DA 50-200 vs Tammy 70-300

rover · 03-16-2009, 12:38 PM

Going to Disney (Yea me!!!) with the Tammy 17-50/2.8, 31 LTD and 77 LTD.
(Oh, the wife and boy are coming with me too.

)

Thinking of just picking up an inexpensive tele zoom to throw in the bag. Both seem to be good bargins from what I have read.

I don't think 300mm is necessary, but if it is there.........

The DA is about an inch shorter, good for travel........but a little more $$$.......

Have I missed anything, is either better in any way over the other?

From what I have read both seem very fit for what I am looking for.

Thanks.

fvalduga · 03-16-2009, 03:03 PM

Da 50-200 is 129USD at Amazon.com. It's a bargain for sure. I'm going to Disney (Florida) as well next week. Are you going to Florida or California? If you see someone with a GX-10 around just say out loud "Felipe" and if it's me we can drink a couple of beers while our wives shop !

Cheers,
Felipe

Andi Lo · 03-16-2009, 03:14 PM

I'm wondering about this as well since the 300mm reach of the tammy would be nice to have... I have the 50-200 and it doesnt get stuck on my body often these days since it's so slow indoors. Hopefully it will see more use in spring / summer though.

Go with the best compact tele! 55-300!

I have that lens on my want list but I'll probably go with a 2.8 lens down the road.

Oh and the 50-200 is amazing combo with DCR 250 Raynox =) I dunno if this applies to the Tammy or 55-300

gokenin · 03-16-2009, 03:21 PM

if you are going to Disney World the only place that you are likely to need anything longer than the 77 will be at Animal Kingdom. You may need some length there if you are planning on doing the Safari but almost nowhere is will you need a long range. I went with the 17-70 and didnt miss not having my 55-300 or my 50-200 on this trip. I find I shot wide more than telephoto at Disney the last couple of trips

kevinschoenmakers · 03-16-2009, 04:15 PM

I have no experience with the 70 - 300, although I decided not to buy it at the time because of bad reviews online. I bought the 50 -200 istead and I'm very happy with it. A downside is the sloppy focussing when there is little light (such as concerts).

Some example photo's, all taken with the k100d super:

rover · 03-16-2009, 05:03 PM

Great shots Kevin!!!

I didn't think of the 55-300, looks like I may have to do some reading in that one.

Felipe, I will be in Florida in May. We miss each other this time, but next time I will buy the beer.

03-16-2009, 12:38 PM	#1
rover Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 149	DA 50-200 vs Tammy 70-300 Going to Disney (Yea me!!!) with the Tammy 17-50/2.8, 31 LTD and 77 LTD. (Oh, the wife and boy are coming with me too. ) Thinking of just picking up an inexpensive tele zoom to throw in the bag. Both seem to be good bargins from what I have read. I don't think 300mm is necessary, but if it is there......... The DA is about an inch shorter, good for travel........but a little more $$$....... Have I missed anything, is either better in any way over the other? From what I have read both seem very fit for what I am looking for. Thanks.

03-16-2009, 03:03 PM	#2
fvalduga Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Porto Alegre - RS Photos: Gallery Posts: 25	Da 50-200 Da 50-200 is 129USD at Amazon.com. It's a bargain for sure. I'm going to Disney (Florida) as well next week. Are you going to Florida or California? If you see someone with a GX-10 around just say out loud "Felipe" and if it's me we can drink a couple of beers while our wives shop ! Cheers, Felipe

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: DA* 16-50mm/2.8, 50-135/2.8, 200/2.8, 300/4, DA 12-24/4, 18-50, 50-200, K10D	Albert Siegel	Sold Items	15	08-14-2010 08:51 AM
Tammy 70-200 versus Sigma 70-200	mi2nc	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	24	11-19-2009 12:47 AM
Tammy 70-300 LD Di MACRO or Sigma 70-300 APO DG MACRO	Ben Hunt	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	01-02-2009 06:11 PM
Pentax 50-200 vs. Sigma 28-200 (vs. Tamron 70-300)	shefaet	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	11-24-2007 10:44 PM

03-16-2009, 03:14 PM	#3
Andi Lo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia Posts: 2,924	I'm wondering about this as well since the 300mm reach of the tammy would be nice to have... I have the 50-200 and it doesnt get stuck on my body often these days since it's so slow indoors. Hopefully it will see more use in spring / summer though. Go with the best compact tele! 55-300! I have that lens on my want list but I'll probably go with a 2.8 lens down the road. Oh and the 50-200 is amazing combo with DCR 250 Raynox =) I dunno if this applies to the Tammy or 55-300

03-16-2009, 03:21 PM	#4
gokenin Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: lowell,ma Posts: 1,899	if you are going to Disney World the only place that you are likely to need anything longer than the 77 will be at Animal Kingdom. You may need some length there if you are planning on doing the Safari but almost nowhere is will you need a long range. I went with the 17-70 and didnt miss not having my 55-300 or my 50-200 on this trip. I find I shot wide more than telephoto at Disney the last couple of trips

03-16-2009, 04:15 PM	#5
kevinschoenmakers Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Shanghai Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,509	I have no experience with the 70 - 300, although I decided not to buy it at the time because of bad reviews online. I bought the 50 -200 istead and I'm very happy with it. A downside is the sloppy focussing when there is little light (such as concerts). Some example photo's, all taken with the k100d super:

03-16-2009, 05:03 PM	#6
rover Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 149 Original Poster	Great shots Kevin!!! I didn't think of the 55-300, looks like I may have to do some reading in that one. Felipe, I will be in Florida in May. We miss each other this time, but next time I will buy the beer.