[y0chang]

I am looking for a budget telephoto over 75mm and less than 300mm light enough for hiking.

So another thread has a few images from a DA 55-300mm on Full Frame and it was at least passable for me.

The options I see are

DA 55-300mm with a bit of cropping
F 100-300mm
FA 100-300mm
FA 80-320mm
FA-J 70-300mm

Please no suggestions about the DA 60-250mm or DA 300mm. I own the DA 300mm and the former is just too large for me for Hiking (or a 70-200mm f2.8 for that matter).

Are any of these lenses worth buying for the K-1?

[pepperberry farm]

why not a used Tamron or Sigma 70-200/2.8?

[othar]

I own the F 100-300mm lens (for my K-3). While beeing a cheap solution it is not a total blunder for APS-C IQ wise (I don't know about the corners on FF though).
It is usually sharp enough and while there are CAs and purple fringing it is manageable in post.
But compared to your 300mm lens it is not that much smaller and lighter (well maybe a little lighter 600g vs 1000g).
For mountaineering I took it just once or twice with me because it has still some weight to it and I don't need the range that often.

I usually prefer my much lighter Cosina Cosinon-T 135mm 1:3.5 lens. While beeing manual focus only it is usually long enough and as a bonus small and light.

[othar]

why not a used Tamron or Sigma 70-200/2.8?

While beeing good lenses they are even heavier than his DA 300mm lens

[othar]

Maybe a used Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM (Contemporary) or is this outside your budget?

The Sigma or Tamron 70-300mm lenses migth also be worth looking at if the Contemporary is too expensive (they are about as heavy as the FA 80-320mm)

[Serkevan]

I would look at the 70-210 slower zooms (we don't so often need fast teles for hiking, right?) in addition to the ones you suggested. Unless you really want the 300mm end, of course.

•Pentax-F 70-210/4-5.6: small and light punches above its weight in IQ, according to the reviews. About... 100€ in Europe, more or less.
•Tokina AF 70-210/4-5.6: probably a bit worse than the Pentax, but also small and light. It's very inexpensive as well, I have found it for around 40€.
•Tokina AF 70-210/4.5: this is the one I own; it's internal zoom (but not internal focus and the 55mm filter ring rotates, so no CPL, grad, or petal hood), it's not terribly heavy or large at 640g and IQ is more than good enough for my needs, it's sharp and I like the rendering.

[SteveinSLC]

For hiking with a K-1, I'd be pretty tempted to use the 55-300 PLM in crop mode. It's light, compact, weatherproof, and fast-focusing.

[kiwi_jono]

I have a DA 55-300 but ended up getting a Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG Macro.
Its light weight, relatively small (well similar to DA 55-300 - wider but shorter), pretty good performer, close focusses and is very cheap. I picked one up second hand for $60.
Main down side is build feels like rubbish and zoom ring on mine is not smooth (sticks a bit here and there). But for walking / hiking the lightness yet still good IQ is a plus!

[ChristianRock]

From the listed options, from my previous research, it would be an FA 100-300 - but beware there's two versions. One is f/4-5.6 and is said to be pretty bad, possibly the worst Pentax tele zoom. The other is f/4.5-5.8 and the pictures I've seen from it are pretty good. Years ago some people in this forum used to prefer it to the 55-300mm, though I think that changed once the 55-300 became HD and WR. Which means, the 100-300 4.5-5.8 remains affordable

I ended up just going for manual focus lenses on APS-C, in addition to a Tamron 70-300mm LD Di that I hardly ever use. The Tamron is capable of some very good results if the light falls evenly on a subject, but as soon as there's some harsh light, it's inferior to my manual focus lenses, mostly the SMC-A 70-210mm f4, which handles harsh sun like a champ.

[ronniemac]

I tested some of these recently but just at 200mm and 300mm, with the following conclusions.

Standard is set by the 200 and 300 DA* primes which I would rate as excellent, or the new DFA* 70-200 which I rate as perfect. For me, clarity and colour rendition are the critical factors. WR and quiet quick focus matter too.

DA 55-300mm plm: very good at 200 & 300 (but will vignette at 55)
F 100-300mm: I don't have this one but do have the FA equivalent (see next)
FA 100-300mm: Poor at 200, very poor at 300 (both versions of FA 100-300 lenses)
FA 80-320mm: OK at 200, poor at 300
FA-J 70-300mm: Poor at both 200 and very poor at 300
I also used to use the Sigma 28-300 which I thought was good for such an extensive range.

In conclusion, of the above, I would recommend the HD Pentax DA 55-300 ED PLM WR RE, (compact - despite is enormous name). Crop where necessary at the short end if p.p. anti-vignetting at does not give the desired result. In addition to image quality, I like the WR and PLM (silent) focus. You'll get used to 'un-retracting' this lens after a while. It's a nice partner to the HD Pentax DFA 28-105.

If on a tight budget, consider the Sigma, but not the F, FAs, or FA-J.

[TwoUptons]

I use a Tamron 70-300 on my K1, and it’s compact, inexpensive, and light. It purple fringes like mad, though, in harsh light, especially wide open.

I also have the well-regraded Pentax F70-210. It’s a great value but not the best ever.

Both work great on film.

I’m really anticipating the DFA70-200 f4 that’s on the roadmap, but it’s not out yet...

-Eric

[normhead]

The DA 55-300 PLM is the only option I'd recommend.
I took it on a 19 day trip this summer with my K-1.

Below, all DA 55-300 PLM images on the K-1








I have my Tamron 300 2.8, my DA*60-250, and DA* 200 2.8, ( both with the option of the 1.4 TC or F 1.7x) but when I'm hiking or portaging, I take the 55-300.

[ChatMechant]

That plm lens looks pretty nice.
I enjoyed the A70-210, and also the F80-200 5.6 is surprisingly good, and very very small. They do need to come out with a tele zoom to go with the 28-105.

[Aaron28]

FA 80-320mm

I don't know the best nor can compare between them all but..

got the FA80-320 (silver version) for dirt cheap.....main reason for reach on full frame when I don't care to lug around the sigma 150-500.....a very light lens but not compact
of course the 80-320 does not really compare (to the sigma) nor is it WR (the sigma is not either) but works for the purpose intended in general at the right price

on the K-1



the same on the K-3ii



good luck in choosing and happy shooting

[climbmountainway]

I would look at the 70-210 slower zooms (we don't so often need fast teles for hiking, right?) in addition to the ones you suggested. Unless you really want the 300mm end, of course.

•Pentax-F 70-210/4-5.6: small and light punches above its weight in IQ, according to the reviews. About... 100€ in Europe, more or less.
•Tokina AF 70-210/4-5.6: probably a bit worse than the Pentax, but also small and light. It's very inexpensive as well, I have found it for around 40€.
•Tokina AF 70-210/4.5: this is the one I own; it's internal zoom (but not internal focus and the 55mm filter ring rotates, so no CPL, grad, or petal hood), it's not terribly heavy or large at 640g and IQ is more than good enough for my needs, it's sharp and I like the rendering.

Check out the reviews under the supposedly "non Pentax SMC", under user reviews, Pentax lenses as is indeed mutlicoated: The Takumkar F 70-210 f4, which I use for backpacking. It is sharper than the related and optically identical Pentax F SMC. There are also user comments on it in a recent forum thread on replacing an unsharp DA 50-200mm. It is maximal budget, has and ED element, and is a great lens. Read up on its strengths and weaknesses. You could couple it with the original Sigma 1.4X telecoverter, for the occasional long shot, likely all together under a hundred.