Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-02-2015, 05:40 AM   #16
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,321
Based upon your currently inventory, I would say no. If you sell the three lenses on you list then I would lean more towards yes. It would still be redundant, but much easier to just carry around on lazy days and simply want to have a camera just in case.

08-02-2015, 06:20 AM   #17
csa
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
csa's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Montana mountains
Posts: 10,133
QuoteOriginally posted by Billk Quote
My nonWR 55-300 got mould in it, and I replaced it with the 300mm F4. After an initial adjustment period, I have never looked back. A lot of people won't consider primes but, once you switch, you start to wonder why you ever thought zooms were better.
I have a 400 prime, & I find it handicaps me at times with bird photography, when I'm fairly close; I cannot get the entire bird in the image; whereas with a zoom, one can adjust it to please you, so for me zooms are better suited.
08-02-2015, 12:15 PM   #18
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Indianapolis
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 527
I wish I had had one in Costa Rica this year. My regular 55-300 is fantastic, but it would get humidity in the lens that I would have to dry out before I could use it. The lens though is very sharp, relatively light, much better than my old Tamron 70-300, although that lens did have a 'macro' mode.
08-08-2015, 01:37 PM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
To me you currently have the 70-300...I'd consider only the 55-300 if you actually used this one significantly.

You would get WR on top of that, true... But a plastic bag and some duck tape would give you the same. Less conveniant, less sexy but cost a few cents.


Last edited by Nicolas06; 08-08-2015 at 01:44 PM.
08-08-2015, 04:59 PM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
K-Three's Avatar

Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pugetopolis, WA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 935
Well, you have almost half of my "carry everywhere" kit, add the 55-300 and you have it.
I keep my K3, the 18-135WR and the 55-300WR, along with my DA35 macro in a small shoulder bag,
I have a similar assortment of other lenses, but these three are with me all the time.
I take about 90% of my photos with these. They are great general purpose lenses, that cover a wide range of applications and situations.

While the 60-250 would be nice to have, I doubt I would carry it everywhere, it would be a "special event" lens, when I was going out to do something specific.

If you want something to carry along all the time, the 18-135 and the 55-300 and a single body make a great small package. If you are looking for a lens for more specific application, or are looking for quality over compactness and weight, then hold out for the 60-250 or the 150-450.
My 2¢

Now less than $300, what a bargain!

Last edited by K-Three; 08-08-2015 at 09:19 PM. Reason: B&H Sale
08-09-2015, 12:41 AM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by K-Three Quote
Well, you have almost half of my "carry everywhere" kit, add the 55-300 and you have it.
I keep my K3, the 18-135WR and the 55-300WR, along with my DA35 macro in a small shoulder bag,
I have a similar assortment of other lenses, but these three are with me all the time.
I take about 90% of my photos with these. They are great general purpose lenses, that cover a wide range of applications and situations.

While the 60-250 would be nice to have, I doubt I would carry it everywhere, it would be a "special event" lens, when I was going out to do something specific.

If you want something to carry along all the time, the 18-135 and the 55-300 and a single body make a great small package. If you are looking for a lens for more specific application, or are looking for quality over compactness and weight, then hold out for the 60-250 or the 150-450.
My 2¢

Now less than $300, what a bargain!
This could be even a 18-270 or once available in K mount, a 18-300 !
08-09-2015, 12:49 AM   #22
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 16,394
I was hiking yesterday, and took the K-S1 with the Tamron 17-50 and the DA 55-300.

I own an SMC 300 f4 and Sigma 150-500, but they don't fit in a little backpack. ☺


Last edited by clackers; 08-09-2015 at 02:03 AM.
08-09-2015, 03:24 AM   #23
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,603
The biggest things going for the 55-300 are the small size and the fact that (the new version) has weather sealing.

I think you need to be honest about what you need and are getting with this. If you want a small-ish telephoto that is light and portable and usable stopped down (I usually shoot at f8 when I am at 300mm), then this lens might work for you. If you want a lens that goes to f4 and is sharp wide open, then you need a lens like the DA *300 or the new DFA 150-450. With the price that the 55-300 is at right now, it is an amazing deal, though.

Shot at 300mm and f7.1 with the original DA 55-300.

08-09-2015, 05:44 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by Michaelina2 Quote
When the DA 55-300 was initially offered, I thought I could go long on the cheap and bought an early version. It just never caught on with me, so after about 2 months, I upped my game with the DA*300/4. Going on 8 years, now, its never given me any problems and I've have never looked back. Set you sights on the DA*300... I'll be very surprised to hear it disappoints.

Cheers... M
The 300 has 2 issues:
- bigger/heavier
- don't zoom, you'll also likely need a 135mm prime at least and change lenses.
08-09-2015, 07:58 AM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by Michaelina2 Quote
Looking at the OP's lens inventory, would you not agree that he's pretty well covered and it's hard to imagine what gap the DA 55-300 might fill?

IMHO the OP sounds bored and just needs to get out and take more photographs; that is, learn to make better use of what he has.... all of which is excellent.

Just sayin'... M
Sure agree with you on the bored aspect. This is just I was looking on a lense for a safari I might do next year. People insist you don't want to change lenses with all the dust and that you are not going to take a picture of an elephant a dozen meter aways with a 300mm prime ! It look like 1-2 zooms look more pragmatic than many prime for that scenario (and you know I own only primes currently, see my sig !).
08-09-2015, 08:16 AM   #26
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,182
Safari - 150-450 / plus 50-135... rental is an option.

My two cents.
08-09-2015, 08:31 AM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
Safari - 150-450 / plus 50-135... rental is an option.

My two cents.
Apparently you also need a fast zoom to cover the 16-50 range... and the 300+ range while usefull will really depend if you plan to take photos of the birds or not.
08-09-2015, 08:36 AM   #28
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,182
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Apparently you also need a fast zoom to cover the 16-50 range... and the 300+ range while usefull will really depend if you plan to take photos of the birds or not.
60-250 and 16-50 is an option that also makes sense. Two camera setup no lens changes in the dust. New 70-200 might work in place of the 60-450.
08-09-2015, 03:52 PM   #29
Site Supporter
VoiceOfReason's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mishawaka IN area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,124
Original Poster
I was mainly tempted by the price and WR, and it being small enough to toss in the bag for a hike. I have my 70-300 sold pending payment.
08-09-2015, 05:18 PM   #30
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
K-Three's Avatar

Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pugetopolis, WA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 935
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
This could be even a 18-270 or once available in K mount, a 18-300 !
i have the Pentax 18-250, used to use it as my go carry everywhere kit,
Not as sharp as the 18-135 or the 55-300 in the same ranges,
Also like the WR, for life on the wet side of the Cascades,
Depends on what is most important to you,
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, pentax, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lens debate- Should I get the 18-55,55-200 or 18-135 when-daybreaks Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 10-19-2016 02:05 PM
Pentax DA 55-300 WR vs Tamron 28-300 TzalamChadash Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 05-06-2014 07:48 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA 18-55 WR & SMC DA 55-300 Lenses Vantage-Point Sold Items 3 04-01-2014 07:45 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA 18-55 WR, DAL 55-300, and DA 18-135 WR lenses Elliot Sold Items 4 11-07-2013 02:46 AM
should i upgrade my sigma 70-300 to a da 55-300? indeo Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 02-08-2012 10:11 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:06 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