Yet another advice thread :-)

**UncleVanya** · 08-12-2019, 07:52 AM - **1 Like**

The DA 55-300 is sometimes close to your budget, one recently was listed for $120 in the marketplace. The DA-L version is similar but the lack of a hood and quickshift is annoying. The F 70-210 is ok but in my copies of these two lenses it exhibits more purple fringing.

**Des** · 08-12-2019, 03:47 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by UncleVanya

The DA 55-300 is sometimes close to your budget, one recently was listed for $120 in the marketplace. The DA-L version is similar but the lack of a hood and quickshift is annoying.

An aftermarket hood for the DA-L costs around $2, so I wouldn't be too fussed about that. I agree that QS is certainly a feature worth paying a bit more for, if the budget will go that far. (There's also the factor that the DA-L has a plastic mount whereas the DA has a metal one, which is likely to be more durable.)

But to put that in perspective, none of the F or FA telephoto zooms and none of the third party telephoto zooms has QS. The absence of QS is one reason why the Sigma, the Tamron and the DA-L are all cheaper than the DA 55-300.

A workaround for the absence of QS is to press the lens release button and focus manually. Not ideal, but many people use this technique.

kevinWE · 08-12-2019, 06:19 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Des

An aftermarket hood for the DA-L costs around $2, so I wouldn't be too fussed about that. I agree that QS is certainly a feature worth paying a bit more for, if the budget will go that far. (There's also the factor that the DA-L has a plastic mount whereas the DA has a metal one, which is likely to be more durable.)

But to put that in perspective, none of the F or FA telephoto zooms and none of the third party telephoto zooms has QS. The absence of QS is one reason why the Sigma, the Tamron and the DA-L are all cheaper than the DA 55-300.

A workaround for the absence of QS is to press the lens release button and focus manually. Not ideal, but many people use this technique.

I actually purchased Pentax-F 35-70 and - F 70-210 for a whopping 75.00 for the pair.

I wasn't looking for anything spectacular. I just wanted something that could produce keeper images on the cheap. These lenses will be used sparingly. I rarely shoot with zoom lenses.

**Des** · 08-13-2019, 05:32 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by kevinWE

I actually purchased Pentax-F 35-70 and - F 70-210 for a whopping 75.00 for the pair.
I wasn't looking for anything spectacular. I just wanted something that could produce keeper images on the cheap. These lenses will be used sparingly. I rarely shoot with zoom lenses.

Sounds like a recipe for cheap fun. Enjoy them.

ChristianRock · 08-13-2019, 01:25 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by kevinWE

I actually purchased Pentax-F 35-70 and - F 70-210 for a whopping 75.00 for the pair.

I wasn't looking for anything spectacular. I just wanted something that could produce keeper images on the cheap. These lenses will be used sparingly. I rarely shoot with zoom lenses.

Sounds like you got a couple good lenses for a song. Well done.

jeallen01 · 08-13-2019, 01:37 PM - **1 Like**

Late to the show, but I would have suggested a generation one 17-70 Sigma for the "short end" - love mine = cheap and very sharp, if a little on the larger size.

gm4life · 08-17-2019, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by Crooski

My suggestion for the Tamron is Pentax F 70-210mm f4.0-5.6

I second this... My pa has one, not a bad lens for the coin. Seriously punches well above it’s weight.

ZombieArmy · 08-17-2019, 09:42 PM - **1 Like**

The main advantage of the 35-70 in my eyes is the extremely fast and accurate autofocus. Which kinda messes with my mind since it isn't exactly a bright aperture lens.

Simply a great walkaround lens you don't have to worry about too much.

08-12-2019, 03:47 PM - 1 Like	#17
Des Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Victoria Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 6,423	Originally posted by UncleVanya The DA 55-300 is sometimes close to your budget, one recently was listed for $120 in the marketplace. The DA-L version is similar but the lack of a hood and quickshift is annoying. An aftermarket hood for the DA-L costs around $2, so I wouldn't be too fussed about that. I agree that QS is certainly a feature worth paying a bit more for, if the budget will go that far. (There's also the factor that the DA-L has a plastic mount whereas the DA has a metal one, which is likely to be more durable.) But to put that in perspective, none of the F or FA telephoto zooms and none of the third party telephoto zooms has QS. The absence of QS is one reason why the Sigma, the Tamron and the DA-L are all cheaper than the DA 55-300. A workaround for the absence of QS is to press the lens release button and focus manually. Not ideal, but many people use this technique. Last edited by Des; 08-12-2019 at 05:58 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Yet another should I buy a K-1 thread	Dirtfisher	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	27	09-06-2017 02:27 PM
Yet another tripod thread... re: K1, keep Bogen 3221 vs/ new carbon	Erictator	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	9	07-27-2017 08:30 PM
Yet another Negative film scanner advice needed thread	ismaelg	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	27	06-23-2010 08:54 PM
Yet another newbie looking for a tripod thread	rpriedhorsky	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	13	01-15-2009 12:21 AM
yet another how is my lens thread	architorture	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	07-12-2008 06:48 AM

08-12-2019, 07:52 AM - 1 Like	#16
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	The DA 55-300 is sometimes close to your budget, one recently was listed for $120 in the marketplace. The DA-L version is similar but the lack of a hood and quickshift is annoying. The F 70-210 is ok but in my copies of these two lenses it exhibits more purple fringing.

08-12-2019, 06:19 PM - 1 Like	#18
kevinWE Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2017 Location: Illinois, USA Posts: 497 Original Poster	Originally posted by Des An aftermarket hood for the DA-L costs around $2, so I wouldn't be too fussed about that. I agree that QS is certainly a feature worth paying a bit more for, if the budget will go that far. (There's also the factor that the DA-L has a plastic mount whereas the DA has a metal one, which is likely to be more durable.) But to put that in perspective, none of the F or FA telephoto zooms and none of the third party telephoto zooms has QS. The absence of QS is one reason why the Sigma, the Tamron and the DA-L are all cheaper than the DA 55-300. A workaround for the absence of QS is to press the lens release button and focus manually. Not ideal, but many people use this technique. I actually purchased Pentax-F 35-70 and - F 70-210 for a whopping 75.00 for the pair. I wasn't looking for anything spectacular. I just wanted something that could produce keeper images on the cheap. These lenses will be used sparingly. I rarely shoot with zoom lenses.

08-13-2019, 05:32 AM - 1 Like	#19
Des Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Victoria Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 6,423	Originally posted by kevinWE I actually purchased Pentax-F 35-70 and - F 70-210 for a whopping 75.00 for the pair. I wasn't looking for anything spectacular. I just wanted something that could produce keeper images on the cheap. These lenses will be used sparingly. I rarely shoot with zoom lenses. Sounds like a recipe for cheap fun. Enjoy them.

08-13-2019, 01:25 PM - 1 Like	#20
ChristianRock Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: People's Republic of America Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,910	Originally posted by kevinWE I actually purchased Pentax-F 35-70 and - F 70-210 for a whopping 75.00 for the pair. I wasn't looking for anything spectacular. I just wanted something that could produce keeper images on the cheap. These lenses will be used sparingly. I rarely shoot with zoom lenses. Sounds like you got a couple good lenses for a song. Well done.

08-13-2019, 01:37 PM - 1 Like	#21
jeallen01 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2008 Location: London, UK Posts: 1,697	Late to the show, but I would have suggested a generation one 17-70 Sigma for the "short end" - love mine = cheap and very sharp, if a little on the larger size.

08-17-2019, 09:39 PM	#22
gm4life Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2016 Posts: 602	Originally posted by Crooski My suggestion for the Tamron is Pentax F 70-210mm f4.0-5.6 I second this... My pa has one, not a bad lens for the coin. Seriously punches well above it’s weight.

08-17-2019, 09:42 PM - 1 Like	#23
ZombieArmy Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Florida Posts: 3,210	The main advantage of the 35-70 in my eyes is the extremely fast and accurate autofocus. Which kinda messes with my mind since it isn't exactly a bright aperture lens. Simply a great walkaround lens you don't have to worry about too much.