[Lukasabs]

Dear Forum-members,

I currently own a Pentax K-70 together with my beloved "HD PENTAX-DA 16-85mm f/3,5~5,6 ED DC WR" lens.


As I will visit multiple national parks in the united states in a couple of months (Yellowstone, Arches, Bryce Canyon, Grand Canyon, Zion, etc.), I want to buy a zoom lens for better wildlife and nature photography.

I´ve been researching for quite some time now and for me it comes down to either the "HD PENTAX-D FA 70-210mm F4 ED SDM WR" for 1200$ or the "HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 PLM WR RE" for less than half the price. I´ve read many reviews (also here in the forum) and am torn between those two lenses. I am fully aware that the 70-210mm lens is designed for full frame cameras, but according to the in depth reviews it works very fine with APS-C as well.

I am simply wondering if my Pentax K-70 can use the full potential of the 70-210mm lens. Or would it be wasted money in your opinion and I should go with the cheaper 55-300mm lens? If the 70-210mm lens is still significantly better on APS-C Systems, I would be willing to pay the higher price.


I would really appreciate your opinions and experiences on both lenses.

Thank you very much in advance,
Lukas

[Sterby]

Dear Forum-members,

I currently own a Pentax K-70 together with my beloved "HD PENTAX-DA 16-85mm f/3,5~5,6 ED DC WR" lens.


As I will visit multiple national parks in the united states in a couple of months (Yellowstone, Arches, Bryce Canyon, Grand Canyon, Zion, etc.), I want to buy a zoom lens for better wildlife and nature photography.

I´ve been researching for quite some time now and for me it comes down to either the "HD PENTAX-D FA 70-210mm F4 ED SDM WR" for 1200$ or the "HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 PLM WR RE" for less than half the price. I´ve read many reviews (also here in the forum) and am torn between those two lenses. I am fully aware that the 70-210mm lens is designed for full frame cameras, but according to the in depth reviews it works very fine with APS-C as well.

I am simply wondering if my Pentax K-70 can use the full potential of the 70-210mm lens. Or would it be wasted money in your opinion and I should go with the cheaper 55-300mm lens? If the 70-210mm lens is still significantly better on APS-C Systems, I would be willing to pay the higher price.


I would really appreciate your opinions and experiences on both lenses.

Thank you very much in advance,
Lukas

Greetings Lukas from the neighborhood. Your "kit" lens is a superb choice for starting out, it is one of the sharpest zoom lens, it will be great for landscapes and allaround snapping. Don't worry if your shots turn out less than expected, just shoot some more and try to find interesting stuff to show off at home. Do not be afraid to go full tourist while being a tourist.
For wildlife those two lenses (55-300 and 70-210) are somewhat usable, the 55-300 PLM is a bit darker than the earlier versions, plus I don't trust collapsible designs. The 70-210 is optically superb but f/4 and weighs the same as the Tamron 70-200/2.8 IF Macro. I would also consider the DA* 60-250/4, superb optics, more focal length and can play well with the DA 1.4x TC. I'm not going to recommend the 150-450 because no matter how nice it is it costs way too much for something that is essentially a Bigma.


For comparison, my route for wildlife was starting with a disappointing DA 50-200, then getting the Tamron 70-200/2.8 and DA TC, then getting a Sigma 50-500 "Bigma" (big mistake, baaaad bokeh, very heavy, dark) and quickly replacing it with a DA* 300/4.

The 300/4 and the 1.4x TC was my main wildlife setup on the K-3 and now on the K-1.
What you want is good optics with bokeh rendition that doesn't make you puke and light enough to be able to carry it around all day.

Also by visiting national parks, be aware there will be rules for photographers, some parks don't allow tripods or long lenses (or groups over a certain number), also they might prohibit photography at certain locations, lookout points.
Make sure you carry enough water, a compass and map, and make sure your phone is charged to be able to call emergency or check GPS on map. And please don't litter.

[ramseybuckeye]

I have the 55-300PLM and highly recommend it, especially since you mention wildlife. It is a fast focusing lens which is obviously a plus for wildlife. Actually, with sufficient light it combines well with the DA 1.4 rear converter. The autofocus may struggle in low light, like in a deep woods or during twilight. A better combination for wildlife is the DA*300 and tc, but that obviously is not a zoom. I don’t know much about the 70-210 but I know it is too short for a lot of wildlife situations, but being F4 is a big plus.

I would suggest searching Pentax Forums and Flickr for photos of the places you are going and see what photos you may like, check the lens, focal length, aperture, shutter speed, etc and think how you would do it. Remember at a lot of places you won’t be able to get closer, or farther back. And in a place like Yellowstone wildlife sightings can be often and sometimes unexpected so be ready. Get out very early and enjoy morning twilight and the sunrise, and stay out until it’s completely dark. Enjoy nature’s best lighting while you’re at these places, and a tripod is a must for landscapes at those times anyway.

Yellowstone is the only one of those that I’ve been to. There is so much to see and enjoy there, the only things that I wouldn’t do the next time would be Old Faithful, just a lot of people and way too touristy and frankly boring. And a hike we too on Beaver Pond Trail, which was OK, but there are no beaver ponds near it.

[Sterby]

I am simply wondering if my Pentax K-70 can use the full potential of the 70-210mm lens. Or would it be wasted money

Looks like I missed out on this little gem. In short, no. Let me explain, you see it is a stupid question so you should not worry about it.
The 70-200 is the kind of lens everyone should have in their lineup, it is an excellent lens and the most versatile. You can use it as a portrait lens, a landscape lens, you can do some wildlife, it is perfect for events, and for nature shots it is second to none.
You might be wondering putting a "pro" lens on your entry body is weird, but actually it is the most recommended way of building up one's set. The body is only there to provide the sensor (or film) otherwise it is a replaceable throwaway thing. The most important thing by far is the lens in front.

Get the good lens, replace body for better later, it is the cheaper part anyway.
In the sense of the 70-200, the f/4 variants have much less difference on crop bodies and FF. The f/2.8 is somewhat different. Both provide excellent image on crop and you will be blown away every time, but once you try it on a FF sensor it will be a whole different world, much more so with the f/2.8. Can't really describe it here, but the 70-200/2.8 gives a kind of etherial, characteristic image on FF that is hard to achieve on crop. That is to say on crop it will still provide breathtaking images. Assuming your subject, composition and background is chosen right, of course.

So, again, in short: don't worry about it.

Also linking a video about this subject from an englishman in Hong Kong:

You Tube

You Tube

[gump]

The 55-300 PLM has served well for my needs (Custer State Park, South Dakota)

[robgski]

A lot of the places you are going, you are more likely to want a wide angle. You might not want to be stopping to change lenses all the time, either. Assuming you are bring your 16-85mm, the 55-300 PLM is probably the better choice. it has a longer zoom range, and will be a little wider than the 70-210mm.
Get a CPL, and possibly an ND 4 filter, because the midday sun will be very bright.

Enjoy your trip, it's a beautiful part of the world you will be visiting. I look forward to seeing your pictures.

[UncleVanya]

I have used but never owned the 70-210/4. I own the 55-300 PLM, The DA* 60-250/4, the DA* 200/2.8, the FA* 300/4.5, and a DA 55-300 older design.

For wildlife either the 300/4.5 or 55-300 PLM would be my first choice. The DA* 60-250 would be next.

The 70-210 is simply not long enough in my view. It’sa good lens, but the DA* 60-250 is longer and I think it’s sharper. But the 60-250 is also slower focusing.

The 55-300 PLM is a nice light lens with excellent reach and speedy focusing. Hard to fault it. Yes it’s not optically fast, The iso will go up vs something like the 70-210/4 but it is sharp and light and compact and you are likely to bring it with you over something heavier. I highly recommend getting it. The older 55-300 models are quite good also, but they are slower and noisier focusing. They also don’t collapse for transport in a small camera bag. I would still recommend one as a cheap option if you’re unsure and one was easier to get. But the 55-300 PLM is my starting wildlife recommendation.

---------- Post added 07-31-22 at 10:08 AM ----------

Note that the HD DA 1.4x teleconverter is more usable on the 300, 60-250, and 70-210 than the 55-300. If you add it into the mix then the ultimate recommendation might change.

[AstroDave]

As I will visit multiple national parks in the united states in a couple of months (Yellowstone, Arches, Bryce Canyon, Grand Canyon, Zion, etc.), I want to buy a zoom lens for better wildlife and nature photography.

I've been to all of those. Not to confuse things, but I would suggest you also think about a wider lens! Aside from wildlife, all these parks offer fantastic vistas (some, perhaps, after some hiking) that cry out for a wide-angle view.

Let me know if you pass through Flagstaff, Arizona on your way to/from the Grand Canyon! Let's do lunch.

ps robgski beat me to it about wide angle!

[wadge22]

Agree with others saying that 210 probably isn't long enough to be ideal for a lot of wildlife. And that DA* 60-250 should also at least be on your short list. Nevertheless, given how satisfied most people are with it, I think 55-300 will probably be an excellent choice.

[northcoastgreg]

I also agree that the 70-210 won't be long enough for wild-life. With the kind of money that DFA lens costs, you'd probably track down a DA* 300, which will producing stunning images. Or, if you want to save some money and have something that will give you more versatility, get the DA 55-300 PLM. Not only is decent for wildlife, but at the wider end it's great for telephoto landscapes. Last time I visited a several of National Parks in the West, I used that PLM more than any other lens in my kit---and I also brought along the K-1 with the DFA 15-30 and DFA 28-105. There's a lot of opportunities for telephoto landscapes in places Bryce, Yellowstone, Glacier, Arches, Grand Tetons, Death Valley, Grand Canyon, etc.

Here's what the PLM can do at Bryce Canyon:

[ToddK]

In my opinion, you might want to add a second body as a back-up, and as a way to keep your DA16-85 and a longer zoom both mounted without having to swap out lenses. I now travel with my DA16-85 and the 55-300 PLM each mounted to a body. I used to take my DA*60-250, but the PLM allows for the second body which I prefer. On a trip, my DA16-85 mounts to my K-5 and the PLM on my K-3II.

northcoastgreg's images are a very good demonstration of how well the PLM performs.

[Sterby]

In my opinion, you might want to add a second body as a back-up, and as a way to keep your DA16-85 and a longer zoom both mounted without having to swap out lenses. I now travel with my DA16-85 and the 55-300 PLM each mounted to a body. I used to take my DA*60-250, but the PLM allows for the second body which I prefer. On a trip, my DA16-85 mounts to my K-5 and the PLM on my K-3II.

northcoastgreg's images are a very good demonstration of how well the PLM performs.

Good idea, but why not get a 645z as well, I heard it is best for landscape photography, so this way he can do his everyday snaps on his K-70, do wildlife and nature on his K-1 MkII while waiting for the light to hit that tree just the right way on his 645z

[UncleVanya]

I’m also going to add that the da* 60-250 is a tougher lens than the 70-210 or 55-300 PLM. I have handled all of these and the 60-250 is by far the best built. That said it’s also the best of the three for landscape photos but not by a lot. It’s also heavier than the others. It extends while zooming as does the 55-300 while the 70-210 is internal zoom.

Whatever you pick will serve you well I’m sure. Keep in mind weight and comfort and you should be ok. A backup body isn’t a bad idea and rental here in the states is a viable option. Lensrentals.com can deliver to a holding location like FedEx and you can pick up and drop off near the destination.

Last bit of advice. The skies out there are dark. Try some astrolandscape stuff.

[RICHARD L.]

[jgnfld]

I'm partial to the 55-300 PLM outdoors. Like today while I was single-handing my 27' sailboat in 25 knot gusty, swirling winds inside an arm heeling all over the place even while double reefed fore-and-aft and a little minke decided to come up literally within touching distance with a boathook and then to follow me for a few breaths (scared me half to death as I hadn't heard him earlier due to all the wind and sailing noise like you normally do!). Missed the best opportunity when he kindof spy-hopped like a seal on the initial surfacing. But here he is following me. Didn't have time to change settings from landscape which is what I was photographing earlier so this is f8, 1/200 sec (way too slow, sadly--especially in these very gusty conditions with the wind coming straight off that bluff to the west), ISO 200, 63mm(!!!).


KP here, but my K-70 would have delivered an identical pic in these conditions with these settings.