[madisonphotogrl]

Ok. so I am at a cross roads. I have my K10D with my kit lens. Pentax has included a nice lens, IMO, with the K10D. Now I want to have a telephoto zoom for going out and about. Nothing too grand. I am torn between the Pentax DA 50-200mm F4.0-5.6 or the Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro lens.
I have the digital pro uv filter (not cheap) for the 18-55 that I have now, and will be getting the mulit coated polarizer too. I say this because one of the benefits to stay with the pentax telezoom is the filer size is the same. It does however lacks the Macro. Not that I plan on doing a lot of macro but to have the option to would be nice. I have read a lot of people love the Tamron lens and I have seen some wonderful photos to confirm this, thanks to this forum. Does anyone have the Pentax DA50-200mm that can post some pictures? It would be superb if someone has or has had both...

Thanks...

[Canada_Rockies]

Ok. so I am at a cross roads. I have my K10D with my kit lens. Pentax has included a nice lens, IMO, with the K10D. Now I want to have a telephoto zoom for going out and about. Nothing too grand. I am torn between the Pentax DA 50-200mm F4.0-5.6 or the Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro lens.
I have the digital pro uv filter (not cheap) for the 18-55 that I have now, and will be getting the mulit coated polarizer too. I say this because one of the benefits to stay with the pentax telezoom is the filer size is the same. It does however lacks the Macro. Not that I plan on doing a lot of macro but to have the option to would be nice. I have read a lot of people love the Tamron lens and I have seen some wonderful photos to confirm this, thanks to this forum. Does anyone have the Pentax DA50-200mm that can post some pictures? It would be superb if someone has or has had both...

Thanks...

In a recent issue of Outdoor Photographer, one of their pros who uses Pentax spoke extremely favourably about the DA 55-200. Light, easy to handle, good IQ. Check out the review page for the 70-300 Tamron. I suspect, without looking, that the IQ is so-so at 300mm.

[ivoire]

go for the Tammy. it is sharp to just over 200mm, soft at 300mm but usable between 200and 300mm.

70-300mm review: Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD Di macro (Pentax K) - Review / Lab Test Report

50-200mm review: Pentax SMC-DA 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED - Review / Test Report

check these links in the forum for pics:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/24756-tamron-70-300mm.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/24315-telephot...-wildlife.html

[Buddha Jones]

For the money I would go with the Tammy, I have owned both lenses, but at different times, and I enjoyed the Tammy more. It suited my style better but was terrible at 300mm which is where i wanted it more, so i sold it. The macro was usefull as seen in my aquarium shots. I found that I used the lens mostly around the 200mm mark so it is getting replaced with the DA*200mm.

For some reason, even after all that, I think that you will be more satisfied with the DA than the Tamron.

[madisonphotogrl]

For the money I would go with the Tammy, I have owned both lenses, but at different times, and I enjoyed the Tammy more. It suited my style better but was terrible at 300mm which is where i wanted it more, so i sold it. The macro was usefull as seen in my aquarium shots. I found that I used the lens mostly around the 200mm mark so it is getting replaced with the DA*200mm.

For some reason, even after all that, I think that you will be more satisfied with the DA than the Tamron.

Now that is funny! did you have the purple hazing around the edges at 300mm with the tammy?

[Buddha Jones]

Yeah, it ruined what would of been my favorite picture from the Atlanta Aquarium of a Beluga whale. It just gave me a bad vibe about the whole thing. And there were a few shots from the Grand Canyon that just didn't live up to what I wanted. For $130 bucks, its a winner, but people are selling the DA for $150 or less used so, if you can live w/o the 200-300mm range, I would get the DA instead. Better IQ and a weee bit faster.

[BrianK]

Here are some examples shot with the K10D and the Da-50-200. Just snaps, nothing special.

I have the Sigma 70-300 non APO as well. I can't comment on the Tamron version. I like the reach on the Sigma and the quality of the DA 50-200. The Da 50-200 is smaller and also a lot lighter and would fit your filters. If you can get a good deal on one I don't think you could go wrong. It is one lens I will not get rid of.

DA 50-200

Sigma 70-300

[heatherslightbox]

The way I approach filters is this--I make sure that every lens has a UV filter on it in it's correct lens filter size. When you start looking at polarizers and other special effect filters, then it really starts getting expensive. Get these type of filters in the size of your largest lens filter diameter and use step-up rings for the rest of your lenses. In your case, if you were to get the Tamron 70-300, I believe it has a 62mm filter diameter. Assuming that is the largest filter diameter in your lens collection, get the polarizer in the 62mm filter size and then pick up a 52-62mm step-up ring to make it work with the 18-55. A step-up ring is definitely a lot cheaper than a second polarizer.

HTH,
Heather

[jgredline]

Consider the Tamron 18-250mm super zoom

[Peter Zack]

The 18-250 or the new 55-300 f4 Pentax are other considerations. IMO between the 2 choices listed I'd get the tamron. I've shot with both and the Tamron would get the nudge for the useable longer length (yes it is soft at 300 but good when pulled back or stopped down). The Da is a fine lens for the money but a touch softer across the entire range.

I no longer have either (the Tamron was a loaner) as I've since gotten the Sigma 70-200mm.

Now if image quality is the main issue in terms of sharpness, colour etc. and you can live without the macro (which you have close focus on the 18-55 anyway) then you should buy Heather's (hwblanks) F SMC 70-210. Superior to either lens without question. I've owned 2 and both were much better lenses. They are noisier and ugly compared to the newer cosmetics but worth those minor trade off's.

Have a look at a thread I posted on this lens back in December:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/16142-more-snow-praise-older-lens.html

It was a mistake to sell this lens. The Sigma f2.8 is wonderful but big. If I hadn't just blown over $1500.00 on new stuff this month, I'd get Heather's lens after posting this.

Bad timing for me Heather!!

[Zewrak]

If you go for the Pentax DA 50-200, get the Samsung version. Here its 100$ compared to the Pentax version that is 210$. And its the same lens. And for 100$ you get alot of bang per $. Wish I had checked the prices before I bought mine, I am not at all unhappy with the DA 50-200 though. I think its a nice lens for that money.

[heatherslightbox]

Peter,

Thanks for the plug for my lens.

If you really want this lens, it would only be $140 total to Canada, Express Mail shipping. In the meantime, if nobody else picks it up, I could wait until early next month for you to get some more money and buy it off of me. If you already haven't signed up for Revolution Money Exchange, you would get $25.00 just for signing up, making your total $115.

As a side note, with RME, if those with U.S. addresses do the same, you would actually be picking this lens up for $100, which is a fabulous deal for such a sharp lens.

I'm really surprised that it hasn't sold already.

Heather

[ivoire]

The Sigma 55-200mm is another inexpensive option:

Sigma AF 55-200mm f/4-5.6 DC - Lab Test Report / Review

[madisonphotogrl]

The 18-250 or the new 55-300 f4 Pentax are other considerations. IMO between the 2 choices listed I'd get the tamron. I've shot with both and the Tamron would get the nudge for the useable longer length (yes it is soft at 300 but good when pulled back or stopped down). The Da is a fine lens for the money but a touch softer across the entire range.

I no longer have either (the Tamron was a loaner) as I've since gotten the Sigma 70-200mm.

Now if image quality is the main issue in terms of sharpness, colour etc. and you can live without the macro (which you have close focus on the 18-55 anyway) then you should buy Heather's (hwblanks) F SMC 70-210. Superior to either lens without question. I've owned 2 and both were much better lenses. They are noisier and ugly compared to the newer cosmetics but worth those minor trade off's.

Have a look at a thread I posted on this lens back in December:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/16142-more-snow-praise-older-lens.html

It was a mistake to sell this lens. The Sigma f2.8 is wonderful but big. If I hadn't just blown over $1500.00 on new stuff this month, I'd get Heather's lens after posting this.

Bad timing for me Heather!!

I am really not in the market to spend $450 for a mega zoom. I don't really want a lens like that anyhow. I'd be afraid I would get lazy and not use another lens, even if the second lens was better.

It would be nice to help a fellow pentaxian out... I am researching now but if I had the $100 today I might take Heather's lens too... I am not cheap..just poor! Wedding is june 7th and it is coming fast!!!

[Peter Zack]

Heather RME is for USA residents only. Sounds good and wouldn't I love to stop getting raked over the %age coals by Paypal but it's availablity is limited right now.