Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-15-2013, 03:04 AM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 528
Sigma 18-250 vs. DA 55-300?

How does the image quality of the sigma 18-250 at 55-250 compare to the DA at 55-250?

I am looking for the best zoom lens under $500 for my pentax k-x. If the Sigma is as good then I might as well get it because it covers the low end range as well. Would be nice if I could just have one lens that looks good throughout. I am not really impressed with the plastic mount of my 18-55.

12-15-2013, 03:07 AM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 528
Original Poster
Hrm, I see the 55-300 is a faster lens. I'm not sure what the cut off is on the Sigma 18-250 at f5.8.
12-15-2013, 03:39 AM   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Slovenia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,180
The DA is 4.5 up to around 200mm I think, while the Sigma drops to 6.3 pretty early.
12-15-2013, 06:59 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 306
I remember seeing IQ compare somewhere here forum, anyway IQ was about same...but da 55-300 AF is really good and pics are properly focuced. With sigma lenses I expect more problems

12-15-2013, 07:50 AM   #5
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
QuoteOriginally posted by Giklab Quote
The DA is 4.5 up to around 200mm I think, while the Sigma drops to 6.3 pretty early.
At 135mm, the Sigma is 5.6. I'm not sure that's an issue for buying or not buying the lens. For Aperture, both are slow, let's not quibble about how slow. For me the big difference is the Sigma covers 18-55. That avoids a lot of lens changes. Not covering 250-300 is a much smaller difference than 18-55. Many of us use the DA*60-250 instead of the DA*300 because the difference is so small.

So it really depends on intended use, whether you have something better, and whether you want WR, which is available on the 55-300. If what I have now is the 18-55, and I'm looking for a walk around lens, my advice would be get the 18-250 and avoid the lens changes.

If you own the DA*16-50, Sigma 16-50, Tamron 17-50, or any other good lens in the 16-50 range, then the 55-300 makes more sense, since you'd be taking the Sigma 18-250 off the camera in favour of one of those lenses when you had the Sigma on, in any case.

After I bought my Sigma 70-300, DA*60-250, and A-400, my wife bought a Sigma 18-250, just for the convenience factor. Especially for many family events etc. you just want few images with minimum fuss.
12-15-2013, 09:50 AM   #6
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,872
I rarely use my 55-300 at less than 200mm. But that is because I have a number of lenses that cover focal lengths less than 200mm better, ie. F35-70, F35-135, FA28-105 etc.

The 55-300 is optimized for the long end, the 18-250 is probably better in the middle focal lengths. Different lenses optimized for different things...
12-15-2013, 09:57 AM   #7
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
I read a review that claimed the Sigma 18-250 is optimized long and short, and is weak in the 80-120 range, pretty much unique in a super zoom.
12-15-2013, 10:35 AM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 306
I also think question is if u want superzoom or u want to change lenses. If u do not want to change lenses take sigma superzoom. If u want little better quality pics, take da 55-300 and prepare to change lenses sometimes.

I have Da 55-300, my copy is good i am happy with it. I do not complain anything, lightwight, small size, sharp focus always and pics look really good with it. Its good pair with normal zoom in my case tamron 17-50.

I also have tamron 18-200 superzoom. I use it when i do not want to change lens.

So no matter what u choose, u will choose good

12-16-2013, 08:19 AM   #9
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,862
They are very different lenses. But if just compare 55-250, DA 55-300 should win easily.
Off topic a little bit: If you need long reach, 70-300 lenses from sigma and tamron are very nice. You can get them at very reasonable price. A little bigger and heavier than 55-300 (they are FF lens), but faster and lower priced. Quality variation is a concern, some of them I have tried are not very good, and some of them are super! But same is true for the DA 55-300. I ordered WR version recently and returned first copy. Very soft at 250-300 range, much worse than the old non-WR version I owned.
So I guess everyone tells you is about their own experience. You just have to test your copy and compare.
12-16-2013, 08:33 AM   #10
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
QuoteQuote:
They are very different lenses. But if just compare 55-250, DA 55-300 should win easily.
Should?

You might like to look at..
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/227006-lens-comparison.html

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying having done a few tests i don't make these kinds of statements anymore without having done a few comparisons. And I know of no reason why the 55-300 should be better.
12-16-2013, 09:04 AM   #11
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,862
lens copy variation

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Should?

You might like to look at..
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/227006-lens-comparison.html

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying having done a few tests i don't make these kinds of statements anymore without having done a few comparisons. And I know of no reason why the 55-300 should be better.
That is what I said in the rest part of the post. It looks the tested lens is a bad copy.
I also owned 18-250, DA 55-300, and some other 70-300s, and now the WR HD 55-300. any conclusion from a single copy comparison is for that copy.
You ahem to test you own copy to make a conclusion.
That is why I said " should".
12-16-2013, 09:15 AM   #12
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
QuoteOriginally posted by grahame Quote
That is what I said in the rest part of the post. It looks the tested lens is a bad copy.
I also owned 18-250, DA 55-300, and some other 70-300s, and now the WR HD 55-300. any conclusion from a single copy comparison is for that copy.
You ahem to test you own copy to make a conclusion.
That is why I said " should".
And I'm still wondering why you said that? Why "should" the 55-300 be better?
12-16-2013, 09:20 AM   #13
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,862
1. from my experience.
2. from most other reviews
3. And I just can not imagine a 18-250 super zoom can be better than a dedicated tele lens, particular 55-250 is the good performance range for DA. 250-300 is weaker.
12-16-2013, 10:15 AM   #14
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
Your experience counts for a lot….

The only site I can find where you can compare these two lenses, DxO, shows the 55-300 better by a considerable margin, at 300mm, almost up with the DA*300, testing the 18-250 on the D7000 and the 55-300 on a K-50.

Scores for Mpix 18-250- 5 mpx, 55-300, 7 mpx, DA*300 - 8 Mpx. although the K-50 seems to test considerably better than the D7000, so hard to say exactly.

According to DxO a DA* 300 on a K-5, tests at the same resolutions a DA 55-300 on a K-5. And an 18-250 on a D7100 performs as well as a DA* 300 on a K-5

See what you got me into?

Last edited by normhead; 12-16-2013 at 10:27 AM.
12-16-2013, 10:22 AM   #15
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,862
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Your experience counts for a lot….
My experience counts for a lot…TO ME.
You have to find yours by yourself, if their's experience doesn't count to you.

Last edited by grahame; 12-16-2013 at 10:36 AM.
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!
da, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, sigma, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Need avice on DA (L) 55-300 vs. Sigma/Tamron 70-300 minahasa Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 11-16-2013 09:23 AM
Sigma 70-300 APO vs Sigma 18-250 HSM (Non-Macro) StephenA Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 10-23-2012 05:19 AM
DA 18-250 v. DA 55-300 flippedgazelle Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 10-10-2009 05:58 PM
18-55 II, 18-250, & 55-300, and last APO 70-300 LeDave Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 07-12-2009 09:51 PM
pentax/tamron 18-250 vs DA 55-300 deuces Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 07-16-2008 08:42 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:57 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