[Ho_agie]

I've been on a spending spree getting back into the hobby, starting with the K-70 and three WR lenses. I think I have a good setup for my interests, which is landscape, nature, and wildlife. I have no illusions of making money from my photos, but enjoy the stress relief of getting outside and the creative aspect of photography. I have found that there are just some shots that I need a longer focal length for. I'd be willing to throw in for one more lens to capture that eagle that won't move any closer or that elk I'm not risking getting any closer to.

Vintage is fine and I have done some reading on 500mm and 600mm lenses, but find myself more confused. If weather sealing and autofocus was not a requirement and you had $300 today, what lens would you look to add? What lens would you enjoy if you wait to spend $600 maximum? Would you choose a vintage lens over a tele-converter for the 55-300mm PLM lens? Thanks for your input.

[RobSpain]

I have the K-70 too. As a 'long' walk-around lens I use a Sigma 18-300mm which serves me fine. I also own some legacy lenses too which of course work so well on the K-70. However, if you're into wildlife and birds from a distance, you really need something longer than 300mm. Having said that and although I don't own the PLM 55-300, I do understand from many posts and reviews here that it's a great lens and of course comes with WR. I think in your position I would hunt down some second hand, long legacy lenses on the net. Take your time in browsing before you purchase. If from eBay, check thoroughly the sellers credentials, look for a 98-100% customer satisfaction, and read the comments from their customers. I have always found this to be the most reliable way to purchase online.

[termy]

55-300 PLM.

Best bang for the buck.

Will work well with the K-70.

[aslyfox]

asking us to suggest how to spend your money can be dangerous

it is nice you indicated a budget

according to the OP's Profile " about me " section

this is the current list of equipment

Pentax Cameras
K-70
Photographic Equipment
Pentax K-70
HD PENTAX-DA 16-85mmF3.5-5.6ED DC WR
Pentax HD DA 55-300mm f/4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE
SMC PENTAX-D FA MACRO 100mmF2.8 WR

I have had good luck getting " experienced " equipment from the forums' market place " buy/sell " above

it is sortable by country:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/24-photographic-equipment-sale/?security...d+States&all=1

it appears that there are some possibilities within or close to the budget announced

I know nothing about the lenses or the sellers

be sure to check out the owners reviews under " lenses "

as far as a teleconverter, I think you would lose too much aperture using one with the PLM

Pentax-DA 1.4x AW AF Rear Converter
Introduction

https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-da-14x-aw-af-rear-converter/intr....html?src=lrdb

---

Last edited by aslyfox; 12-09-2020 at 10:04 AM.

[Ho_agie]

Yes, tried putting the gear in my signature but it was grey. Changed that to be darker.

The tele-converter issue you mentioned is a concern. Wasn't sure if that route, though not perfect would still be better than a vintage lens?

I'll look at the links posted as well. Thanks

[jatrax]

If weather sealing and autofocus was not a requirement and you had $300 today, what lens would you look to add? What lens would you enjoy if you wait to spend $600 maximum?

My thought is that with that budget you will not gain anything over using the 55-300 and cropping. You might try the Pentax 1.4x rear converter on the 55-300 but that will cost $400 or so.

I went through the whole list of trying to get a budget long lens. My conclusion, after buying and trying at least 6 different 400 - 500mm lenses was that long lens photography is a "pay to play" sport. If you are not going to invest a good bit of money ($2,000 plus) then don't bother. You will not be happy with the results. The 55-300 is as good as it gets in that price range.

I now have the Pentax DFA 150-450 and I wish I had just bought that first because if I had I would not have wasted the money on the other lenses I bought and then sold.

[Wasp]

How about a 400mm prime?

This one will let the camera do the focusing:

Sigma 400mm F5.6 APO (AF) v3: 1995 > Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

Pentax also made a 400mm with autofocus but it is outside the stated budget:

SMC Pentax-FA* 400mm F5.6 ED [IF] Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

If you are willing to forego such luxury and want to focus yourself:

SMC Pentax-A 400mm F5.6 Reviews - A Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

I have one of the latter that has served me faithfully since the mid eighties.

[termy]

my bad.

didnt read it clearer, that OP does have the PLM.

yeah. perhaps one of the more reasonably priced 400 prime.

[kypfer]

My lightly (but obviously) used Sigma 150-500mm would have been within budget when I bought it a couple of years ago … not sure what the current market prices are like, but well worth considering if you can find one. Given the in-camera stabilisation of the K-70 the lens doesn't need to be the latest (stabilised) version, but if you do get one, the recommendation is not to have both stabilisation systems active at the same time.
If you're using something this big as a "carry-around" lens, consider fitting the strap to the lens and not to the camera body, to reduce any potential strain on the lens mount.
Enjoy

[aaacb]

For wildlife and shooting through the (optical) viewfinder, I would be cautious with manual focus lenses because it's easy to miss and depth of field is shallow. Perhaps if you are comfortable using live view and a tripod, punching in focus it can work nicely. Autofocus isn't a silver bullet either if you have branches or grass in the way, and that's often the case for me.

[Bertrand3000]

I suggest the 55-300 PLM with no converter, only cropping. I suggest using 260mm focal length, the highest with F5.6 aperture and better in quality (and in cropping) than 270-300mm.

[stevebrot]

If you need longer than 300mm and are price conscious, the options are limited. I might suggest one of the retired "Bigma" variants from Sigma:

Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG HSM APO

Sigma 170-500mm F5-6.3 APO DG (screw-drive)

Here is an interesting comparison with the D FA 150-450...

Pentax DFA 150-450mm vs Sigma DG 150-500mm APO HSM. K3-ii test pics. - PentaxForums.com


Steve

[Lowell Goudge]

I think that there needs to be some additional constraints because I doubt that you will ever find anything in the 500-600mm range for less than $300 with the possible exception of either some very old and cheap 500/8 lenses and perhaps some mirror lenses, all of which are manual focus.

What needs to be decided is
- MF vs AF
- Hand held vs Monopod vs Tripod
- Zoom vs Prime
- speed (maximum aperture)
- modern vs legacy
- close focus distance

Each of the points above has a a big impact on your decision. I recently ended my search for a 500+ mm solution with a DA 560/5.6 after shooting and trying many 400+mm options over the almost 40 years I have been shooting.

Considering I blow the OP’s budget by a factor of 20 I think the OP might be interested on how I ended where I did.

- My first tele was a vivitar series 1 70-210 F3.5 which was used with a 2x TC ( TC’s were cheap in both the price and quality). The vivitar itself is a good lens even in today’s standard but thenTC hurt its performance.
- I then moved to a 400mm/5.6 manual focus vivitar lens which was pretty good at the time. And I could work hand held in good daylight. The main drawback was a 20-25 foot minimum focus distance, and it was slow to focus, requiring 300 degree rotation to go from minimum focus to maximum focus
- In wanting more reach, I then went for a celestron C90 spotting scope with a TMount to PK adaptor, this gave me 1000mm F11 and required a tripod. This could focus to less than 1 meter but took about 1000 degrees of rotation 3 or more complete turns of the focusing ring, to go from infinity to 1 meter. It also produces donut bokeh and lacks contrast and needs a huge heavy tripod to limit vibration that leads to image blur
- WhenAF came out, I got a PZ1 body, and the Pentax AF 1.7x adaptor. I coupled this initially with my series 1 zoom, and later with a K300F4 to give me 500mm F6.9 with range selectable af adjustment. This AF adaptor is still recommended by many as the best way with a good 300mm prime to reach 500 mm. The issue is coupling it with a lens that has limited lateral CA and fringing on digital.
-going to digital shortly after the *istD came out I upgraded my old series 1 zoom to a sigma EX APO 70-200/2.8 and the sigma fast tele specific 2x TC with protruding front element that requires a 35 mm dia, 15mm deep recess in the back of the lens to accept it. Only a limited few Pentax and sigma fast tele lenses accept this TC. This gave me 400/5.6 AF in a very hand holdable combo that I still use from time to time today. If it ever dies mechanically I would likely replace it with the DFA 150-450/5.6
- in looking still for more speed and length, a few years ago, I happened upon a Tamron Adaptall II 200-500/5.6 with PKA mount, while optically this lens is pretty good except for fringing with bright backlight situations, it is so unbalanced that it can only be used on a tripod, with a long Acura Swiss adaptor plate and a gimbal head. This does not fit my current shooting style which is to shootnwildlife while hiking or out walking the dog with my wife. I absolutely need hand held

In trying all these options, I ultimately sat and waited and looked repeatedly at the sigma 500/4.5 and Pentax 560/5.6. Ultimately the Pentax lens won out.

Looking back at all of what I tried, NONE of these options suits the budget for the OP The only thing I didn’t try, and which the op might want to consider is one of the many sigma xx-500 mm F6.3 lenses I.e. the 50-500, or one off then150/170-500 mm AF zooms. Many PF members have them, and overall might today be the best bang for the buck

Either that or a good 300/4 and the 1.7x AF adaptor but for sure, you need to watch on the 300/4 for lateral CA and the purple fringing.

[aslyfox]

. . . . I think I have a good setup for my interests, which is landscape, nature, and wildlife. I have no illusions of making money from my photos, but enjoy the stress relief of getting outside and the creative aspect of photography. I have found that there are just some shots that I need a longer focal length for. I'd be willing to throw in for one more lens to capture that eagle that won't move any closer or that elk I'm not risking getting any closer to. . . .

some clarifications which might be helpful to get good recommendations:

I agree the low end of the budget - $300 is very unlikely $600 might be doable

what does the OP mean about getting outside ?

is weight and size an issue ?

are we talking about a blind situation where a tripod or monopod can be used or will the OP be on the move, by car or foot, looking for target of opportunity ?

what distance between the photographer and the " target " is anticipated ?

will the noise of screw drive be a problem ?

would the OP be willing to look at a " mirror " lens ?

some can be quite good, some quite bad

[eyespywithmyi]

I think that there needs to be some additional constraints because I doubt that you will ever find anything in the 500-600mm range for less than $300 with the possible exception of either some very old and cheap 500/8 lenses and perhaps some mirror lenses, all of which are manual focus.

What needs to be decided is
- MF vs AF
- Hand held vs Monopod vs Tripod
- Zoom vs Prime
- speed (maximum aperture)
- modern vs legacy
- close focus distance

Each of the points above has a a big impact on your decision. I recently ended my search for a 500+ mm solution with a DA 560/5.6 after shooting and trying many 400+mm options over the almost 40 years I have been shooting.

Considering I blow the OP’s budget by a factor of 20 I think the OP might be interested on how I ended where I did.

- My first tele was a vivitar series 1 70-210 F3.5 which was used with a 2x TC ( TC’s were cheap in both the price and quality). The vivitar itself is a good lens even in today’s standard but thenTC hurt its performance.
- I then moved to a 400mm/5.6 manual focus vivitar lens which was pretty good at the time. And I could work hand held in good daylight. The main drawback was a 20-25 foot minimum focus distance, and it was slow to focus, requiring 300 degree rotation to go from minimum focus to maximum focus
- In wanting more reach, I then went for a celestron C90 spotting scope with a TMount to PK adaptor, this gave me 1000mm F11 and required a tripod. This could focus to less than 1 meter but took about 1000 degrees of rotation 3 or more complete turns of the focusing ring, to go from infinity to 1 meter. It also produces donut bokeh and lacks contrast and needs a huge heavy tripod to limit vibration that leads to image blur
- WhenAF came out, I got a PZ1 body, and the Pentax AF 1.7x adaptor. I coupled this initially with my series 1 zoom, and later with a K300F4 to give me 500mm F6.9 with range selectable af adjustment. This AF adaptor is still recommended by many as the best way with a good 300mm prime to reach 500 mm. The issue is coupling it with a lens that has limited lateral CA and fringing on digital.
-going to digital shortly after the *istD came out I upgraded my old series 1 zoom to a sigma EX APO 70-200/2.8 and the sigma fast tele specific 2x TC with protruding front element that requires a 35 mm dia, 15mm deep recess in the back of the lens to accept it. Only a limited few Pentax and sigma fast tele lenses accept this TC. This gave me 400/5.6 AF in a very hand holdable combo that I still use from time to time today. If it ever dies mechanically I would likely replace it with the DFA 150-450/5.6
- in looking still for more speed and length, a few years ago, I happened upon a Tamron Adaptall II 200-500/5.6 with PKA mount, while optically this lens is pretty good except for fringing with bright backlight situations, it is so unbalanced that it can only be used on a tripod, with a long Acura Swiss adaptor plate and a gimbal head. This does not fit my current shooting style which is to shootnwildlife while hiking or out walking the dog with my wife. I absolutely need hand held

In trying all these options, I ultimately sat and waited and looked repeatedly at the sigma 500/4.5 and Pentax 560/5.6. Ultimately the Pentax lens won out.

Looking back at all of what I tried, NONE of these options suits the budget for the OP The only thing I didn’t try, and which the op might want to consider is one of the many sigma xx-500 mm F6.3 lenses I.e. the 50-500, or one off then150/170-500 mm AF zooms. Many PF members have them, and overall might today be the best bang for the buck

Either that or a good 300/4 and the 1.7x AF adaptor but for sure, you need to watch on the 300/4 for lateral CA and the purple fringing.

Great read, thanks for documenting your journey. So you carry and handhold the 560? It's very tempting but I use my 150-450 for birds and sometimes I'm holding the lens up for a bit trying to capture a flitty little songbird and it starts to get heavy after a bit of holding it up. Time for more pushups for me I guess...