Poor man's choice for DA * 50-135

hinman · 04-08-2008, 11:29 AM

As Peter has commented on another forum about my buying habits with lens, when one is low on budget, I end up spending money on the alternative lens that is cheaper in price. I chose Pentax K 45-125mm f/4.0 when I saw it in marketplace. Here are some test shots and summary of initial impressions in my blog post

Pentax K 45-125mm f/4.0 Test Shots - Hin's Tech Corner

All test shots in f/4.0 wide open testing for sharpness

changed photo from the one Peter commented
this one has less distraction from the branches

My pp with Picasa may have clipped the highlight on the edges -- my bad

I paid $125 when I bought it. What do you think? I am contemplating in selling this to a good friend of mine in another forum. I like the lens for its Pentax SMC quality good old glass but I have overlapping range with other manual lens as in my Kiron 70-150 f/3.8 which is much smaller, and my dependable DA 50-200 f/4.0-5.6 with AF. And the lens is on the heavy and bulky side but it works extremely well in fast zooming and focusing and I normally would have problem in catching the fast moving squirrel and it is no problem when I use this manual lens. Extremely well built for fast focusing and zooming needs, these kind of lens beat the lacking in speed in AF in Pentax system.

Last edited by hinman; 04-09-2008 at 07:35 AM.

Noisychip · 04-08-2008, 11:37 AM

I think these are great shots, that lens looks real good. It lacks AF though, right?

hinman · 04-08-2008, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by Noisychip

I think these are great shots, that lens looks real good. It lacks AF though, right?

Thanks for the comment. Yes, it is a complete manual lens. I find the lens quite good for portraits

Noisychip · 04-08-2008, 12:23 PM

Yes, it really looks good for portraits. What I like even more is color and sharpness of the foliage in #1

heatherslightbox · 04-08-2008, 04:38 PM

Nice shots, Hin.

That lens would give me a good excuse to go out and buy the *16-50 (assuming the QC bugs are worked out). The 45-125 would be a good compliment to it.

I've got my own good lens deal in the works--a Sigma 100-300/4.5-6.7 UC for $85 that I found locally on Craigslist. All I need to do to seal the deal is to go get some cash and pick up the lens tomorrow afternoon.

It's cheaper than a new Tamron or Sigma 70-300 and a lot cheaper than the 55-300.

Heather

Peter Zack · 04-08-2008, 05:15 PM

Hin, I must comment again. The picture of your son is one of the best shots you've posted of one of the family. Captured when he didn't see the camera pointed at him and great exposure/use of the available light. The left eye is a touch soft but that makes sense at f4. Crop the shot just above the edge of the orange lid.

Squirrel shot is nice and sharp with great colour but all the branches take away from the image

The tree leaves is another winner. That was wide open with this lens? Beautiful light and colours.

From what you are posting of this lens, consider a sale carefully. IMO the DA50-200 can't touch the IQ or sharpness one bit. These are as rare as it gets. If you can afford to keep it then I'd have it in the bag.

Fritz · 04-08-2008, 06:24 PM

Wide open? Wow, these look great Hin. That looks like an exceptional lens.

vievetrick · 04-08-2008, 06:34 PM

what a steel!!!

axl · 04-09-2008, 12:48 AM

wow, great great shots. Nice colours, sharpness and all... well done for getting it, I hope it'll serve well.

247nino · 04-09-2008, 02:08 AM

great shots HIN!

Miserere · 04-09-2008, 01:13 PM

Yup, what everyone said.

I'm starting to think I should have some kids so I can properly test my lenses

I can just imagine in 5 years: "mummy, why was I born?" "so that daddy could test his new lenses and have someone to post cute pictures of on the internet".

hinman · 04-10-2008, 07:15 PM

Originally posted by Peter Zack

Hin, I must comment again. The picture of your son is one of the best shots you've posted of one of the family. Captured when he didn't see the camera pointed at him and great exposure/use of the available light. The left eye is a touch soft but that makes sense at f4. Crop the shot just above the edge of the orange lid.

Squirrel shot is nice and sharp with great colour but all the branches take away from the image

The tree leaves is another winner. That was wide open with this lens? Beautiful light and colours.

From what you are posting of this lens, consider a sale carefully. IMO the DA50-200 can't touch the IQ or sharpness one bit. These are as rare as it gets. If you can afford to keep it then I'd have it in the bag.

Thank you all and Peter, I took your comment seriously and decided to hold the lens and sell something else. I am planning my lens to sell/donate/gift and Pentax K 45-125 is the one to keep. As of now, I put in Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 in the to-sell list, I may change it to DA 50-200 but I like my DA 50-200 for its versatility.

Hin's Camera Gear - Hin's Tech Corner

I am working on my trimming and it is the beginning of a long journey of undoing the impulse purchases.

moxfyre · 04-10-2008, 07:34 PM

Originally posted by hwblanks

I've got my own good lens deal in the works--a Sigma 100-300/4.5-6.7 UC for $85 that I found locally on Craigslist. All I need to do to seal the deal is to go get some cash and pick up the lens tomorrow afternoon.

It's cheaper than a new Tamron or Sigma 70-300 and a lot cheaper than the 55-300.

Heather

Hi Heather, I hope you're not offended by my unsolicited advice but...

Personally I would not pay $85 for that lens, but would go for the Tamron LD Di f/4-5.6 instead (or spring $200 for the Sigma APO, but I assume you're on a fairly tight budget like me

)

I have not seen that specific lens... but from what I can tell the non-APO Sigma long zooms are not so great. The Tamron lens (I paid $130) or the Sigma 70-300 APO DG will give you significant advantages:

more room at the short end
a half-stop faster (significant when you need it!!)
optical formula optimized for APS-C sensors (where higher /lens/ resolution is required because you're trying to cram an equally detailed image onto a smaller sensor)
nice build quality, and a very generous 6 year warranty (for the Tamron at least)

So I think you'll get quite a bit more bang for your buck if you go for one of the newer consumer zooms, which are just an awfully good deal in my opinion. I don't want to get into a holy war over which of them is better, but I have been very pleased with the sharpness of the Tamron, and can live with the occasional chromatic aberration.

Anyway, that's just my 2¢!

Peter Zack · 04-10-2008, 08:47 PM

Heather I would have to agree with the above comment. I think you're selling the f SMC 70-210 to try and fund this purchase and IMO opinion thats a mistake. I had one of these UC zooms about 2 years ago (came as an Ebay package and I considered it an "extra") and after 5 minutes with the lens, promptly tossed it in the garbage. I couldn't see trying to sell it on some unsuspecting buyer.

Keep your 70-210 or sell it and get the aforementioned Sigma or Tamron 70-300. That UC zoom is worth about $20.

Peter Zack · 04-10-2008, 08:53 PM

Funny Hin, you're keeping the K mount lens and now selling my favourite lens that gets the most use in my kit. I'd never sell the Tamron, ever.

04-08-2008, 12:15 PM	#3
hinman Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fremont, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,473 Original Poster	Originally posted by Noisychip I think these are great shots, that lens looks real good. It lacks AF though, right? Thanks for the comment. Yes, it is a complete manual lens. I find the lens quite good for portraits Last edited by hinman; 04-09-2008 at 07:34 AM.

04-08-2008, 05:15 PM	#6
Peter Zack Pentaxian Moderator Emeritus Join Date: May 2007 Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,643	Hin, I must comment again. The picture of your son is one of the best shots you've posted of one of the family. Captured when he didn't see the camera pointed at him and great exposure/use of the available light. The left eye is a touch soft but that makes sense at f4. Crop the shot just above the edge of the orange lid. Squirrel shot is nice and sharp with great colour but all the branches take away from the image The tree leaves is another winner. That was wide open with this lens? Beautiful light and colours. From what you are posting of this lens, consider a sale carefully. IMO the DA50-200 can't touch the IQ or sharpness one bit. These are as rare as it gets. If you can afford to keep it then I'd have it in the bag. Last edited by Peter Zack; 04-09-2008 at 05:08 AM.

04-10-2008, 07:34 PM	#13
moxfyre Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: College Park, MD Posts: 86	Originally posted by hwblanks I've got my own good lens deal in the works--a Sigma 100-300/4.5-6.7 UC for $85 that I found locally on Craigslist. All I need to do to seal the deal is to go get some cash and pick up the lens tomorrow afternoon. It's cheaper than a new Tamron or Sigma 70-300 and a lot cheaper than the 55-300. Heather Hi Heather, I hope you're not offended by my unsolicited advice but... Personally I would not pay $85 for that lens, but would go for the Tamron LD Di f/4-5.6 instead (or spring $200 for the Sigma APO, but I assume you're on a fairly tight budget like me ) I have not seen that specific lens... but from what I can tell the non-APO Sigma long zooms are not so great. The Tamron lens (I paid $130) or the Sigma 70-300 APO DG will give you significant advantages: more room at the short end a half-stop faster (significant when you need it!!) optical formula optimized for APS-C sensors (where higher /lens/ resolution is required because you're trying to cram an equally detailed image onto a smaller sensor) nice build quality, and a very generous 6 year warranty (for the Tamron at least) So I think you'll get quite a bit more bang for your buck if you go for one of the newer consumer zooms, which are just an awfully good deal in my opinion. I don't want to get into a holy war over which of them is better, but I have been very pleased with the sharpness of the Tamron, and can live with the occasional chromatic aberration. Anyway, that's just my 2¢!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Poor, poor Rand Paul	jeffkrol	General Talk	18	10-19-2010 01:57 PM
Chinon 135 & Chinar 135 , Good Bad or Ugly	seacapt	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	1	02-26-2010 09:03 PM
So THATS the Man on the Moon. DA*50-135	bentax	Post Your Photos!	7	08-08-2009 07:13 PM
lens choice (135/3.5)	lazyeye	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	28	07-28-2008 09:07 PM

04-08-2008, 11:29 AM	#1
hinman Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fremont, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,473	*Poor man's choice for DA 50-135 As Peter has commented on another forum about my buying habits with lens, when one is low on budget, I end up spending money on the alternative lens that is cheaper in price. I chose Pentax K 45-125mm f/4.0 when I saw it in marketplace. Here are some test shots and summary of initial impressions in my blog post Pentax K 45-125mm f/4.0 Test Shots - Hin's Tech Corner All test shots in f/4.0 wide open testing for sharpness changed photo from the one Peter commented this one has less distraction from the branches My pp with Picasa may have clipped the highlight on the edges -- my bad I paid $125 when I bought it. What do you think? I am contemplating in selling this to a good friend of mine in another forum. I like the lens for its Pentax SMC quality good old glass but I have overlapping range with other manual lens as in my Kiron 70-150 f/3.8 which is much smaller, and my dependable DA 50-200 f/4.0-5.6** with AF. And the lens is on the heavy and bulky side but it works extremely well in fast zooming and focusing and I normally would have problem in catching the fast moving squirrel and it is no problem when I use this manual lens. Extremely well built for fast focusing and zooming needs, these kind of lens beat the lacking in speed in AF in Pentax system. Last edited by hinman; 04-09-2008 at 07:35 AM.

04-08-2008, 11:37 AM	#2
Noisychip Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 282	I think these are great shots, that lens looks real good. It lacks AF though, right?

04-08-2008, 12:23 PM	#4
Noisychip Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 282	Yes, it really looks good for portraits. What I like even more is color and sharpness of the foliage in #1

04-08-2008, 04:38 PM	#5
heatherslightbox Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Gainesville, FL Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,599	Nice shots, Hin. That lens would give me a good excuse to go out and buy the *16-50 (assuming the QC bugs are worked out). The 45-125 would be a good compliment to it. I've got my own good lens deal in the works--a Sigma 100-300/4.5-6.7 UC for $85 that I found locally on Craigslist. All I need to do to seal the deal is to go get some cash and pick up the lens tomorrow afternoon. It's cheaper than a new Tamron or Sigma 70-300 and a lot cheaper than the 55-300. Heather

04-08-2008, 06:24 PM	#7
Fritz Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Tillamook, OR Posts: 1,222	Wide open? Wow, these look great Hin. That looks like an exceptional lens.

04-08-2008, 06:34 PM	#8
vievetrick Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Easthampton - Massachusetts - USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,183	what a steel!!!

04-09-2008, 12:48 AM	#9
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	wow, great great shots. Nice colours, sharpness and all... well done for getting it, I hope it'll serve well.

04-09-2008, 02:08 AM	#10
247nino Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sunnyvale, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 302	great shots HIN!

04-09-2008, 01:13 PM	#11
Miserere Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Boston Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,993	Yup, what everyone said. I'm starting to think I should have some kids so I can properly test my lenses I can just imagine in 5 years: "mummy, why was I born?" "so that daddy could test his new lenses and have someone to post cute pictures of on the internet".

04-10-2008, 07:15 PM	#12
hinman Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fremont, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,473 Original Poster	Originally posted by Peter Zack Hin, I must comment again. The picture of your son is one of the best shots you've posted of one of the family. Captured when he didn't see the camera pointed at him and great exposure/use of the available light. The left eye is a touch soft but that makes sense at f4. Crop the shot just above the edge of the orange lid. Squirrel shot is nice and sharp with great colour but all the branches take away from the image The tree leaves is another winner. That was wide open with this lens? Beautiful light and colours. From what you are posting of this lens, consider a sale carefully. IMO the DA50-200 can't touch the IQ or sharpness one bit. These are as rare as it gets. If you can afford to keep it then I'd have it in the bag. Thank you all and Peter, I took your comment seriously and decided to hold the lens and sell something else. I am planning my lens to sell/donate/gift and Pentax K 45-125 is the one to keep. As of now, I put in Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 in the to-sell list, I may change it to DA 50-200 but I like my DA 50-200 for its versatility. Hin's Camera Gear - Hin's Tech Corner I am working on my trimming and it is the beginning of a long journey of undoing the impulse purchases.

04-10-2008, 08:47 PM	#14
Peter Zack Pentaxian Moderator Emeritus Join Date: May 2007 Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,643	Heather I would have to agree with the above comment. I think you're selling the f SMC 70-210 to try and fund this purchase and IMO opinion thats a mistake. I had one of these UC zooms about 2 years ago (came as an Ebay package and I considered it an "extra") and after 5 minutes with the lens, promptly tossed it in the garbage. I couldn't see trying to sell it on some unsuspecting buyer. Keep your 70-210 or sell it and get the aforementioned Sigma or Tamron 70-300. That UC zoom is worth about $20.

04-10-2008, 08:53 PM	#15
Peter Zack Pentaxian Moderator Emeritus Join Date: May 2007 Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,643	Funny Hin, you're keeping the K mount lens and now selling my favourite lens that gets the most use in my kit. I'd never sell the Tamron, ever.