Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-27-2015, 01:48 AM   #16
Veteran Member
Sagitta's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,953
No experience with the 60-250 myself, but I have an old off-brand 70-210 and absolutely love it. Something more modern with around the same focal length and more speed would be amazing, so I would gladly sacrifice adding a bit of weight to get one.

That focal length is about perfect for the 'almost but not quite able to actually get where you want to be for the shot' shots. IE, zoos, tourist attractions, leaning over the guardrail on a mountain pass, etc.

I actually cut my teeth (so to speak) on an old Sigma 70-300. I still have the thing, but I snapped the focus ring somehow (seems to be an issue, I've seen others say they've done the same) and since then its mostly been a paperweight despite it still being perfectly functional.

I'd assume the DA* would have exceptional (or at least very, very good) autofocusing, which would make it a good low-flying bird lens as well. My Sigma was almost but not quite there, and in hindsight it was more the lens than me with it.

01-27-2015, 02:31 AM   #17
Pentaxian
zzeitg's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South Bohemia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,872
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
I recently obtained a 60-250 Pentax that is in great shape (like new) and at a great price. However after getting it I'm stumped. The lens is large and heavy and while it can be handheld for some uses it's really more of a tripod lens I think.

I also thought it's huge and heavy until I received Sigma 150-500. So now it's my "little 60-250" .


I use it pretty often. Mostly wildlife, zoo and nature shooting, many times in combo with 1.4x TC. But sometimes even as a portrait lens (it's a long lens, so nice background separation).


Compared to the Sigma, I'm more convinced about the IQ of 60-250. So if I predict that I won't need the extra length of 150-500, I stick to put 60-250 into the bag.
Could be that I still need to practice much more with Sigma, but so far I'm not able to use it handheld - not at all. With 60-250 it's undoubtedly possible, but it might be even easier if it would be f2.8 instead f4.


(I also have 50-135 but that's a different story. Somehow I'm still trying to find it's proper role.)
01-27-2015, 06:04 AM   #18
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 35,964
QuoteOriginally posted by Sagitta Quote
No experience with the 60-250 myself, but I have an old off-brand 70-210 and absolutely love it. Something more modern with around the same focal length and more speed would be amazing, so I would gladly sacrifice adding a bit of weight to get one.

That focal length is about perfect for the 'almost but not quite able to actually get where you want to be for the shot' shots. IE, zoos, tourist attractions, leaning over the guardrail on a mountain pass, etc.

I actually cut my teeth (so to speak) on an old Sigma 70-300. I still have the thing, but I snapped the focus ring somehow (seems to be an issue, I've seen others say they've done the same) and since then its mostly been a paperweight despite it still being perfectly functional.

I'd assume the DA* would have exceptional (or at least very, very good) autofocusing, which would make it a good low-flying bird lens as well. My Sigma was almost but not quite there, and in hindsight it was more the lens than me with it.
I was lucky, what broke on my Sigma 70-300 was the zoom rig. After zooming it out I have to much it back in by hand, but it still works great, and every now and then I take it out for long distance macro.

---------- Post added 01-27-15 at 08:06 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
I have or had the DA*50-135, DA55-300, DA*60-250 and Sigma EX DG 70-200/2.8 II
The short story is that I have sold all but the DA*50-135.

I loved the size and weight of the 55-300, but speed, autofocus and ultimate IQ were the deciding factors.
The 60-250 had excellent IQ, but I missed the faster maximum aperture, and really disliked the lack of internal zoom. Also, unless the subject was near infinity, it gave no more reach at 250 than the sigma at 200.
I had the Sigma the longest. It was a superb workhorse for my live music work, but now that is drying up, it's just too much lens.

So I'm left with the 50-135. It has great IQ from wide open, the AF is decisive (but not super quick), it is relatively small and compact (and stays that way at maximum focal length) and is WR. If I really want reach I use the DA*300 +/- 1.4TC
That's a very nice explanation.

Last edited by normhead; 01-27-2015 at 07:37 AM.
01-27-2015, 06:11 AM   #19
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,250
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
That's a very nice explanation.
Thanks Norm. I hoped it would be useful

01-27-2015, 06:12 AM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,021
Original Poster
Based on the latest comments the 55-300 May be headed for the marketplace. The 60-250 is very sharp and contrast is quite good.

What is the IQ like with the 50-135 and the HD TC 1.4x? That combo is lighter just as fast and approaches the focal length, 70-190?
01-27-2015, 06:38 AM - 1 Like   #21
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,250
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
What is the IQ like with the 50-135 and the HD TC 1.4x? That combo is lighter just as fast and approaches the focal length, 70-190?
I knew all those "Single In" challenges would come in handy some time













01-27-2015, 06:52 AM   #22
Pentaxian
zzeitg's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South Bohemia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,872
QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
I knew all those "Single In" challenges would come in handy some time
That's a nice set of shots, Sandy!

And congratulation to a very nice garden. Having experience with our labrador retriever lady (unfortunately she died 4 years ago), I guess he/she appreciates this small lake a lot!
01-27-2015, 06:53 AM - 1 Like   #23
Pentaxian
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 7,484
The 60-250 is probably my favourite lens, and that's saying a lot.

QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
The lens is large and heavy and while it can be handheld for some uses it's really more of a tripod lens I think.
YMMV, I rarely use it on a tripod or monopod, I find that I can carry it around for long periods without trouble.

QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
I can think of a lot of uses for it but they are all pretty narrow. I wanted to know what others are doing with this or similar large heavy sharp long zooms.
The 60-250 is my "kids" lens. When they're playing outside, taking gym classes, swimming in the lake, playing on the beach (when we go there ) I use that lens. During the summer it's mounted almost by default.

It's also my events lens. Parades, shows, festivals, I use it there.

I sometimes play at shooting the Moon with it. Birds and other animals too, though that doesn't happen often. If I visit a zoo it's the only lens I need.

I hope it helps. The WR, longer range, smaller size and excellent build quality won me over the Tamron and Sigma 70-200.

01-27-2015, 07:40 AM   #24
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 35,964
It would be really interesting to see a comparison of the DA* 50-135 and 1.4 to a DA* 60-250.
01-27-2015, 08:31 AM   #25
Veteran Member
Sagitta's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,953
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I was lucky, what broke on my Sigma 70-300 was the zoom rig. After zooming it out I have to much it back in by hand, but it still works great, and every now and then I take it out for long distance macro.

---------- Post added 01-27-15 at 08:06 AM ----------



That's a very nice explanation.
Thats what happened to mine. I went to retract the lens one day and just heard (and felt) a SNAP. Now I have to manually shove the lens back down to 70mm to retract it. It'll still zoom out - it just won't zoom in

EDIT"I just noticed I said 'focus ring'... wrong terminology. I blame it for posting while half asleep.
01-27-2015, 09:45 AM   #26
Veteran Member
emalvick's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Davis, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,631
I just received a 60-250 to go with my K3, which is replacing my 55-300 that I used to use quite a bit on my K5. From testing it out in the backyard, the 60-250 is very manageable. I'll admit I was intimidated initially since the size is so much bigger than the 55-300. I do like taking telephoto shots out to about 200 mm and the occasional wildlife shot at longer range. With the K3 and the 60-250, I think I'll be able to take the types of shots I want and crop further if needed and feel good about the results. With the 55-300, I could always get a good shot, but I never felt like I could get away with cropping very much.

The 60-250 will be my primary lens on a trip to the Florida Everglades next month. I won't bring the 55-300, and I mostly intend on using it handheld. I'll see how that goes. Like one of the previous posts, I'm more concerned about getting a good shot than carrying the weight of that lens.
01-27-2015, 12:01 PM   #27
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Crooski's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Rozenburg , Zuid-Holland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,866
The 60-250mm is my everyday lens
I have no problem with the weight, and i do not use a tripod
It is an all round lens and I especially enjoy the weather resistance.
Is used for portrait, landscape, close focus, carnival, street photography and air shows.met 1.4TC
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5 II  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5 II s  Photo 
01-27-2015, 12:06 PM   #28
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,021
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It would be really interesting to see a comparison of the DA* 50-135 and 1.4 to a DA* 60-250.
I agree. Perhaps I will do that.

---------- Post added 01-27-15 at 02:08 PM ----------

Does anyone know if the Tripod ring is removable? I see the flathead screw on the side - does that remove it?
01-27-2015, 12:17 PM   #29
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Richland, Washington, USA
Posts: 925
QuoteOriginally posted by reytor Quote
For me it's fine to carry this with couple other lenses for ten or so miles and it also went with me all the way up to Huaynapichu mountain in Peru.
Exactly. In fact, I bought mine specifically for my trip to Machu Picchu, and love it. This let me get up close to features I never would've been able to reach otherwise. I chose it over the 50-135 for reach (similar IQ) and over the 55-300 for improved IQ.

QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
Landscapes, wildlife, old barns, flowers, airplanes, wild fires, cows, you name it.
Add people, architectural details, etc

I mainly shoot landscapes and wildlife, but I really haven't found anything the lens is bad at. And personally I don't think it's that heavy. Took a 2-hour hike through a local nature reserve, handholding this lens the entire time. It's heavier than the 55-300 by a bit, but I don't find it uncomfortably heavy. I like the bokeh, but you need to pay attentio to background as a relatively near, busy background can get a little...busy?
01-27-2015, 12:24 PM   #30
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Crooski's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Rozenburg , Zuid-Holland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,866
---------- Post added 27th Jan 2015 at 20:24 ----------

[/COLOR]
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
I agree. Perhaps I will do that.

---------- Post added 01-27-15 at 02:08 PM ----------

Does anyone know if the Tripod ring is removable? I see the flathead screw on the side - does that remove it?

You can remove the foot, But not the ring.
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*, da*50-135, foot, iq, k-mount, length, lens, pentax, pentax lens, post, sigma, slr lens, tc, weight
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DA* 60-250 owners: How do you carry your 60-250 at the ready? apisto Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 25 12-30-2017 01:49 PM
How do you actually use your 60-250? bdery Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 11-09-2014 01:40 PM
DA 60-250 f/4 OR Tammy 70-200??? Others northmole Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 29 03-28-2014 07:02 PM
Field Sports - DA*60~250 [or] Tamron 70~200 [or] Sigma 70~200 joe.penn Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 25 02-03-2014 06:11 AM
Sigma 70-200 f2.8 or Pentax DA*60-250 Lukinosity Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 12-02-2013 06:17 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:52 AM. | 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