's shots closely, perhaps even posting some of them here and go from there. Thanks for that suggestion!

[Buschmaster]

Here are 11 pictures from yesterday:
Penny Playing Frisbee - a set on Flickr

The focal lengths are...
83mm
70mm
180mm
70mm
90mm
40mm
40mm
40mm
40mm
40mm
300mm

So the mode is 40mm, but that's because it was my prime I used for nearly half the shots I ended up posting... The total focal length would be 993, making the mean ~90. If you only count the pictures I took with my telephoto the mean is ~130.

I was getting half decent shots at f/5.6 ISO 1100, so I guess 2.8 isn't a necessity, even 4.0 would be a nice step up.

[hoanpham]

Nice photos.
Do you use zoom alot? then DA50-135,
if you are ok with prime, FA77.
Both lenses, shot at f4. K20 is capable with iso1600, use that to gain some more shutter speed.

What about manual/prefocus?
MF lenses are cheaper.

[Buschmaster]

Thanks

Manual is ok for me, just not in the sports scenarios because I've never been good at very quickly focusing. I use it sometimes to get shots when I know about where something is going to be, but I prefer my lenses for this purpose to still have AF as an option.

I am really digging primes, but I'm not entirely against a zoom, either.

Are there any SDM/HSM/Whatever-anyone-else-wants-to-call-it lenses that are sub-$700 in this class?

[Pioneer]

In your case the FA 135mm 2.8 is a really good option and would probably work for the majority of your shots. Using primes for sports is a bit of a change in mindset but I find it works really well.

If you can learn to anticipate, Vivitar made a terrific 70-210mm f3.5 Series One zoom that would be perfect for your application but, no auto focus. I work with both manual and auto focus but I find auto focus to be far more frustrating as it will frequently go into focusing spasms where nothing is in focus. Of course that usually happens in the heat of the moment when a group of kids are in a smaller group. Even when I'm using an autofocus lens I frequently shut it off to prevent that kind of thing. I will occasionally miss the unexpected shot with my manual focus lenses, or when my autofocus is shut off, but it doesn't actually happen too often.

But, you are certainly right. If you want a good, 2.8 zoom with auto focus, you will have to spend some money. For sports the 70-210mm f2.8 is a terrific option, but these lenses are much bigger than what you have been working with. IMO, the Sigma is a great option in this area.

[luftfluss]

Well, here is my dilemma...

Today I was shooting my pup playing frisbee. I was using my K20D (My main workhorse) and my Tamron 70-300 3.5-5.6. There are two main issues... First, the lens doesn't focus quite quickly enough. Sure, there are some ways around this, but ideally I could get faster focus. The second is that the lens is fairly slow. So I'd like something 2.8, and I'm fairly flexible on focal length. I would be using it to shoot my pup, my nephew and niece at soccer games, stuff like that.

Weather seals would be nice, 2.8 would be nice...

Crap. I'm not sure I can afford a lens like this. Any thoughts?

The 100 Macro might be a good candidate, but it doesn't have HSM, does it? And it sure is a lot considering the 77 LTD is cheaper and 1.8 instead of 2.8...

Pretty much any of these lenses I'd HAVE to find used anyway... But still. I want to start looking just to see if there is something out there to help me out.

As far as faster focusing, HSM would help, and wouldn't the new K-30 as well? I think I'll hold off until that either drops in price or I can get one second hand to upgrade my body. Should be a nice step up from the K20D, which will probably be relegated to backup duty.

Long Macro lenses generally have slow AF.

The Sigma 70-200/2.8 is reportedly pretty quick.

[eddie1960]

with WR in this class the only zoom is the DA* 50-135. or given the US price increases the not as fast the 60-250 (which really should be an ideal sport lens, constant f4 and HSM - and though it is marketed as DA the Patents show it as FF compatible) - if you move up to a K7 or K30 (both of which will provide faster focus) the f4 versus f2.8 isn't a big deal
the DFA100 WR is the budget high quality fast (ish) option

for what the first 2 lenses will cost now days (even used) you could probably get a K30/used K5 and a 50-200wr and the better high iso will reduce the issue of needing a fast lens

[pghwarrior23]

You won't get the WR but consider Sigma for some cheaper options and still get the speed. I think the DA 16-45 f/4 is a nice lens and relatively fast. Of course even better on the K-5 because you can crank the ISO up higher. The DA* lenses are of course fantastic but also pricey. The 40mm f/2.8 pancake is an AWESOME little lens, but have to be willing to zoom with your feet. The Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is nicely priced but a REALLY heavy lens. Personally my absolute favorite lens is the DA* 50-135 f/2.8. Awesome focal length, relatively light weight, good size, well built, fast, and SHARP!

[pghwarrior23]

You can also go to cameralensrentals.com and rent Pentax gear to try something out before you buy to see if it fits your needs.

[Buschmaster]

In your case the FA 135mm 2.8 is a really good option and would probably work for the majority of your shots. Using primes for sports is a bit of a change in mindset but I find it works really well.

If you can learn to anticipate, Vivitar made a terrific 70-210mm f3.5 Series One zoom that would be perfect for your application but, no auto focus. I work with both manual and auto focus but I find auto focus to be far more frustrating as it will frequently go into focusing spasms where nothing is in focus. Of course that usually happens in the heat of the moment when a group of kids are in a smaller group. Even when I'm using an autofocus lens I frequently shut it off to prevent that kind of thing. I will occasionally miss the unexpected shot with my manual focus lenses, or when my autofocus is shut off, but it doesn't actually happen too often.

But, you are certainly right. If you want a good, 2.8 zoom with auto focus, you will have to spend some money. For sports the 70-210mm f2.8 is a terrific option, but these lenses are much bigger than what you have been working with. IMO, the Sigma is a great option in this area.

Perhaps I should pick up an old manual focus telephoto prime and just mess around with it and see what I can do. Heck, I even have a screwmount adapter if I really want to go old!

I have a feeling I'll really prefer the autofocus, though. Especially since my girlfriend and Dad often shoot using my camera as well. I would say at this point in time I'm MUCH more technically knowledgable and skilled than them, but they know their way around a camera and what the different things mean.

Which Sigma are you speaking of in particular? The 70mm 2.8 Macro may be good, but does it have a limiter to keep focusing from hunting too far? I suppose that one also doesn't have HSM.

Their 105mm is 2.8, macro, and has HSM, but once that $200 rebate goes away that's one pricey lens and I'm probably not buying anything until a few more checks come in...

I've always been interested in their 17-50 (Now they have an 18-50 as well?) so that may be considered... Time to look in the review section at all of those lenses

Long Macro lenses generally have slow AF.

The Sigma 70-200/2.8 is reportedly pretty quick.

Definitely know what you mean, there. There is just so much room for it to hunt. But it doesn't help that my camera is getting a touch outdated as far as focus speed, none of my lenses are SDM/HSM, and I'm not terribly great at MF.

Macros are necessarily necessary here, sure, it would be nice to have, but not a necessity, especially if I can drop AF times.

with WR in this class the only zoom is the DA* 50-135. or given the US price increases the not as fast the 60-250 (which really should be an ideal sport lens, constant f4 and HSM - and though it is marketed as DA the Patents show it as FF compatible) - if you move up to a K7 or K30 (both of which will provide faster focus) the f4 versus f2.8 isn't a big deal
the DFA100 WR is the budget high quality fast (ish) option

for what the first 2 lenses will cost now days (even used) you could probably get a K30/used K5 and a 50-200wr and the better high iso will reduce the issue of needing a fast lens

I'm sad the 50-135 has gotten so spendy. It seems like such a solid lens and something that so many people could use, but they price it so high... I'm seeing the 60-250 as even more expensive yet. I want to wait for the K30 for upgrading. Perhaps even waiting for it to hit the used marketplace here, but it would definitely be a big step up for me! Remember, the K20D doesn't even shoot any video. So I'd gain quite a few new features.

Is the D FA 100 better than the old Tamron 90mm macro lens that has basically been seen as the standard? Certainly the WR would be a nice addition, the weather here in Minnesota is brutal

You won't get the WR but consider Sigma for some cheaper options and still get the speed. I think the DA 16-45 f/4 is a nice lens and relatively fast. Of course even better on the K-5 because you can crank the ISO up higher. The DA* lenses are of course fantastic but also pricey. The 40mm f/2.8 pancake is an AWESOME little lens, but have to be willing to zoom with your feet. The Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is nicely priced but a REALLY heavy lens. Personally my absolute favorite lens is the DA* 50-135 f/2.8. Awesome focal length, relatively light weight, good size, well built, fast, and SHARP!

The 40mm f/2.8 LTD is currently my favorite lens, but I'm hoping for something with a bit more reach. I love how quickly it focuses, though. And man is it sharp...

Perhaps if I got the 50-135, I would be spending more, sure, but I would be getting a lens I could leave on my camera for a great number of situations. Is it usable at all indoors? 50 seems just a touch to intimate for most indoors other than mugshot portraits but I'll rely on your knowledge on that, as you are an owner and I'm a prospect.

You can also go to cameralensrentals.com and rent Pentax gear to try something out before you buy to see if it fits your needs.

Great, I'll be sure to check that site out!

[pghwarrior23]

I have used my 50-135 in pretty every condition you can think of...cold, indoors, outdoors, sunny, events, sports, candids, and studio portrait work. Granted for events, it is the longer candid shots from afar. Definitely too long for group shots or close up work...that is when the DA* 16-50 comes out of the bag or on a second body. It is definitely on my K-5 more than any other lens. The rubber on the zoom ring is actually coming loose on mine and has me debating whether to try to get it fixed or buy a replacement lens, but I shutter to think being without the lense for any period of time!!

I also own the DA* 60-250 and think it is a killer lens! I just wish there was not as much overlap with my 50-135 but I am glad I purchased it.

[sterretje]

Add a DA(L)35/2.4 for indoors. Get a rain coat for your gear for adverse weather situations if the lens is not WR. Can not really advice on the longer lens, my preference would be a fast 70-200/2.8 over the 50-135. But that's personal.

[Buschmaster]

My 40mm does just fine for indoors. If I got another indoor lens it would be a normal zoom. Something like the 17-50 or 17-70 range.

From what I've been reading, I think the best one for me may be the Sigma 70-200mm HSM OS HD IX PO MN OA LMNOP, I just need to find one at a reasonable price.