[jawats]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Tricky - I'd mormally recommend the D-FA* 70-200/2.8, but you say very good, and unfortunately it's ruled out on the basis of being exceptional

Ha! But isn't it at the top of my list - HD Pentax-D FA* 70-200mm F2.8 ED DC AW ?

[maw]

I will say something that someone may not like, mah, if a lens or an object in general I like or I am convinced of its validity I do not make it a question of price.

If you need it for birdwathing, go to the Sigma's all the way to the focal 500.

I have both the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX APO DG and the Sigma 170-500mm F5-6.3 APO DG, very sharp.

The first one is brighter but heavy (more oriented to portrait and group photography, so not suitable for photographic hunting I'm talking mainly about birds).

The second is less bright lighter and excellent autofocus sharpness fast enough and also quiet.

There is also an old SMC Pentax SMC Pentax-A 70-210 mm F4 lens, manual but one-touch, good results not exceptional.

I mention only the SMC Pentax-F 300 mm F4.5 ED [IF] because it is not a zoom lens, but if you find it you can think about it, it is a star lens. By name and fact.

Good hunting, Mario

[angerdan]

I have both the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX APO DG and the Sigma 170-500mm F5-6.3 APO DG, very sharp.
The second is less bright lighter and excellent autofocus sharpness fast enough and also quiet.

There is also an old SMC Pentax SMC Pentax-A 70-210 mm F4 lens, manual but one-touch, good results not exceptional.

I mention only the SMC Pentax-F 300 mm F4.5 ED [IF] because it is not a zoom lens, but if you find it you can think about it, it is a star lens. By name and fact.

The Sigma 70-200 F2.8 isn't "very sharp". At least not without stopping down.

You could 've mention the F 70-210mm lens, which offers a lot for the buck.


The F* 300mm F4.5 is a very good lens, that's why i'd already recommended it here (there had be a copy for 530 bucks in Wyoming).

[disasterfilm]

I bought my D-FA 150-450 as an open-box / used item (minus the carrying bag) from Adorama for $1500 on the nose. KEH had a copy ~2 weeks ago for $1200ish.
Food for thought!

If you think you'll be staying in the shorter focal length range more though, the D-FA 70-200 used can be had at ~$1,200.

For the long Sigma zooms, I'd say stick to the 50-500 over all of the others. It's versatile but not exceptional. I've seen them on the 2ndhand market from $600-900 too, so a bit below your $1,200 estimate.
I've shot their EX DG 70-200 HSM II before too, not great wide open, but at f/4 and onward definitely a serviceable lens. And they can be had in the $500-600 range.

[SSGGeezer]

I had the Sigma 120-400 and I liked it a great deal. I also got a deal on an open box DFA 150-450 for under 1200 bucks on Bezos' sinkhole for cash. I had worse luck with the 1150-500 so I am with @normhead on those unless it is the Bigma 50-500 Sigma. F* or FA* 300 and a TC are great if you can skip the zoom part of the equation.

[maw]

The F* 300mm F4.5 is a very good lens, that's why i'd already recommended it here (there had be a copy for 530 bucks in Wyoming).

If you find it at that price you could buy it, it's a bargain. My specimen is better than this one in every sense and I bought it in Italy 6/7 years,
it is still an investment because it is part of those optics that are difficult to find and buy cheap.

I think the Sigma (Bigma) 50-500mm or 170-500mm are the candidates without duplicators or anything else.

Otherwise the 70-200mm f/2.8 for brightness but they are short, or you could go to the Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR.

A lot depends on how you want to use it.

Here the link F* 300mm F4.5

Good Luck, Mario

[banangrg]

Tamron SP 70-200 2.8 Di LD has a good bang for a buck, though it is sometimes soft at 200mm wide open.
This seems to be typical issue of this lens. A friend of mine, has sent his copy to technical service and after that, the lens was nearly as sharp as DFA* 70-200,
although with noisy, lower autofocus performance and bit worse bokeh. I wouldn't consider this flaws too much, the lens is worth enough it's money for a portrait work.

[noelpolar]

Given what you have asked.... as an owner of the Sigma 70-200 EX APO DG HSM (very good lens.... probally $700 ish second hand these days.... not $1,300) and a F*300 4.5 (good lens also)...... I would spend $1500 and get a DFA 70-200/2.8. In my view.... there is no great 70-200 lens that also does 400mm ish.... so get the 70-210 and go longer later as you build a high quality set of lenses up.

Of course.... I think the Sigma I have is a good compromise for a 70-210.... but it is 7 or 8 years old. I would not get a tamron 70-210.... as the screw drive harshness is a bit yesterday.... but thats me.

And.... the Sigma 150-500s can be a bit disappointing IQ wise at the longer end.... if thinking that hang out for a second hand dfa 150-450.

[bdery]

If autofocus is the main driver, certainly I would go with the D FA 70-210, it's probably the fastest AF available for the K-1 right now. The 70-200 F2.8 will be superior optically, and good for AF also, but larger and more expensive.

[angerdan]

Here the link F* 300mm F4.5

This is the Link to my quote:
SMC Pentax-F 300mm F4.5 | eBay

But no guarantee for the quality of this copy. Only that it's cheap.

[mbukal]

the D FA 70-210, it's probably the fastest AF available for the K-1 right now.

bdery, is it faster than 55-300 PLM on K1 in apsc format, reading your posts I came to the conclusion that in ff format the order of af speed in telezums is as follows,correct me if I'm wrong :

1.70-210 / 4
2.70-200 / 2.8
3.28-105/3,5-5,6
4.150-450/4,5-5,6
5.60-250 / 4

[bdery]

bdery, is it faster than 55-300 PLM on K1 in apsc format

Hard to tell, but it's certainly the fastest I've tested myself.

reading your posts I came to the conclusion that in ff format the order of af speed in telezums is as follows,correct me if I'm wrong :

1.70-210 / 4
2.70-200 / 2.8
3.28-105/3,5-5,6
4.150-450/4,5-5,6
5.60-250 / 4

I would say that's about right. Of course it varies significantly depending on the scene.

If speed is of the essence I would pick the 70-210, it also has the advantage of being smaller and lighter. The 28-105 is a really different range, and the 150-450 is also wildly different, and much more expensive.