[derekkite]

Very impressive shots. I have the 300 f4, and having something that is sharp wide open at f4 in the low light conditions that I have here is very nice. I use Tv mode, set my shutter speed to as high as I dare in the lighting conditions, and shoot away.

If you tend to shoot a bit shorter, I'd look at a 2.8 200mm. The extra stop will make the difference in auto focus, even if you stop down a bit for depth of field. My K5 and 300 f4 just doesn't focus well when the light is low.

I've seriously considered the bigma, but know that I could only use it for 3-4 months of the year. You are further north than I am, but probably have similar light conditions as the valley I live in. We are about 1ev lower when clouded over than the charts would suggest.

[Stickl]

Very impressive shots. I have the 300 f4, and having something that is sharp wide open at f4 in the low light conditions that I have here is very nice. I use Tv mode, set my shutter speed to as high as I dare in the lighting conditions, and shoot away.

If you tend to shoot a bit shorter, I'd look at a 2.8 200mm. The extra stop will make the difference in auto focus, even if you stop down a bit for depth of field. My K5 and 300 f4 just doesn't focus well when the light is low.

I've seriously considered the bigma, but know that I could only use it for 3-4 months of the year. You are further north than I am, but probably have similar light conditions as the valley I live in. We are about 1ev lower when clouded over than the charts would suggest.

Thank you!

I know the 300/4 and 200/2.8 would be good in low light, but I need a zoom (you understand it if you take a look to my birdphotos) and I've decided to take the 60-250/4, maybe with 1.7X AF (that's being sale there in Finland) because of I need more than 250mm sometimes.

I've been using the DA 55-300/4-5.8 all around a year, but it's not nice to shoot with MF and so on

[stormtech]

I can't say enough good about the DA* 60-250. Here is an example - fairly heavy crop and shot through double pane glass: Click on the image twice for a larger view.

[Stickl]

I can't say enough good about the DA* 60-250. Here is an example - fairly heavy crop and shot through double pane glass: Click on the image twice for a larger view.

Nice pic, thanks for showing it! And I think the 60-250 is almost too sharp for me

[jpyykonen]

Nice pic, thanks for showing it! And I think the 60-250 is almost too sharp for me

If it's too sharp for you, you can always send it to me. Yes?

[Stickl]

If it's too sharp for you, you can always send it to me. Yes?

Haha I meant that there's so big difference between 60-250 and 55-300 that it's hard to understand how poor IQ the 55-300 has. The opinion is based on stormtech's photo because having not the 60-250 (yet). At the other hand it's even the same how sharp the photos are if they aren't so bad -looking than DA 55-300's (that has got many hits etc) photos.. And a main thing why I'll buy the 60-250 is that it has much better AF than in my broken DA 55-300.

[Stickl]

So here's example photo of the IQ with mine DA 55-300.. All sizes | IMGP3337 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
And sorry that I can't get it bigger - but in my opinion the bad IQ is able to be seen from this version too.

And photo was taken in yesterday, 300mm, f/8, 1/800 with ISO 100.. The tree I focused was about five meters away so the lens should have somewhat better IQ when photographing nearby subjects, or?
Oh and I didn't make any PP for the photo so take a look and say your opinion. And as you can see, there's only one place that has little bit better IQ..

[Stickl]

And when I compare the photos taken recently with K-5 and DA 55-300 and photos taken a year ago with same camera and lens, there's a huge difference in terms of IQ. So could someone (who has same camera and lens) look the photo I posted about few hours ago and tell me if there's something wrong in the photo.. So in my opinion there's, but I wanna hear your opinion as well!

[crewl1]

There does seem to be some weird blurring on the left and right that almost looks like motion blur but at 1/800 I would not expect it.
At f8 there should be more of the trees front/back in focus also. Did you say it is broken? Did it get dropped?

[Stickl]

There does seem to be some weird blurring on the left and right that almost looks like motion blur but at 1/800 I would not expect it.
At f8 there should be more of the trees front/back in focus also. Did you say it is broken? Did it get dropped?

So it is, every photo looks like this.. So it's not really fun to have "motion blurred" photos even though it can't be the "right" motion blur.
And even the tree, where I focused, has little bit blurring - even though it isn't on the photo's cornerns..
Yeah, so it's. I think it's someway or other broken althought it didn't get dropped anytime. But I think that it has got some hits from tripod and bike and so on.. So the thing could be so that it has get broken with this way.

And if I wanna take telephotos that I'm able to show for everyone, I need a new lens.. And DA 55-300's problem is the slow AF and now also the IQ so I won't want this lens to be bought anymore.

[crewl1]

That's too bad - you could probably sell it for parts though?

[Stickl]

That's too bad - you could probably sell it for parts though?

I dunno, lets see.. But the fact is that I'm not pixel peeping, as jpyykonen claimed
The equipment has to be in good condition, not like this, that I'd take photos without using something like f/10 aperture all the time. So the cameras and lenses are only tools for me for getting my visions coming truth

[Stickl]

Hi!

Now I've the 60-250 and one thing I'm thinking is its AF speed... cause it's as slow as the pentax 55-300 has. :s
Is that normal?

[Class A]

Now I've the 60-250 and one thing I'm thinking is its AF speed... cause it's as slow as the pentax 55-300 has. :s
Is that normal?

I'm pretty sure that's normal.

SDM is not know for its speed.

I hope you'll enjoy this lens nevertheless. Optically, it is very good.

Anyhow, my main reason for posting is because I wanted to congratulate you on your enormous talent. You have amazing shots in your gallery. Extremely well done.

[Stickl]

I'm pretty sure that's normal.

SDM is not know for its speed.

I hope you'll enjoy this lens nevertheless. Optically, it is very good.

Anyhow, my main reason for posting is because I wanted to congratulate you on your enormous talent. You have amazing shots in your gallery. Extremely well done.

Sad to hear.. but no can do.

It's perfect lens if not speaking its AF speed.
Optically it is super good and other ways too!

That's nice to hear, thank you so much for this comment! I'm in the army now so having not time enough to photograph..