[Jannis]

Hi,
I'm looking for telephoto upgrade from my kit lens (50-200 WR) and I would like something, which give me same degree of IQ as my DA*50-135 or DFA 100 Macro (since I got these lenses, I'm spoiled by its IQ).
I got advices to get DA*300 f/4 or DA*60-250 f/4 but...


These lenses are considerably heavier and bigger than my lenses. DA*200 is only slightly bigger then DA*50-135, while it is 1 full stop faster then above two.
And price of DA*200 and Pentax TC (thus 280 f/4) together is about same as 60-250, while DA*300 is somewhat between.
In terms of focal lengths, I assume that if I can crop images from 200mm in same degree as images from DA*50-135 or my DFA100WR, I will be quite happy with it (and if I need in furure more reach, I can add that TC, I think).

From what i read i think, the DA*200 fill my purposes, but I have some concerns. I read very different reviews and user experiences. Some praise DA*200 as one of the sharpest pentax lens (sharper then 300 nad 60-250) others stated that its performance is quite sub-par to premium pro-grade telephoto...
And lot of reviews found terrible purple fringing with this lens.

Same about autofocus performance. From very slow to nice and quick.
But almost all of these reviews are taken with k10 or other older body.

Is there anyone that posses this lens and can share his experience with it with me? I will be very gratefull if I can see some full res pictures (best will be raw - to see, how difficult it will be to get rid of PF with my adobe camera raw).

It will be great if someone, who have (or had) both or all of these lenses can somewhat compare them.

Thanks for your effort.

---

Last edited by Jannis; 03-18-2015 at 05:18 PM.

[Adam]

These in-depth reviews might be helpful if you want to compare the technical aspects of each lens:

Pentax-DA* 200mm F2.8 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews
Pentax-DA* 300mm F4 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews
Pentax DA* 60-250mm F4 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

If I could only pick one of the three, I'd go for the 60-250mm. It's probably the best zoom lens in Pentax current lineup in terms of image quality and versatility, and it's easily usable wide-open.

If you're looking for exceptional AF speed, you'll have to turn to a Sigma, DC, or screwdrive lens. The SDM lenses are not known for their ability to focus quickly.

[Stavri]

One thing that I've realized shooting wildlife/birding is that you always crave more reach so you can crop less. I anticipate that once you've mastered the Da* 200 you'll find it too short in the long run for wildlife. Birds for instance are always small and don't let you get too close (unless you're a master ninja I don't see a way around this problem) The 300mm is a good starting point in this endeavor, a fast 300 like the Da*300 f4 let's your crop more and works well with the 1.4x AW TC. My suggestion is to go for the DA* 300, there's a lot of forum members who are taking exceptional images with this lens. Check out the 300+ lens thread:

This series is from R0ckstarr: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/55946-300mm-plus-lens-club...ml#post3193533

[baro-nite]

I was in a similar situation to yours, and the DA* 200 was my upgrade from the 50-200. I also now own the DA* 300, and have briefly owned the 60-250. All are excellent lenses, much better than my copy of the 50-200 (which, by reputation, has a wide variance copy-to-copy). The 300 is the best of the bunch in terms of pure optical performance, amazingly sharp and free of aberrations. The 60-250 is of course the most versatile, but it is a large lens and also actually has less reach than the 200 once you are inside 6 meters or so (any lens only achieves its nominal focal length at infinity focus and zoom lenses are typically much shorter than nominal when you get toward the close focus end of the range). The 200 has the most tendency to purple fringe, but I haven't found this to be much of an issue. IMO you can't go wrong with any of these in terms of performance, so it's a question of budget and of which spec best suits your needs.

[Billk]

One thing that I've realized shooting wildlife/birding is that you always crave more reach so you can crop less. I anticipate that once you've mastered the Da* 200 you'll find it too short in the long run for wildlife. Birds for instance are always small and don't let you get too close (unless you're a master ninja I don't see a way around this problem) The 300mm is a good starting point in this endeavor, a fast 300 like the Da*300 f4 let's your crop more and works well with the 1.4x AW TC. My suggestion is to go for the DA* 300, there's a lot of forum members who are taking exceptional images with this lens. Check out the 300+ lens thread:
v
This series is from R0ckstarr: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/55946-300mm-plus-lens-club...ml#post3193533

I started with the DA 200mm F2.8 and loved it for bigger birds, other critters, flowers and side of the stage performance photos. Then I wanted more reach and got the DA 300 F4. Took a little while to get used to the handling of the 300mm (I mostly use it tripod mounted, with a joystick for manoeuvrability) but it is now my most used lens.

However, if you are sure the reach of the 200mm is what you want, you won't be disappointed with it.

PS: I have only found purple fringing to be a problem wide open and shooting into the light.

[normhead]

If you are concerned about weight, go for the DA*200. Especially since you have the DA*50-135. That covers a lot of the DA* 60-250s range with a 2.8n lens. SO cancel the 60-250. To me the 50-135 and 200 would be a great combination. But, if you decide to go to 300mm for birds eventually, the 300 and 1.4 TC will get you out there too. Personally, for primes, I like to double focal length, so the 135 and 300 is a bi much, but the 135 to 200 is a bit on the low side, so it;s a conundrum. If you can go with the 200 go with it. IT's always going to be ƒ2.8, and that extra stop for bumping your shutter speed, sometimes, you just have to stop shooting because you don't have it.

[Jannis]

Thanks all for quick responses.

These in-depth reviews might be helpful if you want to compare the technical aspects of each lens:

Pentax-DA* 200mm F2.8 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews
Pentax-DA* 300mm F4 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews
Pentax DA* 60-250mm F4 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

If I could only pick one of the three, I'd go for the 60-250mm. It's probably the best zoom lens in Pentax current lineup in terms of image quality and versatility, and it's easily usable wide-open.

If you're looking for exceptional AF speed, you'll have to turn to a Sigma, DC, or screwdrive lens. The SDM lenses are not known for their ability to focus quickly.

I read thois reviews multiple times I§m not primary concerned about AF speed (if it is not tooo slow - I'm quite satisfiet even with AF quicknes of *50-135). I'm looking for good IQ in small package, if possible. And something that suit my k-5II and it is capable to be sharp on pixel level even if I will upgrade in future to more MP body.

he 60-250 is of course the most versatile, but it is a large lens and also actually has less reach than the 200 once you are inside 6 meters or so

I'm affraid of this. I mean, if in medium distances it is about as 220-230mm and one stop slower - Will I be more happy with 200 which is also lighter? If IQ on f/4 is good and sharpness is tack sharp (even while pixel peeping), I can easily crop...

PS: I have only found purple fringing to be a problem wide open and shooting into the light.

The 200 has the most tendency to purple fringe, but I haven't found this to be much of an issue.

This is my biggest concern about it. I saw some really horrible pictures - but in some circumstances, all lenses can produces bad results...

I anticipate that once you've mastered the Da* 200 you'll find it too short in the long run for wildlife.

I already had (and sold) two lens that went to 300mm (55-300 and tammy70-300) and found out, that rarelly need full zoom. (And with those lenses if I got to 300mm IQ significantly drop - almost same level of image degradation as with upscaling from smaller focal lenght). I'm not going to do much sport shooting or safari wildlife - I like to take it with me to Zoo, walkaround etc. and use it often handhold. So, maybe, I'm affraid, that it will be problem with heavier and longer lenses than 200. And I thought that it will be good lens for shooting in theatre and music perfomances.

---------- Post added 03-19-15 at 01:43 AM ----------

If you are concerned about weight, go for the DA*200. Especially since you have the DA*50-135. That covers a lot of the DA* 60-250s range with a 2.8n lens. SO cancel the 60-250. To me the 50-135 and 200 would be a great combination. But, if you decide to go to 300mm for birds eventually, the 300 and 1.4 TC will get you out there too. Personally, for primes, I like to double focal length, so the 135 and 300 is a bi much, but the 135 to 200 is a bit on the low side, so it;s a conundrum. If you can go with the 200 go with it. IT's always going to be ƒ2.8, and that extra stop for bumping your shutter speed, sometimes, you just have to stop shooting because you don't have it.

This is the the way which my ideas are going now. You're nailed it.
And for doubles - I then can go with my prime kit - 21/3.2 50/1.8 100/2.8 and - maybe 200/2.8...

[UncleVanya]

You could start with just the HD 1.4x TC - use it on your 50-135 and see if that gives you the reach you want (70-189 f/4).

[hcc]

I was in a somehow similar situation a few year ago. I needed a relatively compact tele. A senor PF guided me away from the DA*200mm because of the lack of reach.

After some research here and elsewhere, I went for the FA*300mm f4.5. The lens is out of production but some good quality copies are regularly available on the marketplace (PF) as well as in reputed Japanese ebay sellers.

I am extremely happy with my FA*300mm and I would recommend it very much. The IQ is excellent.The lens is compact and easy to handle by hand (no need of tripod or monopod). Highly recommended IMHO.....

Hope that the comment may assist you.

[jddwoods]

I have both D-FA 100 Macro WR and DA* 200 mm. I think the D-FA 100 is the sharper of the two but the DA* 200 is more than sharp enough. I use the DA* 200 mainly for bird photography, the DA* 200 has its advantages and disadvantages.
The Good: Small enough for hand held, Fast F2.8, Quiet focusing
The Bad: Not quite long enough for bird photography, especially small birds, There is purple fringing if you shoot at maximum aperture. You will see it more with this lens not because it is an issue with the lens but how you are using it. Photographing a bird up in a tree branch with the sky as the background is the worst possible scenario for purple fringing.
Summing it all up my main issue with the lens for bird photography is that it is just not long enough. I do not know if the Teleconverter will help enough or I just need a longer lens. Good Luck with your decision, I hope this helps. For now I am leaning toward getting the TC which will bump it up to 280mm with a still fast F 4.0 and still have 200mm F 2.8 when I need it. This would be a lot less expensive than a new lens.

[normhead]

Bird photography is a whole different discussion.

[daytona9]

Hi,
I'm looking for telephoto upgrade from my kit lens (50-200 WR) and I would like something, which give me same degree of IQ as my DA*50-135 or DFA 100 Macro (since I got these lenses, I'm spoiled by its IQ).
I got advices to get DA*300 f/4 or DA*60-250 f/4 but...


These lenses are considerably heavier and bigger than my lenses. DA*200 is only slightly bigger then DA*50-135, while it is 1 full stop faster then above two.
And price of DA*200 and Pentax TC (thus 280 f/4) together is about same as 60-250, while DA*300 is somewhat between.
In terms of focal lengths, I assume that if I can crop images from 200mm in same degree as images from DA*50-135 or my DFA100WR, I will be quite happy with it (and if I need in furure more reach, I can add that TC, I think).

From what i read i think, the DA*200 fill my purposes, but I have some concerns. I read very different reviews and user experiences. Some praise DA*200 as one of the sharpest pentax lens (sharper then 300 nad 60-250) others stated that its performance is quite sub-par to premium pro-grade telephoto...
And lot of reviews found terrible purple fringing with this lens.

Same about autofocus performance. From very slow to nice and quick.
But almost all of these reviews are taken with k10 or other older body.

Is there anyone that posses this lens and can share his experience with it with me? I will be very gratefull if I can see some full res pictures (best will be raw - to see, how difficult it will be to get rid of PF with my adobe camera raw).

It will be great if someone, who have (or had) both or all of these lenses can somewhat compare them.

Thanks for your effort.

Hi Jannis,


Here is a recent image taken with the DA*200/2.8 on the K3 - 1/2500 sec, f5.6 at ISO 400, some PP in PSE5. Just to show that you can use it to shoot birds, albeit pelicans are pretty big.

[W412ren]

I'm not going to do much sport shooting or safari wildlife - I like to take it with me to Zoo, walkaround etc. and use it often handhold. So, maybe, I'm affraid, that it will be problem with heavier and longer lenses than 200.

This is pretty much how I use mine. It's a great lens and the images from it (IMO) stand out from the rest of my lenses. Not had any issues from PF other than from shooting situations where any lens would suffer.
I combine it with the 20-40 and the 100 DFA Macro for a (relatively) smallish kit.

Here is a link to my flickr album for the local zoo with a fair proportion of DA*200 images.
https://flic.kr/s/aHsk453Ekc

My dilemma now is whether to add the new teleconverter.

[UncleVanya]

This is pretty much how I use mine. It's a great lens and the images from it (IMO) stand out from the rest of my lenses. Not had any issues from PF other than from shooting situations where any lens would suffer.
I combine it with the 20-40 and the 100 DFA Macro for a (relatively) smallish kit.

Here is a link to my flickr album for the local zoo with a fair proportion of DA*200 images.
https://flic.kr/s/aHsk453Ekc

My dilemma now is whether to add the new teleconverter.

Well... that would give you a 140mm f/4 and a 300mm f/4 to add to the possible focal lengths. Also it will make 1.4:1 macro reproduction an option.

[W412ren]

Well... that would give you a 140mm f/4 and a 300mm f/4 to add to the possible focal lengths. Also it will make 1.4:1 macro reproduction an option.

Yes! Very tempting it is.