Revisiting the DA* 60-250?

Sandy Hancock · 05-05-2019, 01:11 AM

I had a DA* 60-250 years ago, but didn't bond with it. There were no gripes about the image quality, but in the days before the K-1 and the new monster telephoto zooms I found the size and weight, the extension while zooming, and the focus breathing to be significant turn-offs.

I'll always have some specialty primes of course, and the DFA* 70-200 and DFA 150-450 still fill their respective niches better than anything, but now I plan to ditch the consumer zooms and old manual glass I see a 60-250 sized hole in my life once again. With a two body kit (KP and K-1 Mark II), I see it complimenting my DA* 11-18 and DFA 24-70 better than anything else.

Feel free to talk me out of it. Or not

Joshua A · 05-05-2019, 01:23 AM

I am having quite a similar conundrum at the moment, having both a heavy and light kit, but no light FF tele option. Whilst at first I thought that the DA 60-250 would fill that niche well, I found that the focus and build quality of the lens isn't up to par compared to the more modern DA*/DFA* lenses. Optically that lens is fantastic, but honestly I would probably add a 200mm f2.8 and 1.4x TC as a light tele photo option instead, especially considering the considerable focus breathing problems that the 60-250mm had at close focusing distances.

That said, I currently use a Tokina AT-X 70-210mm f4.5 AF for my light tele, and due to its light weight it fits my needs currently until the 70-200mm f4 arrives.

Sandy Hancock · 05-05-2019, 01:32 AM

Originally posted by Joshua A

I would probably add a 200mm f2.8 and 1.4x TC as a light tele photo option instead

Good thought.

On the other hand, it's hard to beat the convenience of a zoom. I didn't like the purple fringing from the DA* 200 either, and the hood is enormous (same as the DA* 300).

I have the teleconverter, and it apparently works well with the DA* 60-250.

**BigMackCam** · 05-05-2019, 01:55 AM - **2 Likes**

Whenever I go out with the DA*60-250, I almost always bring the converter with me too. If I know I'm going to be shooting at close range, I fit the converter and it makes up for the focus breathing. Plus, at longer distances it adds nicely to the magnification.

pschlute · 05-05-2019, 02:32 AM

Image quality of the DA* 60-250 is superb, but compared to the DFA 70-200 the focus is slow. If that is not an issue for you then go for it.

Sandy Hancock · 05-05-2019, 02:34 AM

Originally posted by BigMackCam

Whenever I go out with the DA*60-250, I almost always bring the converter with me too. If I know I'm going to be shooting at close range, I fit the converter and it makes up for the focus breathing. Plus, at longer distances it adds nicely to the magnification.

I like the way you're thinking Mike. It was certainly my intention to use the teleconverter for both those reasons.

**Rondec** · 05-05-2019, 02:36 AM

I would wait a bit (unless you need it now) and look at what the DFA 70-200 f4 brings. I think it will focus faster and be a sharper lens on the edges than the DA *60-250 on full frame. It might have more magnification too, who knows. My guess would be size in the range of the DA * 50-135 f2.8 -- probably just a bit bigger.

Sandy Hancock · 05-05-2019, 02:40 AM

Originally posted by pschlute

Image quality of the DA* 60-250 is superb, but compared to the DFA 70-200 the focus is slow. If that is not an issue for you then go for it.

I see it as a lighter, more versatile option for travel and active outdoor use. I'd still use the DFA* 70-200 for gigs and events.

Saltwater Images · 05-05-2019, 04:15 AM

I’m shooting with a KP and K-5II. Most of my kit is all 5 HD DA Ltd primes and the D FA 100 Macro WR (which is really another limited as far as I’m concerned). My only zoom at the moment is the 60-250 however I have ordered a Sigma 17-50. Last year choosing between the DA* 60-250 and DA* 200 was a tough choice. The 60-250 has not disappointed and is a stack of primes with punchy colours - I selected it for flexibility. Most times I find myself using the lens at the 200mm focal length so the DA* 200 would have also been ideal. This year I considered adding the 200 to my kit for the extra stop of light but bought the KP for a little less cash and the improved ISO performance of settling the need for the wider aperture in low light. The 200 is lighter and perhaps a better match for both of your cameras. If I had a K-1 and a KP the 200 would be my choice. Good luck with your decision.

**nitehntr** · 05-05-2019, 04:35 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by Sandy Hancock

I had a DA* 60-250 years ago, but didn't bond with it. There were no gripes about the image quality, but in the days before the K-1 and the new monster telephoto zooms I found the size and weight, the extension while zooming, and the focus breathing to be significant turn-offs.

I'll always have some specialty primes of course, and the DFA* 70-200 and DFA 150-450 still fill their respective niches better than anything, but now I plan to ditch the consumer zooms and old manual glass I see a 60-250 sized hole in my life once again. With a two body kit (KP and K-1 Mark II), I see it complimenting my DA* 11-18 and DFA 24-70 better than anything else.

Feel free to talk me out of it. Or not

the 60-250 was the first of the * lenses i bought. i have used it on the K10 through the K1 with fantastic results. i am considering selling my other DA* lenses but not the 60-250 it is too versatile to get rid of. i have seen people wanting a 70-200 f4 which i really don't understand since the 60-250 covers that and takes high quality images and is relatively lightweight for such a zoom range. i did have it altered when i got the K1 and it has performed flawlessly ever since. my advice is to use it.

**jeffdrew** · 05-05-2019, 06:51 AM - **1 Like**

Sandy, your first two sentences say a lot! What has really changed; or is this likely a GAS attack? For your KP, the DA PLM 55-300mm really rocks for value, weight etc. It can work on your K1 as well. Otherwise, a heretical thought: Olympus Zuiko 45-150 f2.8 Pro w/ EM1 body! Lol!

normhead · 05-05-2019, 07:01 AM

Originally posted by jeffdrew

Otherwise, a heretical thought: Olympus Zuiko 45-150 f2.8 Pro w/ EM1 body! Lol!

I always consider DoF when buying fast lenses. To be comparable to 2.8 on FF the 4/3 lens would have to be a 1.4 lens. If you always shoot 5.6 or higher, for more depth of field then the advantage goes to the 4/3 camera, except for the much worse low light performance and stop lower diffraction limit.

**JensE** · 05-05-2019, 08:04 AM

For those occasions when I don't want to carry the 70-200mm f/2.8, I would very likely not pack the 60-250mm either. So I just went with the DA 55-300mm PLM, expecting and accepting to crop on the K-1 accordingly, most of the time much bigger than APS-C. For the KP, it's the ideal match as a lightweight addition to the big zooms anyway. The 60-250mm is just too close. It would make sense as a sole lens if I had to choose just one tele-zoom.

**clickclick** · 05-05-2019, 08:27 AM

I did the baffle mod to my 60-250 and like it on my K-1 II, and then throw the K-3 II into the kit, and you've got a nice threesome. Add the 1.4 TC, and you've got some icing on the cake. AF speed is slow, but for general walking around, it's a nice way to go, especially given the versatility of the mix you can put together. And the 43 Limited (or 31) probably will find it's way into this bag.

Sandy Hancock · 05-05-2019, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by jeffdrew

Sandy, your first two sentences say a lot! What has really changed; or is this likely a GAS attack? For your KP, the DA PLM 55-300mm really rocks for value, weight etc. It can work on your K1 as well.

This is actually the opposite of GAS - yesterday I made a list of twenty superb lenses, which I will most likely sell in the near future. The 55-300PLM is one of them, but I reserve the right to change my mind

Quote:

Otherwise, a heretical thought: Olympus Zuiko 45-150 f2.8 Pro w/ EM1 body! Lol!

Get behind me, Satan!

05-05-2019, 01:11 AM	#1
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	*Revisiting the DA 60-250?** I had a DA* 60-250 years ago, but didn't bond with it. There were no gripes about the image quality, but in the days before the K-1 and the new monster telephoto zooms I found the size and weight, the extension while zooming, and the focus breathing to be significant turn-offs. I'll always have some specialty primes of course, and the DFA* 70-200 and DFA 150-450 still fill their respective niches better than anything, but now I plan to ditch the consumer zooms and old manual glass I see a 60-250 sized hole in my life once again. With a two body kit (KP and K-1 Mark II), I see it complimenting my DA* 11-18 and DFA 24-70 better than anything else. Feel free to talk me out of it. Or not

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
SMC Pentax DA 60-250 F4 vs Sigma DC 18-250 F3.5-6.3	thepurplehornet	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	03-25-2019 10:22 PM
DA* 60-250 owners: How do you carry your 60-250 at the ready?	apisto	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	25	12-30-2017 01:49 PM
Revisiting the HD DA 20-40mm Limited	loganross	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	53	03-20-2014 04:36 AM

05-05-2019, 01:23 AM	#2
Joshua A Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 273	I am having quite a similar conundrum at the moment, having both a heavy and light kit, but no light FF tele option. Whilst at first I thought that the DA 60-250 would fill that niche well, I found that the focus and build quality of the lens isn't up to par compared to the more modern DA/DFA lenses. Optically that lens is fantastic, but honestly I would probably add a 200mm f2.8 and 1.4x TC as a light tele photo option instead, especially considering the considerable focus breathing problems that the 60-250mm had at close focusing distances. That said, I currently use a Tokina AT-X 70-210mm f4.5 AF for my light tele, and due to its light weight it fits my needs currently until the 70-200mm f4 arrives.

05-05-2019, 01:32 AM	#3
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272 Original Poster	Originally posted by Joshua A I would probably add a 200mm f2.8 and 1.4x TC as a light tele photo option instead Good thought. On the other hand, it's hard to beat the convenience of a zoom. I didn't like the purple fringing from the DA* 200 either, and the hood is enormous (same as the DA* 300). I have the teleconverter, and it apparently works well with the DA* 60-250.

05-05-2019, 01:55 AM - 2 Likes	#4
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,671	Whenever I go out with the DA*60-250, I almost always bring the converter with me too. If I know I'm going to be shooting at close range, I fit the converter and it makes up for the focus breathing. Plus, at longer distances it adds nicely to the magnification.

05-05-2019, 02:32 AM	#5
pschlute Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Surrey, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,198	Image quality of the DA* 60-250 is superb, but compared to the DFA 70-200 the focus is slow. If that is not an issue for you then go for it.

05-05-2019, 02:34 AM	#6
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272 Original Poster	Originally posted by BigMackCam Whenever I go out with the DA*60-250, I almost always bring the converter with me too. If I know I'm going to be shooting at close range, I fit the converter and it makes up for the focus breathing. Plus, at longer distances it adds nicely to the magnification. I like the way you're thinking Mike. It was certainly my intention to use the teleconverter for both those reasons.

05-05-2019, 02:36 AM	#7
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	I would wait a bit (unless you need it now) and look at what the DFA 70-200 f4 brings. I think it will focus faster and be a sharper lens on the edges than the DA 60-250 on full frame. It might have more magnification too, who knows. My guess would be size in the range of the DA 50-135 f2.8 -- probably just a bit bigger.

05-05-2019, 02:40 AM	#8
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272 Original Poster	Originally posted by pschlute Image quality of the DA* 60-250 is superb, but compared to the DFA 70-200 the focus is slow. If that is not an issue for you then go for it. I see it as a lighter, more versatile option for travel and active outdoor use. I'd still use the DFA* 70-200 for gigs and events.

05-05-2019, 04:15 AM	#9
Saltwater Images Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Newfoundland Photos: Gallery Posts: 501	I’m shooting with a KP and K-5II. Most of my kit is all 5 HD DA Ltd primes and the D FA 100 Macro WR (which is really another limited as far as I’m concerned). My only zoom at the moment is the 60-250 however I have ordered a Sigma 17-50. Last year choosing between the DA* 60-250 and DA* 200 was a tough choice. The 60-250 has not disappointed and is a stack of primes with punchy colours - I selected it for flexibility. Most times I find myself using the lens at the 200mm focal length so the DA* 200 would have also been ideal. This year I considered adding the 200 to my kit for the extra stop of light but bought the KP for a little less cash and the improved ISO performance of settling the need for the wider aperture in low light. The 200 is lighter and perhaps a better match for both of your cameras. If I had a K-1 and a KP the 200 would be my choice. Good luck with your decision.

05-05-2019, 04:35 AM - 2 Likes	#10
nitehntr Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Rivesville West Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 238	Originally posted by Sandy Hancock I had a DA* 60-250 years ago, but didn't bond with it. There were no gripes about the image quality, but in the days before the K-1 and the new monster telephoto zooms I found the size and weight, the extension while zooming, and the focus breathing to be significant turn-offs. I'll always have some specialty primes of course, and the DFA* 70-200 and DFA 150-450 still fill their respective niches better than anything, but now I plan to ditch the consumer zooms and old manual glass I see a 60-250 sized hole in my life once again. With a two body kit (KP and K-1 Mark II), I see it complimenting my DA* 11-18 and DFA 24-70 better than anything else. Feel free to talk me out of it. Or not the 60-250 was the first of the * lenses i bought. i have used it on the K10 through the K1 with fantastic results. i am considering selling my other DA* lenses but not the 60-250 it is too versatile to get rid of. i have seen people wanting a 70-200 f4 which i really don't understand since the 60-250 covers that and takes high quality images and is relatively lightweight for such a zoom range. i did have it altered when i got the K1 and it has performed flawlessly ever since. my advice is to use it.

05-05-2019, 06:51 AM - 1 Like	#11
jeffdrew Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2015 Posts: 102	Sandy, your first two sentences say a lot! What has really changed; or is this likely a GAS attack? For your KP, the DA PLM 55-300mm really rocks for value, weight etc. It can work on your K1 as well. Otherwise, a heretical thought: Olympus Zuiko 45-150 f2.8 Pro w/ EM1 body! Lol!

05-05-2019, 07:01 AM	#12
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by jeffdrew Otherwise, a heretical thought: Olympus Zuiko 45-150 f2.8 Pro w/ EM1 body! Lol! I always consider DoF when buying fast lenses. To be comparable to 2.8 on FF the 4/3 lens would have to be a 1.4 lens. If you always shoot 5.6 or higher, for more depth of field then the advantage goes to the 4/3 camera, except for the much worse low light performance and stop lower diffraction limit.

05-05-2019, 08:04 AM	#13
JensE Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2015 Location: Leipzig Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,969	For those occasions when I don't want to carry the 70-200mm f/2.8, I would very likely not pack the 60-250mm either. So I just went with the DA 55-300mm PLM, expecting and accepting to crop on the K-1 accordingly, most of the time much bigger than APS-C. For the KP, it's the ideal match as a lightweight addition to the big zooms anyway. The 60-250mm is just too close. It would make sense as a sole lens if I had to choose just one tele-zoom.

05-05-2019, 08:27 AM	#14
clickclick Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Location: East Coast Posts: 2,903	I did the baffle mod to my 60-250 and like it on my K-1 II, and then throw the K-3 II into the kit, and you've got a nice threesome. Add the 1.4 TC, and you've got some icing on the cake. AF speed is slow, but for general walking around, it's a nice way to go, especially given the versatility of the mix you can put together. And the 43 Limited (or 31) probably will find it's way into this bag.

05-05-2019, 03:10 PM	#15
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272 Original Poster	Originally posted by jeffdrew Sandy, your first two sentences say a lot! What has really changed; or is this likely a GAS attack? For your KP, the DA PLM 55-300mm really rocks for value, weight etc. It can work on your K1 as well. This is actually the opposite of GAS - yesterday I made a list of twenty superb lenses, which I will most likely sell in the near future. The 55-300PLM is one of them, but I reserve the right to change my mind Quote: Otherwise, a heretical thought: Olympus Zuiko 45-150 f2.8 Pro w/ EM1 body! Lol! Get behind me, Satan!