Budget Telephoto Lens

Thekillerqueen · 08-26-2021, 12:52 AM

Is there such thing as a GOOD budget telephoto lens?

I’ve been using a Sigma 28-200mm for the last 8 years and really need to upgrade. It takes some lovely shots but when it comes to wildlife photography such as birds, I just don’t have the zoom power, even with the 2x MC4 fitted.

I’ve seen some 400mm M8’s going on ebay for under £100 and various others, but are they worth it?

I know nothing about lenses , and my kidneys aren’t in the best condition to be sold to afford a proper massive lens like most people seem to have these days.

Any thoughts/suggestions would be appreciated!

**GUB** · 08-26-2021, 01:06 AM

Originally posted by Thekillerqueen

I’ve seen some 400mm M8’s going on ebay for under £100 and various others, but are they worth it?

A lot of the older ones are capable of sharp images and are cheap enough. Trouble is they are manual focus - up to you and your subject matter whether that is an issue or not.

rozand · 08-26-2021, 01:26 AM

try the sigma 400mm apo tele, with af, often forgotten

https://500px.com/photo/1036324997

AfterPentax Mark II · 08-26-2021, 01:37 AM - **2 Likes**

I was always convinced that the words "good" an "budget" should not be used in the same line.

**termy** · 08-26-2021, 01:37 AM

think, first of all.

Got to define what is your "budget".

To some, USD400 is A LOT of money.
For some, USD1000 is considered "small change".

But, without knowing the above, i will think, consideration has to be given to the following >>

1) Pentax DA 55-300 PLM
(superb image quality, extremely portable size)

2) Sigma 70-300 DG OS.

3) Tamron 70-300.

4) (assuming you can push it to USD500-600, you could have two possible choices)
Sigma 100-300 f4,
Sigma 120-400 DG OS HSM.
Sigma 135-400 APO DG

And if you don't mind manual focus, there be others as well, such as >>

5) Tamron Adaptall 60-300.

6) Tokina AT-X 100-300 f4

35mmfilmfan · 08-26-2021, 01:39 AM

Until I got my Sigma 150-500, I was content with my Pentax 55-300 for wildlife (mainly birds, including BIF) - on a K3, a certain amount of cropping is also feasible. Also tried a cheap 500mm mirror lens - usable, but often somewhat soft.

BTW, the OP indicated a price of £100 for the lens originally envisaged - this may be the upper limit of the available budget.

biz-engineer · 08-26-2021, 02:00 AM - **1 Like**

About five or six years ago I asked the same question in the forum, I was looking for an affordable long lens for birding.
The lowest cost , yet quality lenses, I found were old manual focus Pentax, Tokina or Nikon 400mm f5.6 lenses.
Mirror lenses are cheap, but you get what you paid for.

The very cheapest way to get outstanding wildlife shot without spending a lot of money was to use the lenses I already have , plus remote control of camera / wifi ImageSync, with me standing 2 to 4 meters behind the camera.
Camera tethering on mobile phone is a game changer, long lenses (600mm etc) were a must have in the past, but not anymore with Wifi tethering, electronic remote control is a lot cheaper and lighter than large glass.
I now shot birds with my 70-200 lens on full frame.

Thekillerqueen · 08-26-2021, 02:31 AM

Originally posted by AfterPentax Mark II

I was always convinced that the words "good" an "budget" should not be used in the same line.

Yes I am the same

**marcusBMG** · 08-26-2021, 03:38 AM - **1 Like**

The qq are:

1. budget
2. photographic intent:
- > desired field of view = focal length
-> AF necessary/desired/ok without
-> prime or zoom, size and weight

For wildlife, I would push towards 400mm. 300mm tends to be a bit short, even on apsc.
There is no substitute for browsing and reading around, to ease you towards one of the options. This is a perrrenial question and there are numerous threads here eg

Any suggestions on a beginners level wildlife camera/kit under $1000 CAD? - PentaxForums.com

experiences with Soligor 400 mm f/6.3? - PentaxForums.com

Replacement for old Sigma 400 non-APO? - PentaxForums.com

Telephoto lenses for shooting tits : 10 lenses compared - PentaxForums.com

Also for info on particular lenses, as well as the reviews here there is lots of discussion on mflenses.com. The onsite mflenses search function is a bit clunky, just googling is often quicker to find a particular thread on there.

biz-engineer · 08-26-2021, 03:48 AM

Originally posted by marcusBMG

For wildlife, I would push towards 400mm. 300mm tends to be a bit short, even on apsc.

Or 200mm with remote trigger. David Yarrow shoots safaris with a 35mm and radio remote trigger

Other than that, I can confirm, 400mm with apsc or 600mm full frame. Some folks get a 500mm prime add/remove a 1.4x teleconverter.

**pepperberry farm** · 08-26-2021, 04:30 AM

Originally posted by marcusBMG

The qq are:

1. budget
2. photographic intent:
- > desired field of view = focal length
-> AF necessary/desired/ok without
-> prime or zoom

For wildlife, I would push towards 400mm. 300mm tends to be a bit short, even on apsc.
There is no substitute for browsing and reading around, to ease you towards one of the options. This is a perrrenial question and there are numerous threads here eg

Any suggestions on a beginners level wildlife camera/kit under $1000 CAD? - PentaxForums.com

experiences with Soligor 400 mm f/6.3? - PentaxForums.com

Replacement for old Sigma 400 non-APO? - PentaxForums.com

Telephoto lenses for shooting tits : 10 lenses compared - PentaxForums.com

Also for info on particular lenses, as well as the reviews here there is lots of discussion on mflenses.com. The onsite mflenses search function is a bit clunky, just googling is often quicker to find a particular thread on there.

agreed - this comes up regularly....

my response is always the same - do not buy a cheap telephoto lens (prime or zoom) expecting it to satisfy this itch....

it won't satisfy you and now you have another cheap lens that you either have to store or attempt to sell....

save your money, do not buy a cheap old telephoto (especially a zoom), and wait for a decent deal on a good known prime at the focal length you want....

do your research, decide if 300mm is enough or do you want 400mm?

I did this - bought this cheap zoom, that cheap prime, etc.... and was never happy with any of them....

I finally saved up and bought a solid FA* 300/4.5 and this has been my only long telephoto for quite awhile and I'm entirely happy with it....

**marcusBMG** · 08-26-2021, 05:00 AM

While I agreee with you in a general sense p f, IMO there is value in the old lenses. Satisfaction is getting decent photos and the better ones are capable of that. Wildlife photography especially is opportunistic and if you don't have a lens then you don't get a pic. Plus you get on the learning curve. The trick is an informed choice of vintage lens. And I am not surprised if there is disappointment with this or that x-300mm AF consumer zoom, quite frankly most of these are a bit of a waste of time at 300mm, being slow and sub-par resolution, (the pentax FA 100-300mm I acquired a few months ago for next to nothing was a surprise exception, see my pics in the 300mm thread and the FA unlimited thread). Value, in the end, is in the eye of the beholder.

With telephotos, you pay exponentially more for incremental improvements in IQ.

Tamron "nestar" 400mm f6.9 @ f11. IMO the best of the real old 1960's vintage t-mount preset 400's. This lens has the cachet of being the only non-mirror 400mm that you can fit in your pocket.

Thekillerqueen · 08-26-2021, 07:38 AM

thanks all , very helpful!

**aslyfox** · 08-26-2021, 07:48 AM

Originally posted by Thekillerqueen

Is there such thing as a GOOD budget telephoto lens?

I’ve been using a Sigma 28-200mm for the last 8 years and really need to upgrade. It takes some lovely shots but when it comes to wildlife photography such as birds, I just don’t have the zoom power, even with the 2x MC4 fitted.

I’ve seen some 400mm M8’s going on ebay for under £100 and various others, but are they worth it?

I know nothing about lenses , and my kidneys aren’t in the best condition to be sold to afford a proper massive lens like most people seem to have these days.

Any thoughts/suggestions would be appreciated!

I was taught that with the exception of the vivitar series 1 lenses, a lot of the " film era " zooms were " compromises "

my initial recommendation was to be one of the Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm mf lenses

Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm Line Lens Reviews - Vivitar Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

I have Ver. 3

but I think those would be too " short "

I think more information is needed from the OP to get good recommendatons

what camera is being used ?

has the OP looked at the information found under " lenses " above yet

what are the photographic goals

what focal length

zoom or prime

is AF needed or desired

would MF do

are some of the questions I would ask the OP to answer

**termy** · 08-26-2021, 08:26 AM

With what i encountered before.

The main thing will be, the distance of subject.

so-called cheap zooms, when snapping subjects that are relatively near (ie from Minimum focus distance up to maybe 10metres, 12metres), these "budget zooms" are still able to produce fine images
("Budget zooms such as Sigma 70-300 DG OS, Pentax FA 80-320).

(But this is what i encountered.
I wouldn't think that everyone will have similar experience)

And some of the older lenses, such as Tamron Adaptall 80-200 f2.8, Tamron Adaptall 60-300, they really are rather fine lenses and don't give "cheap images".

I really wouldn't dismiss "budget zooms".

Different people have different needs, wants, and finances.
And there are different lenses that can be suitable for some, even if not all.

08-26-2021, 12:52 AM	#1
Thekillerqueen New Member Join Date: Jan 2016 Posts: 20	Budget Telephoto Lens Is there such thing as a GOOD budget telephoto lens? I’ve been using a Sigma 28-200mm for the last 8 years and really need to upgrade. It takes some lovely shots but when it comes to wildlife photography such as birds, I just don’t have the zoom power, even with the 2x MC4 fitted. I’ve seen some 400mm M8’s going on ebay for under £100 and various others, but are they worth it? I know nothing about lenses , and my kidneys aren’t in the best condition to be sold to afford a proper massive lens like most people seem to have these days. Any thoughts/suggestions would be appreciated!

08-26-2021, 01:26 AM	#3
rozand New Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Kathu Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 22	try the sigma 400mm apo tele, with af, often forgotten https://500px.com/photo/1036324997 Last edited by rozand; 08-26-2021 at 02:37 AM.

08-26-2021, 01:39 AM	#6
35mmfilmfan Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2016 Location: Norfolk, UK Posts: 4,329	Until I got my Sigma 150-500, I was content with my Pentax 55-300 for wildlife (mainly birds, including BIF) - on a K3, a certain amount of cropping is also feasible. Also tried a cheap 500mm mirror lens - usable, but often somewhat soft. BTW, the OP indicated a price of £100 for the lens originally envisaged - this may be the upper limit of the available budget. Last edited by 35mmfilmfan; 08-26-2021 at 01:53 AM.

08-26-2021, 03:38 AM - 1 Like	#9
marcusBMG Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: North Wales Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,868	The qq are: 1. budget 2. photographic intent: - > desired field of view = focal length -> AF necessary/desired/ok without -> prime or zoom, size and weight For wildlife, I would push towards 400mm. 300mm tends to be a bit short, even on apsc. There is no substitute for browsing and reading around, to ease you towards one of the options. This is a perrrenial question and there are numerous threads here eg Any suggestions on a beginners level wildlife camera/kit under $1000 CAD? - PentaxForums.com experiences with Soligor 400 mm f/6.3? - PentaxForums.com Replacement for old Sigma 400 non-APO? - PentaxForums.com Telephoto lenses for shooting tits : 10 lenses compared - PentaxForums.com Also for info on particular lenses, as well as the reviews here there is lots of discussion on mflenses.com. The onsite mflenses search function is a bit clunky, just googling is often quicker to find a particular thread on there. Last edited by marcusBMG; 08-26-2021 at 04:53 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Budget telephoto zoom lens for Sony A330	SuperSyx	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	6	06-11-2016 06:05 PM
Looking for a BUDGET telephoto lens for sports/action shots... I shoot on a K-5	arden_clark	Welcomes and Introductions	8	01-18-2016 09:29 PM
Help Choosing a begginer budget telephoto lens	edgaus	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	29	08-13-2014 08:57 AM
Best budget telephoto lens?	robert	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	05-20-2012 09:08 PM
Budget Telephoto >=300mm	Class A	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	12-04-2008 04:49 AM

08-26-2021, 01:06 AM	#2
GUB Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Wanganui Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,760	Originally posted by Thekillerqueen I’ve seen some 400mm M8’s going on ebay for under £100 and various others, but are they worth it? A lot of the older ones are capable of sharp images and are cheap enough. Trouble is they are manual focus - up to you and your subject matter whether that is an issue or not.

08-26-2021, 01:37 AM - 2 Likes	#4
AfterPentax Mark II Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2021 Posts: 1,461	I was always convinced that the words "good" an "budget" should not be used in the same line.

08-26-2021, 01:37 AM	#5
termy Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2019 Posts: 1,154	think, first of all. Got to define what is your "budget". To some, USD400 is A LOT of money. For some, USD1000 is considered "small change". But, without knowing the above, i will think, consideration has to be given to the following >> 1) Pentax DA 55-300 PLM (superb image quality, extremely portable size) 2) Sigma 70-300 DG OS. 3) Tamron 70-300. 4) (assuming you can push it to USD500-600, you could have two possible choices) Sigma 100-300 f4, Sigma 120-400 DG OS HSM. Sigma 135-400 APO DG And if you don't mind manual focus, there be others as well, such as >> 5) Tamron Adaptall 60-300. 6) Tokina AT-X 100-300 f4

08-26-2021, 02:00 AM - 1 Like	#7
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,231	About five or six years ago I asked the same question in the forum, I was looking for an affordable long lens for birding. The lowest cost , yet quality lenses, I found were old manual focus Pentax, Tokina or Nikon 400mm f5.6 lenses. Mirror lenses are cheap, but you get what you paid for. The very cheapest way to get outstanding wildlife shot without spending a lot of money was to use the lenses I already have , plus remote control of camera / wifi ImageSync, with me standing 2 to 4 meters behind the camera. Camera tethering on mobile phone is a game changer, long lenses (600mm etc) were a must have in the past, but not anymore with Wifi tethering, electronic remote control is a lot cheaper and lighter than large glass. I now shot birds with my 70-200 lens on full frame.

08-26-2021, 02:31 AM	#8
Thekillerqueen New Member Join Date: Jan 2016 Posts: 20 Original Poster	Originally posted by AfterPentax Mark II I was always convinced that the words "good" an "budget" should not be used in the same line. Yes I am the same

08-26-2021, 03:48 AM	#10
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,231	Originally posted by marcusBMG For wildlife, I would push towards 400mm. 300mm tends to be a bit short, even on apsc. Or 200mm with remote trigger. David Yarrow shoots safaris with a 35mm and radio remote trigger Other than that, I can confirm, 400mm with apsc or 600mm full frame. Some folks get a 500mm prime add/remove a 1.4x teleconverter.

08-26-2021, 04:30 AM	#11
pepperberry farm amateur dirt farmer Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: probably out in a field somewhere... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 41,660	Originally posted by marcusBMG The qq are: 1. budget 2. photographic intent: - > desired field of view = focal length -> AF necessary/desired/ok without -> prime or zoom For wildlife, I would push towards 400mm. 300mm tends to be a bit short, even on apsc. There is no substitute for browsing and reading around, to ease you towards one of the options. This is a perrrenial question and there are numerous threads here eg Any suggestions on a beginners level wildlife camera/kit under $1000 CAD? - PentaxForums.com experiences with Soligor 400 mm f/6.3? - PentaxForums.com Replacement for old Sigma 400 non-APO? - PentaxForums.com Telephoto lenses for shooting tits : 10 lenses compared - PentaxForums.com Also for info on particular lenses, as well as the reviews here there is lots of discussion on mflenses.com. The onsite mflenses search function is a bit clunky, just googling is often quicker to find a particular thread on there. agreed - this comes up regularly.... my response is always the same - do not buy a cheap telephoto lens (prime or zoom) expecting it to satisfy this itch.... it won't satisfy you and now you have another cheap lens that you either have to store or attempt to sell.... save your money, do not buy a cheap old telephoto (especially a zoom), and wait for a decent deal on a good known prime at the focal length you want.... do your research, decide if 300mm is enough or do you want 400mm? I did this - bought this cheap zoom, that cheap prime, etc.... and was never happy with any of them.... I finally saved up and bought a solid FA* 300/4.5 and this has been my only long telephoto for quite awhile and I'm entirely happy with it....

08-26-2021, 07:38 AM	#13
Thekillerqueen New Member Join Date: Jan 2016 Posts: 20 Original Poster	thanks all , very helpful!

08-26-2021, 07:48 AM	#14
aslyfox Seeker of Knowledge Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: Topeka, Kansas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 24,581	Originally posted by Thekillerqueen Is there such thing as a GOOD budget telephoto lens? I’ve been using a Sigma 28-200mm for the last 8 years and really need to upgrade. It takes some lovely shots but when it comes to wildlife photography such as birds, I just don’t have the zoom power, even with the 2x MC4 fitted. I’ve seen some 400mm M8’s going on ebay for under £100 and various others, but are they worth it? I know nothing about lenses , and my kidneys aren’t in the best condition to be sold to afford a proper massive lens like most people seem to have these days. Any thoughts/suggestions would be appreciated! I was taught that with the exception of the vivitar series 1 lenses, a lot of the " film era " zooms were " compromises " my initial recommendation was to be one of the Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm mf lenses Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm Line Lens Reviews - Vivitar Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database I have Ver. 3 but I think those would be too " short " I think more information is needed from the OP to get good recommendatons what camera is being used ? has the OP looked at the information found under " lenses " above yet what are the photographic goals what focal length zoom or prime is AF needed or desired would MF do are some of the questions I would ask the OP to answer

08-26-2021, 08:26 AM	#15
termy Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2019 Posts: 1,154	With what i encountered before. The main thing will be, the distance of subject. so-called cheap zooms, when snapping subjects that are relatively near (ie from Minimum focus distance up to maybe 10metres, 12metres), these "budget zooms" are still able to produce fine images ("Budget zooms such as Sigma 70-300 DG OS, Pentax FA 80-320). (But this is what i encountered. I wouldn't think that everyone will have similar experience) And some of the older lenses, such as Tamron Adaptall 80-200 f2.8, Tamron Adaptall 60-300, they really are rather fine lenses and don't give "cheap images". I really wouldn't dismiss "budget zooms". Different people have different needs, wants, and finances. And there are different lenses that can be suitable for some, even if not all.