Originally posted by VoiceOfReason If you can wait a few days I can do a comparison with the 150-500 (little bigma) and the 60-250. Heck, I'll even toss the Sigma 100-300 into the mix!
One thing I would do is get the HD DA 1.4 tc and try it with your Tamron. If that still seems too short then go for the Bigma or the Pentax 150-450.
I do not own the converter - that is the one on sale right now for around $500, right?
Does the tamron 70-200 f2.8 pair well with the Pentax converter?
I cannot afford the 150-400 by Pentax but the 50-500 is "affordable" in the used market.
One thing that I think would bother me about the converter on my tamron is the short end of the lens would be 105mm...when the play gets close, I have a hard time already with my framing of the action/kids.
I imagined that (framing the closer action photos) getting a bit better with the 60-250 and even another bit better with the 50-500.
I am concerned as mentioned above that the 50-500 may be too slow especially in low Michigan light (overcast skies, late games)...
I have considered getting a K-50 or a K-S2 to pair with my longer lens...I would put a 50mm f1.8 on it or if it is bright out my 18-55 DAL ...I do not have a fast short zoom.
I am not sure about getting my kids more embarrassed by me (the paparazzi as they say) when they see me with more gear, 2 cameras, tripods, monopods
I look forward to any more thoughts that you have especially after y9our comparison...thanks for your time!
---------- Post added 12-09-15 at 10:19 PM ----------
Originally posted by WPRESTO WR will not prevent misty rain from accumulating on the front element and destroying IQ. It will prevent moisture from getting onto interior lens surfaces when the lens is zoomed on a foggy/misty day. Such internal moisture never gets back out short of dismantling the lens, and the longer it stays the more damage it causes, even to rendering the lens essentially useless.
Hi,
What is the main utility of the WR lenses?
Is it to get the last photos of the shoot while the rain is just starting?
I imagine it is hard to keep shooting and expect to continue to get good images (IQ) with the rain/mist accumulating on the front element.
Is the WR more of an insurance; a just in case there is a sudden rain, a splash of fluid (squirt gun, hose...), or gusty wind at the beach (sand)?
Thanks for your insights!
---------- Post added 12-09-15 at 10:25 PM ----------
Originally posted by pic-nic I shoot indoor figure skating with the 60-250, which is an upgrade from the 50-200 f/4-5.6 - almost zero difference in range. When using the 60-250, the range difference is barely noticeable from the 200mm mark to the 250mm one. The autofocus isn't the fastest but it does an alright job. I would definitely trade the last 50mm for the extra aperture speed your Tamron offers, but I am not sure how well it would do in the cold ice rink. I'm holding out for the FA* Pentax 70-200 2.8 this February. My advice would probably be to get or rent a teleconverter and see if that gets you what you're after.
Hi,
Thanks for the advice based on your experience...so basically the extra 50 does not make a big difference in your eyes/shots.
That was my concern in regards to shelling out nearly $1000.
My concern with the TC is that the short end would be 98 mm on my Tamron 70-200.
There are times already that I miss photos when the action gets close.
I do not have any WR lenses...pic-nic, you find that the WR is helpful in the cold environment of the ice rink?
Does it help prevent condensation when moving from cold to warm?
Thanks!
---------- Post added 12-09-15 at 10:29 PM ----------
Originally posted by bertwert They are quite different lenses...
But I would recommend the 60-250 for your needs.
It won't AF that well if it is darker i.e. overcast.
Hi bertwert,
Thanks for the info. Is that based on your experience with the lens?
So not only would it possibly have a hard time freezing the motion of the sport/action...it may not even focus well (or at all) to begin with...is that right?
Does ability to AF vary with the focal length being used? For instance, if I am shooting with the 50-500, would it AF the same at 50 as it would at 100 or 500?
Thanks for you time!