Upgrading from a DAL 55-300?

sharik · 09-01-2015, 03:23 PM

Originally posted by mgvh

I have a DAL 55-300. It's been a great lens that I got some time ago as part of my K-x kit. If I wanted to upgrade my quality at the long end, and money were no object, I'd get the DA* 300 or the DA 60-250. By all accounts those are outstanding lenses. But, since I don't use the long end that much, and money is an object, I was poking around for a cheaper option. I first tried a very nice M 200 f4 figuring a prime would get me better quality. I found that the M 200 really only was as good as the DAL 55-300 at 200mm and when upsizing to match images at 300mm, the 55-300 was much better.
So, I found an inexpensive but well-regarded Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm lens. At 210mm, this can deliver pictures as good as or better than the DAL 55-300 at the same focal length. Upsizing to match at 300mm renders similar quality. I do have a higher success rate with the autofocus of the DAL as compared to my manual focus skills on the Vivitar, especially with action shots.
So (and I'm finally getting to my question), does anyone have a comparison between the DA/DAL 55-300 and one of the earlier Takumar F/Pentax F (FA) 70-210 (80-200; 70-200) autofocus lenses? These often show up in the right price range ($50-75 or less). Any other suggestions? Or is the improvement so minimal that I should wait and save up for a really good lens? Thanks!

Have you tried using your Vivitar with a 1.4x teleconverter? This may be a temporary budget solution, until you buy a lens such as DA*60-250 or Sigma 100-300 F4. Vivitar S1 70-200 v.3 (Komine) was my first telephoto zoom and the mostly used lens for about a year, until I bought a DA*60-250. I tried 55-300 also but did not like it for a number of reasons. In optical quality, I would place the Vivitar half-way between the DA55-300 and DA*60-250, aside from noticeable purple fringing. A good thing about the Vivitar is that it can be used with many teleconverters, including old Sigma Ex (non-DG) 1.4x that may be possible to buy for less than $100. You can also use the Vivitar with the AFA 1.7x, which will give you a ~120-350 mm lens with very fast autofocus (albeit a bit tricky and somewhat limited in functionality).

bass3587 · 09-01-2015, 07:43 PM

I've upgraded to the Tamron 70-200 to replace my DA L 55-300 and haven't looked back since then. IQ improved significantly to the point the 55-300 has only seen action at an airshow once last year. It is a beast to carry around compared to the 55-300 but I'll gladly take it over the Pentax any day for the IQ. The rendering is outstanding and for portraits it's awesome. Since I've switched bodies (K5 to K3) the focusing speed has improved and made it a better lens for sports photography. The 55-300 will hunt in low light regardless of bodies and while the Tamron will occasionally hunt in low light and the keeper rate is easily up 50%, it's not a deal breaker like the 55-300.

I will say this if you have the funds to upgrade all the choices that have been mentioned in this post will make you happy.

calsan · 09-01-2015, 08:27 PM

DA-L doesn't have a lens hood. That is one upgrade you might consider before buying a new lens. A lens hood will up the contrast in many situations.
The original hood isn't cheap, but you could find a generic or rubber hood to suit, as it's a very simple shape.
Lens Hood PH-RBI 58 | B&H Photo Video

mee · 09-01-2015, 09:00 PM

lens hood and stop down.. f/8 is generally where it behaves the sharpest..

GeneV · 09-02-2015, 12:43 AM

Originally posted by cali92rs

Just curious, have you tried the 60-250mm?
I personally thought it was a fairly substantial increase in IQ.

I have not used it, but I do not doubt it is much better than the DAL at the FL they share. I used and needed 300, so my upgrade needed that reach.

Both are near the same price, so neither fits the OP criteria.

mtux · 09-02-2015, 02:27 AM

Originally posted by mgvh

So (and I'm finally getting to my question), does anyone have a comparison between the DA/DAL 55-300 and one of the earlier Takumar F/Pentax F (FA) 70-210 (80-200; 70-200) autofocus lenses? These often show up in the right price range ($50-75 or less). Any other suggestions? Or is the improvement so minimal that I should wait and save up for a really good lens? Thanks!

I sold my F70-210 right after I compared it to DA55-300 in terms of sharpness.
in other areas, specially weight, there was no debate, the F was heavier.

**mgvh** · 09-02-2015, 04:52 PM

It's becoming clearer that moving up from the 55-300 simply will take some money.
@calsan: Yes, I did get a knock-off lens hood, and I use it regularly. It helps.
@mee: Yes, I usually set it at f8. At 300mm, I even use f11 (or f16) if I have enough light and stability.
@sharik: I have the well-regarded Kenko Pz-AF 1.5x SHQ (which really is a 1.4x). I don't lose anything by using it (except for some light stops), but I don't gain much either. (I do need to practice a bit more, so there may be room for improvement.)
MORAL of the story: There is no such thing as a cheap lunch when it comes to long telephotos, but the 55-300 is about as reasonable a lunch that you can find.
Thanks again to all.

mtux · 09-02-2015, 06:56 PM

Originally posted by mgvh

MORAL of the story: There is no such thing as a cheap lunch when it comes to long telephotos, but the 55-300 is about as reasonable a lunch that you can find.

Yeah, actually I'm in the same boat as you, and can't find anything better, without a huge amount of investment or added weight and size.

drypenn · 09-02-2015, 07:29 PM

Originally posted by mtux

I sold my F70-210 right after I compared it to DA55-300 in terms of sharpness.
in other areas, specially weight, there was no debate, the F was heavier.

I guess that every F70-210, being an "old" lens, already has some history of bumps, drops, and despite being seemingly tank-like in built may have already been suffering from some ailments. Mine, after a CLA, has been delightfully and obviously sharper than my 55-300, and has better contrast too, when provided with a good rubber hood. Though, I still keep my 300 since it's light, has very little resale value, and is handy whenever I need that extra 100mm.

**yucatanPentax** · 09-02-2015, 08:28 PM

I find the 60-250mm to be a noticeable upgrade to the 55-300mm in many ways, however, it is BIG and it is heavy in comparison. The 55-300 really is an outstanding value. Checking some of the images posted here shows what it can do. The newest version with WR is a huge bargain if it's still on sale for $267.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: FA31 (MIJ), FA77 DA50, K5, 18-55 WR, DAL 55-300, SMC 50 F1.4 SuperTak 35mm F2	BillS	Sold Items	16	12-23-2014 09:59 AM
Is this a costly repair? DAL 55-300	Scottie137	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	8	08-07-2014 01:17 PM
DAL 55-300 Question	Noskovus	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	30	09-23-2013 01:22 AM
For Sale - Sold: Dal 18-55 & dal 55-300	taiweitai	Sold Items	9	02-29-2012 11:30 PM

09-01-2015, 03:23 PM	#16
sharik Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Canberra, Australia Posts: 31	Originally posted by mgvh I have a DAL 55-300. It's been a great lens that I got some time ago as part of my K-x kit. If I wanted to upgrade my quality at the long end, and money were no object, I'd get the DA* 300 or the DA 60-250. By all accounts those are outstanding lenses. But, since I don't use the long end that much, and money is an object, I was poking around for a cheaper option. I first tried a very nice M 200 f4 figuring a prime would get me better quality. I found that the M 200 really only was as good as the DAL 55-300 at 200mm and when upsizing to match images at 300mm, the 55-300 was much better. So, I found an inexpensive but well-regarded Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm lens. At 210mm, this can deliver pictures as good as or better than the DAL 55-300 at the same focal length. Upsizing to match at 300mm renders similar quality. I do have a higher success rate with the autofocus of the DAL as compared to my manual focus skills on the Vivitar, especially with action shots. So (and I'm finally getting to my question), does anyone have a comparison between the DA/DAL 55-300 and one of the earlier Takumar F/Pentax F (FA) 70-210 (80-200; 70-200) autofocus lenses? These often show up in the right price range ($50-75 or less). Any other suggestions? Or is the improvement so minimal that I should wait and save up for a really good lens? Thanks! Have you tried using your Vivitar with a 1.4x teleconverter? This may be a temporary budget solution, until you buy a lens such as DA60-250 or Sigma 100-300 F4. Vivitar S1 70-200 v.3 (Komine) was my first telephoto zoom and the mostly used lens for about a year, until I bought a DA60-250. I tried 55-300 also but did not like it for a number of reasons. In optical quality, I would place the Vivitar half-way between the DA55-300 and DA*60-250, aside from noticeable purple fringing. A good thing about the Vivitar is that it can be used with many teleconverters, including old Sigma Ex (non-DG) 1.4x that may be possible to buy for less than $100. You can also use the Vivitar with the AFA 1.7x, which will give you a ~120-350 mm lens with very fast autofocus (albeit a bit tricky and somewhat limited in functionality).

09-01-2015, 07:43 PM	#17
bass3587 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 517	I've upgraded to the Tamron 70-200 to replace my DA L 55-300 and haven't looked back since then. IQ improved significantly to the point the 55-300 has only seen action at an airshow once last year. It is a beast to carry around compared to the 55-300 but I'll gladly take it over the Pentax any day for the IQ. The rendering is outstanding and for portraits it's awesome. Since I've switched bodies (K5 to K3) the focusing speed has improved and made it a better lens for sports photography. The 55-300 will hunt in low light regardless of bodies and while the Tamron will occasionally hunt in low light and the keeper rate is easily up 50%, it's not a deal breaker like the 55-300. I will say this if you have the funds to upgrade all the choices that have been mentioned in this post will make you happy.

09-01-2015, 08:27 PM	#18
calsan Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Perth, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,548	DA-L doesn't have a lens hood. That is one upgrade you might consider before buying a new lens. A lens hood will up the contrast in many situations. The original hood isn't cheap, but you could find a generic or rubber hood to suit, as it's a very simple shape. Lens Hood PH-RBI 58 \| B&H Photo Video

09-01-2015, 09:00 PM	#19
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	lens hood and stop down.. f/8 is generally where it behaves the sharpest..

09-02-2015, 12:43 AM	#20
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by cali92rs Just curious, have you tried the 60-250mm? I personally thought it was a fairly substantial increase in IQ. I have not used it, but I do not doubt it is much better than the DAL at the FL they share. I used and needed 300, so my upgrade needed that reach. Both are near the same price, so neither fits the OP criteria.

09-02-2015, 02:27 AM	#21
mtux Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: the Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,444	Originally posted by mgvh So (and I'm finally getting to my question), does anyone have a comparison between the DA/DAL 55-300 and one of the earlier Takumar F/Pentax F (FA) 70-210 (80-200; 70-200) autofocus lenses? These often show up in the right price range ($50-75 or less). Any other suggestions? Or is the improvement so minimal that I should wait and save up for a really good lens? Thanks! I sold my F70-210 right after I compared it to DA55-300 in terms of sharpness. in other areas, specially weight, there was no debate, the F was heavier.

09-02-2015, 04:52 PM	#22
mgvh Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: MD Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,029 Original Poster	It's becoming clearer that moving up from the 55-300 simply will take some money. @calsan: Yes, I did get a knock-off lens hood, and I use it regularly. It helps. @mee: Yes, I usually set it at f8. At 300mm, I even use f11 (or f16) if I have enough light and stability. @sharik: I have the well-regarded Kenko Pz-AF 1.5x SHQ (which really is a 1.4x). I don't lose anything by using it (except for some light stops), but I don't gain much either. (I do need to practice a bit more, so there may be room for improvement.) MORAL of the story: There is no such thing as a cheap lunch when it comes to long telephotos, but the 55-300 is about as reasonable a lunch that you can find. Thanks again to all.

09-02-2015, 06:56 PM	#23
mtux Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: the Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,444	Originally posted by mgvh MORAL of the story: There is no such thing as a cheap lunch when it comes to long telephotos, but the 55-300 is about as reasonable a lunch that you can find. Yeah, actually I'm in the same boat as you, and can't find anything better, without a huge amount of investment or added weight and size.

09-02-2015, 07:29 PM	#24
drypenn Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 963	Originally posted by mtux I sold my F70-210 right after I compared it to DA55-300 in terms of sharpness. in other areas, specially weight, there was no debate, the F was heavier. I guess that every F70-210, being an "old" lens, already has some history of bumps, drops, and despite being seemingly tank-like in built may have already been suffering from some ailments. Mine, after a CLA, has been delightfully and obviously sharper than my 55-300, and has better contrast too, when provided with a good rubber hood. Though, I still keep my 300 since it's light, has very little resale value, and is handy whenever I need that extra 100mm.

09-02-2015, 08:28 PM	#25
yucatanPentax Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Dallas / Yucatan Posts: 1,840	I find the 60-250mm to be a noticeable upgrade to the 55-300mm in many ways, however, it is BIG and it is heavy in comparison. The 55-300 really is an outstanding value. Checking some of the images posted here shows what it can do. The newest version with WR is a huge bargain if it's still on sale for $267.