Sharp tele on a budget?

jimr-pdx · 08-19-2012, 05:48 PM

Originally posted by Boris_Akunin

What would suit me best is a small set of compact lenses to take everywhere plus a few special-purpose lenses to carry if needed, something like this:

To take everywhere:
24/2.8 - 40/2.8 - (50/1.7, 50/1.4, 50/1.2) - 85/100/135

-Jan

The SMC-M 135/3.5 now deserves a spot on your list, or the 120 /150mm Pentax lenses. These things are so small they should be registered as concealed weapons (though my 135/3.5 isn't sharp enough until f/5.6

). I regret selling the 150mm but still have the SMC-Ms 135 and 200; tiny and talented considering their focal lengths.

liukaitc · 08-19-2012, 05:51 PM

maybe buy an used 55-300?
We can find it used at marketplace quite often.
If you can got this lens, no need to consider other consumer telephoto lens.

Boris_Akunin · 08-19-2012, 06:35 PM

Originally posted by jimr-pdx

The SMC-M 135/3.5 now deserves a spot on your list, or the 120 /150mm Pentax lenses. These things are so small they should be registered as concealed weapons (though my 135/3.5 isn't sharp enough until f/5.6

). I regret selling the 150mm but still have the SMC-Ms 135 and 200; tiny and talented considering their focal lengths.

The 120 and 150 DO look quiet nice but in that range I'd rather go for the M/A100/4 Macro and check macro off the list of things to cover.
But those two are certainly on my buy-if-cheap list, now.

ryan s · 08-19-2012, 11:36 PM

With 200 euro, you might have a shot at the DA 55-300 if you catch a deal or go for the DA-L version.

The FA 80-320 is decent at f/8 as long as your subject is within about 20 meters and you're not cropping heavily. And keep the zoom ring at or under 260-280mm. I find its AF pretty worthless for birds, but it's ok for most other stuff.

K10D, 50% crop (?)

K10D, 100% crop

It's not terrible for under $135...

mickey · 08-20-2012, 12:01 AM

I'm a big fan of the FA 100-300/4.7-5.8.
In fact, I have two copies, and it should be noted that the first one I bought is slightly sharper towards the long end.
The second copy is a bit softer from about 270-300.

**dms** · 08-20-2012, 12:21 AM

I would suggest the K 200mm f2.5 from what I have seen/heard (I don't have it) and the price may be in your range--I saw one in BGN condition at KEH for about $190.00 about 1/2-1 year ago. Another lens I suggest and have/love is the K 135mm f2.5 smc--again at KEH I recall seeing BGN condition for about $150.00--really a spectacular lens! If you can do w/o AF you will get a lot for the money.

**dms** · 08-20-2012, 12:34 AM

Since you say you want A lens--you should consider the Vivitar series 1 70-210mm f2.8-4 lens (version 3) by komine. I have this lens--it and the 135mm f2.5 are my bread and butter lens for theatre photo's--very sharp, good color, nice handling if you like push-pull lens (I do) and really good macro setting. Although an A lens--I don't use the A setting--but I have heard it can sometimes not close down reliably. In US I am guessing now it would go for about $100.

alspe · 08-20-2012, 01:53 AM

What I've understood, DA 50-200 F4-5.6 is quite good even it is light and cheap.

Can someone compare it to something K/ M 200mm prime. Is there much difference in IQ?

timo · 08-20-2012, 02:57 AM

Originally posted by alspe

What I've understood, DA 50-200 F4-5.6 is quite good even it is lihht and cheap.

Can someone compare it and somethink K/ M 200mm prime. Is there much difference in IQ?

I have M200/4 and 50-200. There isn't a huge amount in it at the centre, but the 200 performs across the frame. The zoom doesn't. Or at least mine doesn't.

The 200/4 is perfectly usable at all apertures, slightly soft at 4, tightens up nicely one click on from 5.6.

pcarfan · 08-20-2012, 05:08 AM

I had the Pentax 80-320, and it was quite a decent lens. You might be interested in this thread I had started, it has samples from my 80-320 and other inexpensive tephoto lenses.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/lens-clubs/80818-inexpensive-auto-focus-t...200-200mm.html

Edgar_in_Indy · 08-20-2012, 05:39 AM

My father-in-law frequents auctions, and a few weeks ago he bought a Pentax SF-1 with a Takumar-F 70-200mm f4-5.6 autofocus zoom lens for about $5. I tested the lens on my K-30 and I wasn't expecting much, but it actually shocked me with its sharpness at f8. It's not too great wide open, but if you find one very cheap it may be a good buy. I believe it is the same lens as the Pentax-F 70-200/f4-5.6. I may post some sample shots later on.

GibbyTheMole · 08-20-2012, 05:54 AM

Originally posted by civiletti

High IQ tele on a budget: Tamron adaptall SP70-210 or SP60-300.

Yep. I have the SP 60-300 (model 23A) and it's an exceptional lens. Extremely sharp all the way to 300mm. Some PF, but other than that, wow. Great macro capability for a zoom, too. Manual focus though, and it's only an "A" lens if you have the expensive PK/A Adaptall mount. (which I don't.)

msatlas · 08-20-2012, 06:55 AM

The F 70-210/4-5.6 is nice optically but its handling leaves a little to be desired. It's not too huge in size but is about 100g heavier than the DA 55-300. The AF is reasonably fast but boy is it loud! If it gets to hunting it can crash around and you can feel the torque of the focus motor while you hold the camera.

Which is why I have mine listed for sale in the marketplace and why I'm planning to get a 55-300.

northcoastgreg · 08-20-2012, 07:00 AM

Originally posted by mickey

I'm a big fan of the FA 100-300/4.7-5.8.

I had a copy of this lens briefly, and found it soft in comparison to the SMC F 70-210.

Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy

I believe it is the same lens as the Pentax-F 70-200/f4-5.6

None of the Takumar K-mount F 70-200/210 lens are the same, optically, as the Pentax SMC F 70-210 f4-5.6. They differ, not merely in respect to the SMC coatings, but in the design as well.

Edgar_in_Indy · 08-20-2012, 07:24 AM

Originally posted by northcoastgreg

None of the Takumar K-mount F 70-200/210 lens are the same, optically, as the Pentax SMC F 70-210 f4-5.6. They differ, not merely in respect to the SMC coatings, but in the design as well.

I didn't say it was the same as the Pentax SMC F 70-210 f4-5.6. I said it was the same as the Pentax-F 70-200mm f4-5.6. This is just what I read in another thread, and I notice that in Photoshop the lens is also described as "Pentax-F 70-200mm F4-5.6" in the EXIF info.

I noticed that some of the pictures I'm getting from this lens are low in contrast, despite being very sharp. I fashioned a very crude lens hood, and this helped quite a bit. So anybody using this lens should immediately pick up some kind of lens hood from eBay.

08-20-2012, 01:53 AM	#23
alspe Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 36	What I've understood, DA 50-200 F4-5.6 is quite good even it is light and cheap. Can someone compare it to something K/ M 200mm prime. Is there much difference in IQ? Last edited by alspe; 08-20-2012 at 02:59 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Super tele on a budget	joefru	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	06-01-2008 01:31 PM
So.... (Another Budget Tele Thread)	Matthew Roberts	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	08-02-2007 09:19 PM
Need a budget tele...HELP	jgmankos	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	25	07-30-2007 05:04 PM

08-19-2012, 05:48 PM	#16
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	Originally posted by Boris_Akunin What would suit me best is a small set of compact lenses to take everywhere plus a few special-purpose lenses to carry if needed, something like this: To take everywhere: 24/2.8 - 40/2.8 - (50/1.7, 50/1.4, 50/1.2) - 85/100/135 -Jan The SMC-M 135/3.5 now deserves a spot on your list, or the 120 /150mm Pentax lenses. These things are so small they should be registered as concealed weapons (though my 135/3.5 isn't sharp enough until f/5.6 ). I regret selling the 150mm but still have the SMC-Ms 135 and 200; tiny and talented considering their focal lengths.

08-19-2012, 05:51 PM	#17
liukaitc Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: New York Photos: Albums Posts: 1,008	maybe buy an used 55-300? We can find it used at marketplace quite often. If you can got this lens, no need to consider other consumer telephoto lens.

08-19-2012, 06:35 PM	#18
Boris_Akunin Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Bremen, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 674 Original Poster	Originally posted by jimr-pdx The SMC-M 135/3.5 now deserves a spot on your list, or the 120 /150mm Pentax lenses. These things are so small they should be registered as concealed weapons (though my 135/3.5 isn't sharp enough until f/5.6 ). I regret selling the 150mm but still have the SMC-Ms 135 and 200; tiny and talented considering their focal lengths. The 120 and 150 DO look quiet nice but in that range I'd rather go for the M/A100/4 Macro and check macro off the list of things to cover. But those two are certainly on my buy-if-cheap list, now.

08-19-2012, 11:36 PM	#19
ryan s Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,383	With 200 euro, you might have a shot at the DA 55-300 if you catch a deal or go for the DA-L version. The FA 80-320 is decent at f/8 as long as your subject is within about 20 meters and you're not cropping heavily. And keep the zoom ring at or under 260-280mm. I find its AF pretty worthless for birds, but it's ok for most other stuff. K10D, 50% crop (?) K10D, 100% crop It's not terrible for under $135...

08-20-2012, 12:01 AM	#20
mickey Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,146	I'm a big fan of the FA 100-300/4.7-5.8. In fact, I have two copies, and it should be noted that the first one I bought is slightly sharper towards the long end. The second copy is a bit softer from about 270-300.

08-20-2012, 12:21 AM	#21
dms Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: New York, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,192	I would suggest the K 200mm f2.5 from what I have seen/heard (I don't have it) and the price may be in your range--I saw one in BGN condition at KEH for about $190.00 about 1/2-1 year ago. Another lens I suggest and have/love is the K 135mm f2.5 smc--again at KEH I recall seeing BGN condition for about $150.00--really a spectacular lens! If you can do w/o AF you will get a lot for the money.

08-20-2012, 12:34 AM	#22
dms Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: New York, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,192	Since you say you want A lens--you should consider the Vivitar series 1 70-210mm f2.8-4 lens (version 3) by komine. I have this lens--it and the 135mm f2.5 are my bread and butter lens for theatre photo's--very sharp, good color, nice handling if you like push-pull lens (I do) and really good macro setting. Although an A lens--I don't use the A setting--but I have heard it can sometimes not close down reliably. In US I am guessing now it would go for about $100.

08-20-2012, 02:57 AM	#24
timo Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: former Arsenal football stadium Photos: Gallery Posts: 431	Originally posted by alspe What I've understood, DA 50-200 F4-5.6 is quite good even it is lihht and cheap. Can someone compare it and somethink K/ M 200mm prime. Is there much difference in IQ? I have M200/4 and 50-200. There isn't a huge amount in it at the centre, but the 200 performs across the frame. The zoom doesn't. Or at least mine doesn't. The 200/4 is perfectly usable at all apertures, slightly soft at 4, tightens up nicely one click on from 5.6.

08-20-2012, 05:08 AM	#25
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	I had the Pentax 80-320, and it was quite a decent lens. You might be interested in this thread I had started, it has samples from my 80-320 and other inexpensive tephoto lenses. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/lens-clubs/80818-inexpensive-auto-focus-t...200-200mm.html

08-20-2012, 05:39 AM	#26
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685	My father-in-law frequents auctions, and a few weeks ago he bought a Pentax SF-1 with a Takumar-F 70-200mm f4-5.6 autofocus zoom lens for about $5. I tested the lens on my K-30 and I wasn't expecting much, but it actually shocked me with its sharpness at f8. It's not too great wide open, but if you find one very cheap it may be a good buy. I believe it is the same lens as the Pentax-F 70-200/f4-5.6. I may post some sample shots later on.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-20-2012, 05:54 AM	#27
GibbyTheMole Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Iowa Photos: Albums Posts: 2,275	Originally posted by civiletti High IQ tele on a budget: Tamron adaptall SP70-210 or SP60-300. Yep. I have the SP 60-300 (model 23A) and it's an exceptional lens. Extremely sharp all the way to 300mm. Some PF, but other than that, wow. Great macro capability for a zoom, too. Manual focus though, and it's only an "A" lens if you have the expensive PK/A Adaptall mount. (which I don't.)

08-20-2012, 06:55 AM	#28
msatlas Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 309	The F 70-210/4-5.6 is nice optically but its handling leaves a little to be desired. It's not too huge in size but is about 100g heavier than the DA 55-300. The AF is reasonably fast but boy is it loud! If it gets to hunting it can crash around and you can feel the torque of the focus motor while you hold the camera. Which is why I have mine listed for sale in the marketplace and why I'm planning to get a 55-300.

08-20-2012, 07:00 AM	#29
northcoastgreg Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Northern Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,172	Originally posted by mickey I'm a big fan of the FA 100-300/4.7-5.8. I had a copy of this lens briefly, and found it soft in comparison to the SMC F 70-210. Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy I believe it is the same lens as the Pentax-F 70-200/f4-5.6 None of the Takumar K-mount F 70-200/210 lens are the same, optically, as the Pentax SMC F 70-210 f4-5.6. They differ, not merely in respect to the SMC coatings, but in the design as well.

08-20-2012, 07:24 AM	#30
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685	Originally posted by northcoastgreg None of the Takumar K-mount F 70-200/210 lens are the same, optically, as the Pentax SMC F 70-210 f4-5.6. They differ, not merely in respect to the SMC coatings, but in the design as well. I didn't say it was the same as the Pentax SMC F 70-210 f4-5.6. I said it was the same as the Pentax-F 70-200mm f4-5.6. This is just what I read in another thread, and I notice that in Photoshop the lens is also described as "Pentax-F 70-200mm F4-5.6" in the EXIF info. I noticed that some of the pictures I'm getting from this lens are low in contrast, despite being very sharp. I fashioned a very crude lens hood, and this helped quite a bit. So anybody using this lens should immediately pick up some kind of lens hood from eBay.