[Rondec]

What body are you using with the 50-135? Maybe time to think about something newer with faster AF?

According to his equipment list (which may be out of date), he owns a K110D and a Kr. Certainly a K3 would do a bit better if there was a budget for it.

[pres589]

Using US used pricing found in about 30 seconds total, used K-3's are about $400 in good condition, used KP's are about $700, used K-70's are about the same (seems odd). I'd find the money for a KP and skip the K-3 entirely, as the goal here is improved AF. I've used neither but I don't see a reason to put money into a K-3 given the issues.

[clickclick]

I know this isn't what you asked, but if you're looking for speed and a great lens for motorsports, I might set my sights on budgeting for a used K3-II or KP and the 55-300 PLM. I think you would find it a revelation in performance.

[ChristianRock]

Guys (and gals), all it takes is to open one of his images in flickr, and you'll see he already owns a K-3

Nice pictures. I love racing as well.

[red5isalive]

What body are you using with the 50-135? Maybe time to think about something newer with faster AF?

Those are great shots, by the way.

Thanks
Im using a K3 and a K3-II.
Im not willing to use a KP because of its ergonomics and i'll stop here and explain why because is a bit weird i've been told.

I am shooting looking with my left eye and im a right hander. That won't be much of a problem if the shutter button on the KP would be placed where the K3's are. But it is a problem for me because I wear glasses. That button disposition makes my finger touch constantly my glasses, adds dirt on them and then i get kinda blind on one eye each time i press the shutter.

Changing eyes to look from or contact lenses are not a true option right now.

---------- Post added 03-07-20 at 01:25 AM ----------

Guys (and gals), all it takes is to open one of his images in flickr, and you'll see he already owns a K-3

Nice pictures. I love racing as well.

Thanks mate! Sorry it was sleeping hours in Europe

---------- Post added 03-07-20 at 01:27 AM ----------

I know this isn't what you asked, but if you're looking for speed and a great lens for motorsports, I might set my sights on budgeting for a used K3-II or KP and the 55-300 PLM. I think you would find it a revelation in performance.

Sorry guys i was sleeping.

Yeah information is not up to date. I have a K3 and a K3-IIand have had a 55-300mm but changed it for a Sigma 100-300mm f4 which is to me the best lens i ever owned and kicks out the 55-300mm in terms of focus speed (the 55-300mm is quite slow) and quality.

[pres589]

The older 55-300 doesn't have the same focus mechanism as the 55-300 PLM that was mentioned. The PLM has the motor internal to the lens and is one of the fastest focusing lenses Pentax has sold. The IQ seems a bit better with the PLM as well (although maybe not miles ahead, it's still generally considered *better*).

I'm wondering if the new 70-210 f4 is worth considering. I don't think there are many comprehensive reviews of it yet, though, although I believe bdery is working on one. Seems like a natural lens to consider.

Understood about K-3 and why the KP isn't of interest.

[hypermodern]

I've owned both. Short answer, both are good lenses, but for whatever reason the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 didn't autofocus properly on my K3ii. It was fine on my K50, and on a friend's KS2. So I gave it to her and got a used Pentax 50-135mm. I'm pretty pleased with the outcome - the Pentax is a bit shorter I think, which I prefer, but most importantly the colours are much better. The Sigma had a muddy warmth that I didn't like (fixable in post but annoying to have to adjust), the Pentax is more saturated especially in the blues. It just seems to represent what I could see better. I'm still using the SDM and it's just fast enough for kids in the park, but for sport I would try converting to screw drive or geting something else.

[red5isalive]

I've owned both. Short answer, both are good lenses, but for whatever reason the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 didn't autofocus properly on my K3ii. It was fine on my K50, and on a friend's KS2. So I gave it to her and got a used Pentax 50-135mm. I'm pretty pleased with the outcome - the Pentax is a bit shorter I think, which I prefer, but most importantly the colours are much better. The Sigma had a muddy warmth that I didn't like (fixable in post but annoying to have to adjust), the Pentax is more saturated especially in the blues. It just seems to represent what I could see better. I'm still using the SDM and it's just fast enough for kids in the park, but for sport I would try converting to screw drive or geting something else.

Thanks for your reply,

Well the 50-135mm is passed to screwdrive but still a bit too slow. And the "something else" i was considering is that Sigma 50-150mm

---------- Post added 03-07-20 at 05:27 AM ----------

The older 55-300 doesn't have the same focus mechanism as the 55-300 PLM that was mentioned. The PLM has the motor internal to the lens and is one of the fastest focusing lenses Pentax has sold. The IQ seems a bit better with the PLM as well (although maybe not miles ahead, it's still generally considered *better*).

I'm wondering if the new 70-210 f4 is worth considering. I don't think there are many comprehensive reviews of it yet, though, although I believe bdery is working on one. Seems like a natural lens to consider.

Understood about K-3 and why the KP isn't of interest.

Well i got the old 55-300mm. But i have no intention tl go back to this.

I have heard actually that this 70-210mm f4 is not at all any good. And yet the focal range is too close to my sigma 100-300mm f4 so i have not even considered it (and of course because of the price! As i only buy used gear).

The 70-200mm new is also not an option, too expensive, too big and too close to my actual workhorse.

But thanks

[pres589]

... where would you have heard that the Pentax D-FA 70-210 f4 isn't any good? It's been on sale for a week or two. I've not seen anything close to a review for this lens, unless you're talking about something else. And I'd honestly be shocked if this new lens was anything less than stellar optically; Pentax hasn't released a dud lens in years, in my estimation (they do exist, usually zooms when it's happened).


I don't know about AF speed, but the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 might be worth considering? Or do you need the lenses widest focal length to be back nearer to 50mm?

[gatorguy]

... where would you have heard that the Pentax D-FA 70-210 f4 isn't any good? It's been on sale for a week or two. I've not seen anything close to a review for this lens, unless you're talking about something else. And I'd honestly be shocked if this new lens was anything less than stellar optically; Pentax hasn't released a dud lens in years, in my estimation (they do exist, usually zooms when it's happened).


I don't know about AF speed, but the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 might be worth considering? Or do you need the lenses widest focal length to be back nearer to 50mm?

Personally I think the OP is dismissing the 55-300PLM for entirely the wrong reason, that it's not much different than his old non-PLM version. On paper it almost looks like a lesser piece of glass. I spent months thinking the same thing, buying it only for my son to have a one-lens-fits-all for the KS-2 he used when hiking with me. I never once tried it until just a few months go.

The first couple of times trying a shot I had to double-check and make sure i wasn't on manual focus as I didn't see anything snap into focus. Put it to my eye again and focused on something else. Still didn't catch it. It focuses so quickly and silently compared to most of my other Pentax lenses I didn't realize it WAS snapping into focus. That. Fast.

I still prefer my primes but if I'm shooting fast-moving subjects there is no other lens I have that will more reliably capture a properly focused image at speed. At a football game this past fall it was amazing how many more focused shots I got than using my *200 as I had at a past game, and much less work to do so.

Better to catch 2-3 dozen spot-on focus images with perhaps a lesser IQ (perhaps...) than using top-end glass for 6 nice ones with dozens more that you wish the focus had been faster.

[clickclick]

Well i got the old 55-300mm. But i have no intention tl go back to this.

So do I. Have both the old 55-300 and the new 55-300 PLM. The only thing these lenses have in common is the name. The IQ is much better with my PLM, and the focus speed is amazing. I'd really advise putting it on the short list, especially for automotive sports. I'm a car nut too, and the PLM is the lens I will be taking to the track. And don't be put off by the f6.3 at 300mm. Back it off to about 280mm, and you're at f5.6.

[red5isalive]

... where would you have heard that the Pentax D-FA 70-210 f4 isn't any good? It's been on sale for a week or two. I've not seen anything close to a review for this lens, unless you're talking about something else. And I'd honestly be shocked if this new lens was anything less than stellar optically; Pentax hasn't released a dud lens in years, in my estimation (they do exist, usually zooms when it's happened).


I don't know about AF speed, but the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 might be worth considering? Or do you need the lenses widest focal length to be back nearer to 50mm?

Sorry i got comfused, I thought it was the 70-210mm at a youtube channel named CameraVille but he was talking about the 70-200mm I believe.

You Tube

You Tube

Yet still, I won't have 1200€ to spend on a lens to be honest

---------- Post added 03-07-20 at 12:49 PM ----------

... where would you have heard that the Pentax D-FA 70-210 f4 isn't any good? It's been on sale for a week or two. I've not seen anything close to a review for this lens, unless you're talking about something else. And I'd honestly be shocked if this new lens was anything less than stellar optically; Pentax hasn't released a dud lens in years, in my estimation (they do exist, usually zooms when it's happened).


I don't know about AF speed, but the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 might be worth considering? Or do you need the lenses widest focal length to be back nearer to 50mm?

About the Tamron, I've tested one unit in the past.
Image quality is stunning, but its AF is very slow. And its a shame, because I loved the images done with that lens.

My need comes from the fact that I already own a lens like the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 that is brilliant for my needs, and the Sigma 100-300mm F4 which is a blast of a lens, so there is a gap in between 50 and 100mm and in some circuits like Montecarlo for example or the ones used in Formula E you don't need a 300mm lens attached to your camera. Usually the maximum range you'll need is 150mnm in a APS-C sensor. There is where my need comes from.

Of couse I can just use both Sigmas, that'd be fine also. But sometimes doing motorsport grids is nice to have a reach similar to 50-150mm for some shots. And as you don't have much time to shoot, AF needs to be quick. But most important it needs to be quick when performing action.

---------- Post added 03-07-20 at 12:51 PM ----------

So do I. Have both the old 55-300 and the new 55-300 PLM. The only thing these lenses have in common is the name. The IQ is much better with my PLM, and the focus speed is amazing. I'd really advise putting it on the short list, especially for automotive sports. I'm a car nut too, and the PLM is the lens I will be taking to the track. And don't be put off by the f6.3 at 300mm. Back it off to about 280mm, and you're at f5.6.

Thanks is good to know
Yet I have the 100-300mm covered with the Sigma 100-300mm F4
Sigma APO 100-300mm F4 EX DG Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

Which is the real deal to me. But when you can't use 100mm you need something smaller, and this is why something like the 50-135mm helps.

[clickclick]

Thanks is good to knowYet I have the 100-300mm covered with the Sigma 100-300mm F4

Welcome! The thing the PLM has is the focus speed, but yes, you've got the range covered with the Sigma. I'm afraid you're too far away to lend you my PLM, but if you could get one to test out, it would be nice to compare to the others.

[stevebrot]

I have heard actually that this 70-210mm f4 is not at all any good.

Well, that is interesting...

There has been very little buzz about this lens except for complaints about price reducing its value proposition. As noted above, any owners would have only had the lens in hand for a couple of weeks at most. That said, I would not consider it to be competition as a normal to mid-range zoom.


Steve

[DWS1]

Since you have the 100mm and above range covered, another option for you might be the D FA 28-105mm f:3.5-5.6. I find it to be an excellent lens on a K70. Quick to focus, great IQ, and a great walk around lens.