[micromacro]

70-200 f2.8 on both APS-C and FF. On APS-C, 70-200 is a bit long, but on FF is about right. But once again, lens use depends where you are shooting from, and what you want to capture from the action.

Seems like I need to start thinking about 70-200 f2.8 good zoom, preferably Pentax, for action shots to step out of birding zone
For this time it will be either combo DA300/DA 70mm ltd, or DA300/Canon55-250 f4-5.6.
Or I can take out my old K200D with 70ltd as a second body.

Crap... I better rethink my lenses. I blame DA* and limiteds. It's hard to move back to cheaper glass after using those

[shardulm]

DA*50-135 or DA*60-250

Between the 2 I will pick DA*50-135 any day.
1. Its lightweight,much sharper f3.5 onwards, Internal Focusing so you can shoot in rain.
2. DA*60-250's FOV is not too much narrower from DA*50-135 additional crop in good light will give you nearly same FOV.
3. DA*50-135 feels like 70-200 in every respect and that extra 50mm from the DA*60-250 with a stop less isn't worth carrying it.

---------- Post added 02-10-16 at 10:35 AM ----------

On additional thoughts DA55-300 is a superb lens as well and should serve you well as long as there is enough light,

[UncleVanya]

Between the 2 I will pick DA*50-135 any day.
1. Its lightweight,much sharper f3.5 onwards, Internal Focusing so you can shoot in rain.
2. DA*60-250's FOV is not too much narrower from DA*50-135 additional crop in good light will give you nearly same FOV.
3. DA*50-135 feels like 70-200 in every respect and that extra 50mm from the DA*60-250 with a stop less isn't worth carrying it.

---------- Post added 02-10-16 at 10:35 AM ----------

On additional thoughts DA55-300 is a superb lens as well and should serve you well as long as there is enough light,

Extra 50??? Extra 115mm.
Admittedly at shorter distances the focus breathing makes the 60-250 seem shorter than its focal length but by 30' it is close to normal.

I own both, I find that they both have uses. I don't find the 50-135 very different in terms of sharpness -it does have a faster aperture however it focuses slower.

[redrockcoulee]

If you are sitting in the stands you will need at least a 300mm to shoot a rodeo. I have shot indoor and outdoor rodeos but was able to get a photographer's pass for them and shot mostly near the shoots in the indoor rodeo or the pit for the outdoor one. Bulls stay close to the chutes and bucking horses further into the ring. Both steer wrestling and calf roping are best from the ends rather than the sides.

The one time I did use a 300mm from the photographer's pit I found it too short for the bulls but the person I borrowed the 300 2.8 insisted that I use the D3 with it so it was no better than a 200mm.

I have actually also used the Sigma 10-20 for some of the bull riding but that was shot from right behind the chute on the walkway for the cowboys. From your photo it appears that the area is well lite which is much better than the one I have shot in, low light, dark horses dark dirt.

Remember that you only have 8 seconds to get all your shots for each ride, and I think that the time goes much quicker for the photographer than the rider.

[Storm Chaser]

I like SH recommendation rent another body if you do not have one, and have done it several times and works very well! But if it were me go with the DA*300 your images will be sharper and then crop later if needed will leave you some room to play with.
Do not have the DA*300 yet but have Sigma 150-500 and feel it would be to slow for your shoot and soft on top end. You could rent or buy a T/C but really think DA*300 is the way to go if you have it already.

[micromacro]

It helps a lot to hear from experienced rodeo shooters. The best way of course to go myself and see what it is. And yes, I always can come back there another time.
I checked my camelot fest horses pics, DA 70 actually was not bad, even too close sometimes. So, I will bring Pentax only, 300mm and 70mm just in case.

However, this idea to shot rodeo pushed me to think about one very good zoom to buy. For sure I don't want 50-135mm, or 60-250mm due to unreliable motor. Maybe, Sigma 50-150mm... Anyway, it's better wait for FF first

[shardulm]

Extra 50??? Extra 115mm.

Thanks for the correction. Its definitely a math error but 50-135 albiet short by 115 mm a little crop of a picture at 135 gives me something similar what a picture at 250 would.

[UncleVanya]

Thanks for the correction. Its definitely a math error but 50-135 albiet short by 115 mm a little crop of a picture at 135 gives me something similar what a picture at 250 would.

I use both. With the 1.4x tc I agree. Without it that's a big crop unless the subject is close. If the subject is within 30' the two may be very similar in image size.

The 50-135 is a stunning lens, but if you need length or speed of focus the 60-250 is better on both counts. If you need less weight and size the 50-135 is excellent.

---------- Post added 02-10-16 at 04:36 PM ----------

It helps a lot to hear from experienced rodeo shooters. The best way of course to go myself and see what it is. And yes, I always can come back there another time.
I checked my camelot fest horses pics, DA 70 actually was not bad, even too close sometimes. So, I will bring Pentax only, 300mm and 70mm just in case.

However, this idea to shot rodeo pushed me to think about one very good zoom to buy. For sure I don't want 50-135mm, or 60-250mm due to unreliable motor. Maybe, Sigma 50-150mm... Anyway, it's better wait for FF first

The 50-135 can be converted to screwdrive easily and cheaply. (DIY is free) if the motor in the 50-150 dies you will have to have it repaired.