Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-24-2012, 05:06 PM   #16
Site Supporter
LaurenOE's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,487
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
I just took the Tamron 70-200/2.8 off my K-5 after shooting off the pier outside our room. I have the 55-300 too but the Tamron is sharper. I was not able to get the sea birds the way I like with only 200mm. Much as I like my Tamron 70-200, it's just not a birding lens IMHO. Perhaps either a 300 prime or a zoom in the 150-500 range instead?
I'm convinced that birding - unless they are not moving - requires a Gimbal.

Katana Gimbal Head Review



08-24-2012, 05:47 PM   #17
Veteran Member
msatlas's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 309
For the shooting described by the OP, gotta go for length. Two options in the not-crazy price range are 300mm and faster, or more reach with similar aperture.

Pentax F/FA* 300/4.5
Pentax DA* 300/4
Sigma 120-400/4.5-5.6
Sigma 135-400/4.5-5.6
Sigma 150-500/5-6.3
Sigma 170-500/5-6.3
Sigma 300/4
Sigma 400/5.6
08-24-2012, 07:00 PM - 1 Like   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: New England
Photos: Albums
Posts: 689
There's also the (now out of production) Tokina AT-X 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 AF, one of the most compact lenses in it's class. Version 1 has no lens tripod mount, version 2 does (though it is small enough to be hand-holdable either way).
08-24-2012, 08:11 PM   #19
Site Supporter
ramseybuckeye's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Elida, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,622
QuoteOriginally posted by gut1kor Quote
Hi,

I need a little bit of suggestion here. I am not into any wedding photography. I was impressed by the reviews on Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 lens and kind of wanting to purchase it. I don't have any f2.8 lens as of now and my main interest lies in wildlife and nature photography. But when I reviewed my old photographs 70% of them were shot at 300mm (FA 100-300mm f4.7-5.6 lens & Sigma 70-300mm). So I am not sure if my desire for this lens is out of a need or because of the reviews and images I have seen from this glass and at affordable price. Is this focal length suitable for me??? Will I be happy at 200mm with an f2.8 despite shooting most of the time at 300mm???

Guna
I think your point about this lens being affordable was missed since the 300 primes are quite a bit more money. I would love to have one too but the Tamron is probably coming sooner. As blackcloudbrew said the DA55-300 is better than all of the other xx-300s, that may be a solution, because I'm not sure that 200 will be enough length. I have had some MF 200s and was disappointed in all of them. And I use the 55-300 mostly at 300, probably very rarely have I used it at 200. But I still want that Tamron! I still think of the times that I'm in a dark woods where the 55-300 can suffer, and the tiny warbler that is surrounded by auto focus stealing twigs. I would think the Tamron may help there. I'd rather have the 300, but it's just out of reach. I don't like the idea of a teleconverter either, you lose speed and IQ, and may end up needing to use a tripod, which can really limit you in wildlife.

08-25-2012, 04:23 PM   #20
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 23
I took my Tamy 70-200 to the Smokey Mountains and got some great shots deer, Ok shots of birds, and few marginal ones of bear. The bear wasn't being cooperative and I wasn't about to ask it to say cheeeeez. For mosre distanct shots of Elk I wish I'd had a longer lens. I've also used by 70-200 for several event type circumstances. In general lens choice should be based upon what type of nature you're trying to capture including lighting conditions (some wild life is nocturnal), distance, how fast the subject moves, and how close you can get.

A word of advice when shooting wildlife. Take the time to learn about the wildlife your shooting and the type you're not. If your shooting water foul in bear country be ready to meet a bear. I'm still recovering from injuries earned from my last conversation with a rather irritated bear that decided I shouldn't be in his forest. I survived, so did the bear, but it took half a can of bear spray for us both to get away.
08-25-2012, 04:37 PM   #21
Site Supporter
ramseybuckeye's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Elida, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,622
QuoteOriginally posted by pentaxinhouston Quote
I took my Tamy 70-200 to the Smokey Mountains and got some great shots deer, Ok shots of birds, and few marginal ones of bear. The bear wasn't being cooperative and I wasn't about to ask it to say cheeeeez. For mosre distanct shots of Elk I wish I'd had a longer lens. I've also used by 70-200 for several event type circumstances. In general lens choice should be based upon what type of nature you're trying to capture including lighting conditions (some wild life is nocturnal), distance, how fast the subject moves, and how close you can get.

A word of advice when shooting wildlife. Take the time to learn about the wildlife your shooting and the type you're not. If your shooting water foul in bear country be ready to meet a bear. I'm still recovering from injuries earned from my last conversation with a rather irritated bear that decided I shouldn't be in his forest. I survived, so did the bear, but it took half a can of bear spray for us both to get away.
Glad you got away from the bear, bear spray is a must! They have elk in the Smokeys now?
08-25-2012, 05:23 PM   #22
Senior Member
Frank B's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 149
I do a fair amount of sort-of-wildlife photos - at the San Diego Zoo mostly. I often have both a 300/4 and an 80-200/2.8 with me, but really, the 80-200/2.8 rarely comes out. Every now and then I find the 300 to be too long (and mine is somewhat ancient, with an almost 10" minimum focus distance), but I'm generally too lazy to change and just make due. For what you describe, especially if you are actually out in the field versus a zoo, the longer lenses suggested will likely serve you better.

That said, a 70 or 80-200/2.8 is a nice lens to have. I really like mine on an APS-C sensor too. It's a nice range of focal lengths. Mine works great with an old 1.4x teleconverter too.
08-26-2012, 03:03 PM   #23
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 23
Ramseybuckeye, They've had elk now for about ten years. There are two herds one in the southern end of the on US 441, north of Cherokee, NC. The second herd was near the north park HQ. I didn't get to see the north herd.

A good place to shoot is in Cade's Cove early morning and evening hours. The area was rich in whidlife including Bear, Deer, Turkey, and Coyote.

08-27-2012, 01:49 PM   #24
Junior Member
wkrider's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chandler, Az
Posts: 41
Mine just came via UPS today....time to start shooting with it.
08-27-2012, 04:59 PM   #25
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by wkrider Quote
Mine just came via UPS today....time to start shooting with it.
Congratulations. I took mine Dolphin watching this weekend.
08-27-2012, 11:09 PM   #26
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bangalore
Photos: Albums
Posts: 174
Original Poster
Thank you all. These answers definitely help me in making the decision...

Cheers
Guna
08-28-2012, 01:15 AM   #27
Senior Member
neil's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 182
I bought mine new in April, used it maybe three times, sold it last week. Thought I could get used to a zoom lens, I guess not!

That said, it does have great image qualities, good luck with your decision!
08-28-2012, 03:28 AM   #28
Site Supporter
tabl10s's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sacramento(formerly from B'Ham, England).
Posts: 1,401
QuoteOriginally posted by LaurenOE Quote
I'm convinced that birding - unless they are not moving - requires a Gimbal.

Katana Gimbal Head Review


The Really Right Stuff version might be better(certainly better looking).
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!
70-200mm, f2.8, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, photography, reviews, slr lens, tamron, tamron 70-200mm f2.8
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro AF Lens for Pentax manishved Sold Items 12 08-13-2012 08:03 AM
Issues with Tamron 70-200mm Macro lens at 200mm f2.8, just purchased, please help! AH11 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 04-03-2012 05:32 AM
Another which lens thread ....da 50-135mm or tamron 70-200mm? janstew Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 24 03-20-2011 04:05 AM
Which Travel Lens? Sigma or Tamron 18-200mm scarr2k Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 11-10-2010 04:51 PM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Macro AF Lens (Worldwide) raybird Sold Items 2 09-23-2010 05:10 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:37 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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