Cheap tele zoom

rob_k20d · 06-12-2013, 12:36 PM

Hi,

I am looking for a cheap zoom lens, ideally up to 300mm, but may consider 200mm.

I need an aperture ring (so can use it with a Q with a cheap adapter), but would also like autofocus (to use on my K30).

Some ability to close focus would also be a bonus.

And I don't want to spend too much. Maybe between £50 and £100 (Is that about $80 to $150?).

Happy to buy second hand.

I think there are a few lenses that meet these criteria, from Sigma and Tamron, and also Pentax F/FA lenses.

Any recommendations appreciated?

VisualDarkness · 06-12-2013, 12:44 PM

Can it be a prime? Older zooms are usually worse than the primes.
To get a AF zoom with an aperture ring that performs really well on the Q for nothing is pretty impossible.

VisualDarkness · 06-12-2013, 12:52 PM

There is almost no lenses tested that fits what you wrote. You have to buy and try something like this one: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/227304-sale-d...7-5-8-ist.html

scratchpaddy · 06-12-2013, 12:58 PM

The first lens I ever bought for my K-r was the Tamron 70-300mm AF Di Macro. It's still my go-to telephoto. It's really lightweight, but still feels solid. It sells for less than $100 used, or less than $200 new. It's an excellent performer from 70mm to about 200, but it gets a little mushy at the long end.

It has an aperture ring, and a (admittedly crappy) 1:2 macro mode.

Here's a sample:

jimr-pdx · 06-12-2013, 01:02 PM

It's not a great lens in lower light levels, but I find the Sigma / Quantaray 100-300mm f/4.5-6.7 to be talented and available for $50us regularly. I have one now, my 2nd or 3rd copy. In some shots its contrast is low which comes across as soft, but I have no complaints especially for the price.

the second one is tightly cropped from original

VisualDarkness · 06-12-2013, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by scratchpaddy

The first lens I ever bought for my K-r was the Tamron 70-300mm AF Di Macro. It's still my go-to telephoto. It's really lightweight, but still feels solid. It sells for less than $100 used, or less than $200 new. It's an excellent performer from 70mm to about 200, but it gets a little mushy at the long end.

It has an aperture ring, and a (admittedly crappy) 1:2 macro mode.

Here's a sample:

Originally posted by jimr-pdx

It's not a great lens in lower light levels, but I find the Sigma / Quantaray 100-300mm f/4.5-6.7 to be talented and available for $50us regularly. I have one now, my 2nd or 3rd copy. In some shots its contrast is low which comes across as soft, but I have no complaints especially for the price.

the second one is tightly cropped from original

Are those from the Q?

carrrlangas · 06-12-2013, 01:07 PM

FA80-320 is working great. F80-200 is alsgo good but I had to stop it down to f/8 or f/11 to get good results. A hood is really important!

**Just1MoreDave** · 06-12-2013, 01:12 PM

The SMC Pentax-F 70-210mm f4-5.6 only fails on close focus - I think it's 1.2m or so.

VisualDarkness · 06-12-2013, 01:12 PM

Originally posted by carrrlangas

FA80-320 is working great. F80-200 is alsgo good but I had to stop it down to f/8 or f/11 to get good results. A hood is really important!

Do you have pics from it on a Q? Lenses I've tried and seen with much purple fringing seems to often perform very bad on the Q.

scratchpaddy · 06-12-2013, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by VisualDarkness

Are those from the Q?

Mine is not. I agree that good IQ on a cheap zoom adapted to the Q is a tall order. I don't think the Tamron would look so great on the Q. It's not nearly as bad as some old tele-zooms I've used, but it does fringe. The long end is terrible even on APS-C.

Originally posted by Just1MoreDave

The SMC Pentax-F 70-210mm f4-5.6 only fails on close focus - I think it's 1.2m or so.

I have the Takumar version of this lens (simpler, cheaper coatings than the Pentax one), but I think the Tamron performs better. The Takumar is really heavy, too, even though it's smaller

carrrlangas · 06-12-2013, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by VisualDarkness

Originally posted by carrrlangas
FA80-320 is working great. F80-200 is alsgo good but I had to stop it down to f/8 or f/11 to get good results. A hood is really important!
Do you have pics from it on a Q? Lenses I've tried and seen with much purple fringing seems to often perform very bad on the Q.

Sorry, I don´t own a Q. On the purple fringing matter, I don´t think any old zoom will scape from it. stoping down the lens helps but most software can remove it easely and safely in PP...

VisualDarkness · 06-12-2013, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by carrrlangas

Sorry, I don´t own a Q. On the purple fringing matter, I don´t think any old zoom will scape from it. stoping down the lens helps but most software can remove it easely and safely in PP...

The problem isn't the purple per se, the high resolution needed for the Q seems to exaggerate the effect so much that it results in pure softness.

rob_k20d · 06-12-2013, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by VisualDarkness

Can it be a prime? Older zooms are usually worse than the primes.
To get a AF zoom with an aperture ring that performs really well on the Q for nothing is pretty impossible.

Why is this impossible? Why is there no lens that fits this description? I never said it had to be a fast lens. I didn't even say it had to be a good lens.

I believe there are half a dozen lenses that match the description - unless I am missing something.

carrrlangas · 06-12-2013, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by VisualDarkness

The problem isn't the purple per se, the high resolution needed for the Q seems to exaggerate the effect so much that it results in pure softness.

Have you tried a deeper hood? I am talking about a home made - carboard 20cm long hood! tape it over the existing one to see how it works..

rob_k20d · 06-12-2013, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by rob_k20d

Why is this impossible? Why is there no lens that fits this description? I never said it had to be a fast lens. I didn't even say it had to be a good lens.

I believe there are half a dozen lenses that match the description - unless I am missing something.

Okay, Maybe I should have read the other posts before replying.

Thanks everyone. That is helpful.

06-12-2013, 12:36 PM	#1
rob_k20d Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Leeds Posts: 152	Cheap tele zoom Hi, I am looking for a cheap zoom lens, ideally up to 300mm, but may consider 200mm. I need an aperture ring (so can use it with a Q with a cheap adapter), but would also like autofocus (to use on my K30). Some ability to close focus would also be a bonus. And I don't want to spend too much. Maybe between £50 and £100 (Is that about $80 to $150?). Happy to buy second hand. I think there are a few lenses that meet these criteria, from Sigma and Tamron, and also Pentax F/FA lenses. Any recommendations appreciated?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Cheap, good, old MF 300mm zoom or tele... Any recommendations?	GibbyTheMole	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	03-10-2011 09:02 PM
Getting some tele ability on the cheap	tilling	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	9	07-27-2009 06:45 AM
Dirty cheap tele combi: M75-150+Panagor TC	Rense	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	05-02-2009 03:02 PM
A tele between dirt cheap and crazy expensive?	mutedphotos	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	32	04-19-2009 07:57 PM
recommendations on a tele zoom	shoey	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	11-01-2006 06:42 PM

06-12-2013, 12:44 PM	#2
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Can it be a prime? Older zooms are usually worse than the primes. To get a AF zoom with an aperture ring that performs really well on the Q for nothing is pretty impossible.

06-12-2013, 12:52 PM	#3
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	There is almost no lenses tested that fits what you wrote. You have to buy and try something like this one: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/227304-sale-d...7-5-8-ist.html

06-12-2013, 12:58 PM	#4
scratchpaddy Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Phoenix Posts: 3,361	The first lens I ever bought for my K-r was the Tamron 70-300mm AF Di Macro. It's still my go-to telephoto. It's really lightweight, but still feels solid. It sells for less than $100 used, or less than $200 new. It's an excellent performer from 70mm to about 200, but it gets a little mushy at the long end. It has an aperture ring, and a (admittedly crappy) 1:2 macro mode. Here's a sample:

06-12-2013, 01:02 PM	#5
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	It's not a great lens in lower light levels, but I find the Sigma / Quantaray 100-300mm f/4.5-6.7 to be talented and available for $50us regularly. I have one now, my 2nd or 3rd copy. In some shots its contrast is low which comes across as soft, but I have no complaints especially for the price. the second one is tightly cropped from original

06-12-2013, 01:05 PM	#6
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Originally posted by scratchpaddy The first lens I ever bought for my K-r was the Tamron 70-300mm AF Di Macro. It's still my go-to telephoto. It's really lightweight, but still feels solid. It sells for less than $100 used, or less than $200 new. It's an excellent performer from 70mm to about 200, but it gets a little mushy at the long end. It has an aperture ring, and a (admittedly crappy) 1:2 macro mode. Here's a sample: Originally posted by jimr-pdx It's not a great lens in lower light levels, but I find the Sigma / Quantaray 100-300mm f/4.5-6.7 to be talented and available for $50us regularly. I have one now, my 2nd or 3rd copy. In some shots its contrast is low which comes across as soft, but I have no complaints especially for the price. the second one is tightly cropped from original Are those from the Q?

06-12-2013, 01:07 PM	#7
carrrlangas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Joensuu (Finland) Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,761	FA80-320 is working great. F80-200 is alsgo good but I had to stop it down to f/8 or f/11 to get good results. A hood is really important!

06-12-2013, 01:12 PM	#8
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	The SMC Pentax-F 70-210mm f4-5.6 only fails on close focus - I think it's 1.2m or so.

06-12-2013, 01:12 PM	#9
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Originally posted by carrrlangas FA80-320 is working great. F80-200 is alsgo good but I had to stop it down to f/8 or f/11 to get good results. A hood is really important! Do you have pics from it on a Q? Lenses I've tried and seen with much purple fringing seems to often perform very bad on the Q.

06-12-2013, 01:22 PM	#10
scratchpaddy Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Phoenix Posts: 3,361	Originally posted by VisualDarkness Are those from the Q? Mine is not. I agree that good IQ on a cheap zoom adapted to the Q is a tall order. I don't think the Tamron would look so great on the Q. It's not nearly as bad as some old tele-zooms I've used, but it does fringe. The long end is terrible even on APS-C. Originally posted by Just1MoreDave The SMC Pentax-F 70-210mm f4-5.6 only fails on close focus - I think it's 1.2m or so. I have the Takumar version of this lens (simpler, cheaper coatings than the Pentax one), but I think the Tamron performs better. The Takumar is really heavy, too, even though it's smaller

06-12-2013, 01:27 PM	#11
carrrlangas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Joensuu (Finland) Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,761	Originally posted by VisualDarkness Originally posted by carrrlangas FA80-320 is working great. F80-200 is alsgo good but I had to stop it down to f/8 or f/11 to get good results. A hood is really important! Do you have pics from it on a Q? Lenses I've tried and seen with much purple fringing seems to often perform very bad on the Q. Sorry, I don´t own a Q. On the purple fringing matter, I don´t think any old zoom will scape from it. stoping down the lens helps but most software can remove it easely and safely in PP...

06-12-2013, 01:39 PM	#12
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Originally posted by carrrlangas Sorry, I don´t own a Q. On the purple fringing matter, I don´t think any old zoom will scape from it. stoping down the lens helps but most software can remove it easely and safely in PP... The problem isn't the purple per se, the high resolution needed for the Q seems to exaggerate the effect so much that it results in pure softness.

06-12-2013, 01:43 PM	#13
rob_k20d Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Leeds Posts: 152 Original Poster	Originally posted by VisualDarkness Can it be a prime? Older zooms are usually worse than the primes. To get a AF zoom with an aperture ring that performs really well on the Q for nothing is pretty impossible. Why is this impossible? Why is there no lens that fits this description? I never said it had to be a fast lens. I didn't even say it had to be a good lens. I believe there are half a dozen lenses that match the description - unless I am missing something.

06-12-2013, 01:43 PM	#14
carrrlangas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Joensuu (Finland) Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,761	Originally posted by VisualDarkness The problem isn't the purple per se, the high resolution needed for the Q seems to exaggerate the effect so much that it results in pure softness. Have you tried a deeper hood? I am talking about a home made - carboard 20cm long hood! tape it over the existing one to see how it works..

06-12-2013, 01:56 PM	#15
rob_k20d Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Leeds Posts: 152 Original Poster	Originally posted by rob_k20d Why is this impossible? Why is there no lens that fits this description? I never said it had to be a fast lens. I didn't even say it had to be a good lens. I believe there are half a dozen lenses that match the description - unless I am missing something. Okay, Maybe I should have read the other posts before replying. Thanks everyone. That is helpful.