[jatrax]

I don't thein the " star " designation depends on use on full frame senor or ASP-C sensor does it ?

I believe I saw a quote from Ricoh on the 60-250 stating that they would not certify it as FF compatible because it did not meet the standards for a '*' lens on full frame. But obviously it does on APS-C. You are correct that format is not included in the definition of "star quality", I was just going from memory on that quote. My experience with the 60-250 on the K-1 supports that quote. On APS-C it is '*' but on FF, its good but not '*', the edge vignetting is acceptable in a 'good' lens but not in a '*' one. That said I would be happy with the image quality of the 60-250 on FF, it was the AF that drove me nuts.

[aslyfox]

since I have had no experience with the lens on either the FF or ASP-C bodies

I accept your advance knowledge

thanks for the information

[jatrax]

thanks for the information

You are most welcome! Now will somebody please help make this decision?

[Adam007]

Can't speak to the 60-250, but I have the 70-210, and it is fantastic. Light and as sharp as one of my god macro lenses. Renders OOF beautifully around F5. I feel that you do need to give it a little more light, but I use it all the time now - and I am mostly a prime shooter.

[jatrax]

I suddenly realized that Lightroom has all of the focal length data recorded. So for just about 4,000 images made with the 60-250 here are the focal lengths used. I thought it would help but sadly not. Most of the images were taken at the extremes, either 60mm or 250mm. If anybody smart would like to chime in and tell me what that means I would appreciate it. Note that the majority of these are on APS-C not FF.

[simsburyphoto]

I have a 60-250 that I did the baffle modification on. I am very happy with its performance on the both the K-1 and K-3. I thought about the new 70-210 when it came out, but when I saw the review of the new lens on this site, I could not justify buying it considering it really has no improvement in image quality. It's only real advantage is faster focusing which I don't need for most of my photography. I do appreciate the longer zoom range of the 60-250. I am guessing you could get a much better deal on a lightly used 60-250 than a new 70-210.

[mikesbike]

One other consideration is the SDM failure factor. When it happens on the DA*60-250mm, there is no possible conversion to screw-driven. Too bad Pentax did not re-issue this lens with a DC motor. But the DA 70-200mm f/4 seems to do well as lighter alternative to the f/2.8 lens, according to those having experience with both, offering a faster AF than the DA 60-250mm, will not have vignetting problems, and it should be more reliable.

My own solution to this dilemma is upon getting a FF body I am not even concerned regarding much in the way of a tele zoom. I will get the body with the highly-regarded DFA 28-105mm for versatility and WR, and I already have a Tokina ATX 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 pro II bought new when shooting only film. I also have the DA* 200mm f/2.8 and the FA* 300mm f/4.5 fine tele lenses. For most of my tele interests requiring a faster aperture, there are those tele lenses and my excellent KP with my now 10 year-old DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 and Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM, which will be fine for a fast tele zoom combo.

---

Last edited by mikesbike; 10-18-2020 at 03:57 PM.

[sbh]

I have modified the 60-250 myself, and there really almost no visable vignetting at FF.

I can confirm this first hand.

I haven't used the 60-250, so no comparison info. I own the 70-210 and I'm pleased with it. Decent sharpness and light. However, when I first got it I noticed how much it was affected by breezes, particularly from the side. It wasn't a tripod and head issue. I solved it with Manfrotto's Telephoto Lens Support (293). It obviously adds a bit of weight, but it has worked well in windy conditions. (I don't bother with the strap.)

It does not come with a foot???

I don't have either lens

I don't think the " star " designation depends on use on full frame senor or ASP-C sensor does it ? ...

In some way it does because the sharpness falls off noticably outside the APS-C area. Even at f/8.

You are most welcome! Now will somebody please help make this decision?

I haven't used the 70-210 but – assuming image quality is fine – I'd recommend that one to you.

The 60-250 would only be your choice if you rely on a tripod foot as a knock-out criteria. And of course if your life as a photographer ends instantly if you don't have those 40mm at the long end at infinity any more.

[jatrax]

The 60-250 would only be your choice if you rely on a tripod foot

I thought I read someplace that a third party foot would fit. But maybe I misremember that. I'll have to check.
And those 40mm is exactly what I am worried about. Seems I used the 60-250 at 250mm a lot.

[normhead]

Personally, I have a 60-250, I don't have a DFA 70-210. No way it's worth my while to add the 70-210. My main lens in that range is now the DA 55-300 PLM, I also have he DA*200 2.8 and Tamron 300 2.8 and F 70-210. My DA*60-250 is getting very little work, adding another lens to that range would make no sense.

But I can see it being attractive to someone for whom it's their first telephoto. to o with other quality glass, although using a lens like the DA 55-300 PLM is a no brainer compared to any of these lenses in good light.

[Paul the Sunman]

I thought I read someplace that a third party foot would fit.

The Tamron foot fits.

(Does anyone else have to over-ride their spell-checker whenever they type "Tamron"?)

[house]

I thought I read someplace that a third party foot would fit. But maybe I misremember that. I'll have to check.
And those 40mm is exactly what I am worried about. Seems I used the 60-250 at 250mm a lot.

I think it's nearly always the case that people use zooms at their extremes. I understand that its a mistake to draw the conclusion that you like/need that particular fl. Had it been 30mm longer or shorter the you'd have a majority of shots there instead.

[bdery]

If they came out with a D FA 60-250 I would pre-order but I doubt that is going to happen

Not going to happen in the foreseable future. North America Ricoh says so.

a little help here would be appreciated, especially from anyone who has used both lenses. I either need to re-buy a 60-250 and modify it or buy a new 70-210.

Have you seen the DFA 70-210 review where I compare the two?

HD Pentax-D FA 70-210mm F4 ED SDM WR Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

It is usable but there remains some vignette.

The article I wrote about this describes the amount of vignetting to be expected depending on the shape of the baffle.

Modifying the DA* 60-250mm F4 for Full Frame - Introduction - In-Depth Articles

You'll read my personal opinion regarding the two in the review. I expected to change the 60-250 for the 70-210, but despite the new lens' qualities, I ended up keeping the 60-250.

[jatrax]

although using a lens like the DA 55-300 PLM is a no brainer compared to any of these lenses in good light.

But 55-300 is not FF right? Maybe I need to wait for the 70-300 that is on the lens road map.

The Tamron foot fits.

Thanks, I thought that was the case.

I think it's nearly always the case that people use zooms at their extremes. I understand that its a mistake to draw the conclusion that you like/need that particular fl.

Thanks that is good insight.

Not going to happen in the foreseable future. North America Ricoh says so.

Yeah, I know.

You'll read my personal opinion regarding the two in the review. I expected to change the 60-250 for the 70-210, but despite the new lens' qualities, I ended up keeping the 60-250.

Your review is exactly why I am in this quandary. I sold the 60-250 in expectation of getting the 70-210 but after your review decided I needed to think about it some more.

The article I wrote about this describes the amount of vignetting to be expected depending on the shape of the baffle.

I was one of the early modifiers, the photos in the original thread on the modification are of my lens. I have plenty of images of the 60-250 vignetting on FF. It is acceptable to me but the slow AF on the 60-250 was the real reason I sold it. Now I am wishing I had kept it.

[aslyfox]

But 55-300 is not FF right? . . .

it scores one star for the PLM and two stars for the other versions

Full Frame Coverage of DA Lenses: Comprehensive Test
Which DA lenses cover the full 24x36 mm frame?
By PF Staff in Gear Guides on Jan 7, 2019

Read more at: Full Frame Coverage of DA Lenses: Comprehensive Test - Gear Guides | PentaxForums.com