Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-13-2009, 06:32 PM   #16
Veteran Member
RawheaD's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: MA, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 831
Thanks for the (somewhat conflicting? :-) input!!


I'm feeling the 60-250mm. My feeling is that if I get the 50-135mm, I would still long for a DA* quality lens between 135-300mm no matter what, so I will have to, at some point, buy the *200 and maybe even the *300 (or go ahead an buy the 60-250 anyway), but if I buy the 60-250mm, there's a very good chance I'll just be satisfied with it so that I won't necessarily be longing for the 50-135mm.

If not, I probably won't be loosing too much if I had to sell the 60-250mm to get a 50-135mm :-)

11-26-2009, 11:37 PM   #17
Veteran Member
MJB DIGITAL's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: st. louis
Posts: 1,173
I have a 50-135 and my 70-300 is a cheap sigma.

It might be that I prefer the good glass, but I haven't really had the need for a longer focal length than 135 and never use the sigma. But I have been shooting pretty much nothing but weddings lately.
11-27-2009, 04:04 PM   #18
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: West Sussex UK
Posts: 235
Equally - no offence intended but I have seen a lot better images from the 60-250.

It may be a hosting issue or possibly you do not have a good example but on a good day this lens gets close to the DA*300.
11-27-2009, 08:32 PM   #19
New Member




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Washington State
Posts: 8
QuoteOriginally posted by RawheaD Quote
If the 60-250mm will sufficiently cover the 60-135mm range, then I won't hesitate selling the 55-300 and getting the 60-250. However, if the 50-135 is noticably better in that range, then I might get that instead, and keep the 55-300mm... maybe until I buy the DA*300
I'm in the same boat, I'm trying to decide between getting the 60-250 or the 50-135 and the DA* 300

11-29-2009, 06:58 PM   #20
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,102
QuoteOriginally posted by ironcorn Quote
I'm in the same boat, I'm trying to decide between getting the 60-250 or the 50-135 and the DA* 300
Lately I've really been unhappy with myself that I have zooms and primes covering up to 75mm, then jump to a 125mm (MF), then jump to a 300mm, with a major hole between 125mm and 300mm. (And I don't always travel with the Voitlander 125mm due to its rarity either, making my hole in my range even larger). I've had many shooting opportunities lately that would have worked out much better if I had something in the 200mm range or a bit wider. So, just an fyi in that regard of leaving the 135mm - 300mm range w/o a lens to cover it.
11-29-2009, 07:27 PM   #21
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,535
QuoteOriginally posted by m8o Quote
Lately I've really been unhappy with myself that I have zooms and primes covering up to 75mm, then jump to a 125mm (MF), then jump to a 300mm, with a major hole between 125mm and 300mm. (And I don't always travel with the Voitlander 125mm due to its rarity either, making my hole in my range even larger). I've had many shooting opportunities lately that would have worked out much better if I had something in the 200mm range or a bit wider. So, just an fyi in that regard of leaving the 135mm - 300mm range w/o a lens to cover it.
That is due entirely to shooting style. I have just given my A 70-210/4 to my daughter for her birthday. I use no lenses between the 50-135 and my 400. I did use the 70-210 for some shots, one day only. It gives me nothing that suits my shooting style. Now if I could afford the A* 250-600/5.6 ...
11-29-2009, 07:43 PM   #22
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,256
Creampuff, you said:"I dare say if you're looking at one lens that can substitute the DA* 50-135mm, DA* 200mm and DA* 300mm, this is it." Perhaps so, but if you are into bird/wildlife photography, I don't think "this is it". IMHO the 60-250 @ can't really replace the 300 f4.
Perhaps I am wrong because I don't own a 60-250.
But for those who, just like me, are missing focla length between 85-100 to 300 ... take a look at this thread:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/81402-sold-len...at-i-need.html
Maybe one should also look into the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 to "fill that gap".
JP

Last edited by jpzk; 11-29-2009 at 07:50 PM.
12-10-2009, 01:57 AM   #23
Veteran Member
Zorglub's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 486
A couple of shots with the 60-250. I usually prefer primes, but for telephoto this is a great package - ok weight, very useful range IMO.





12-10-2009, 12:54 PM   #24
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,102
QuoteOriginally posted by Canada_Rockies Quote
That is due entirely to shooting style. I have just given my A 70-210/4 to my daughter for her birthday. I use no lenses between the 50-135 and my 400. I did use the 70-210 for some shots, one day only. It gives me nothing that suits my shooting style. Now if I could afford the A* 250-600/5.6 ...
I based my statement you are referring to to when I was recently on a cruise in the Baltic. There were numerous instances where I was on the ship in port or leaving and the 300mm was too long a lens to properly do the scene I wanted to shoot justice, and the next shorter lens I had of 75mm too wide to isolate what I wanted to shoot and/or give adequate detail of the scene (ignoring the fact I can't really be swapping lenses while leaving port... time being of the essence). Even on the largest ship (which we were on) one has a very limited distance one could walk forward or back when on deck and "zoom with your feet". Now yes, if your shooting style is to not take the scenes I wanted to take photos of at that fleeting moment in time, yes, you wouldn't find you need the range. So that statement is true in that sense.
12-10-2009, 01:27 PM   #25
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,185
QuoteOriginally posted by m8o Quote
I based my statement you are referring to to when I was recently on a cruise in the Baltic. There were numerous instances where I was on the ship in port or leaving and the 300mm was too long a lens to properly do the scene I wanted to shoot justice, and the next shorter lens I had of 75mm too wide to isolate what I wanted to shoot and/or give adequate detail of the scene (ignoring the fact I can't really be swapping lenses while leaving port... time being of the essence). Even on the largest ship (which we were on) one has a very limited distance one could walk forward or back when on deck and "zoom with your feet". Now yes, if your shooting style is to not take the scenes I wanted to take photos of at that fleeting moment in time, yes, you wouldn't find you need the range. So that statement is true in that sense.
[smart aleck]
If the 300mm was too long and you were leaving port, why didn't you just wait until the ship moved farther away?
[/smart aleck]
12-10-2009, 02:11 PM   #26
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Rhyl - North Wales
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 33
Haven't posted a shot on here for ages. This was with the K10d.


This with the K7

12-10-2009, 02:38 PM   #27
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,102
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
[smart aleck]
If the 300mm was too long and you were leaving port, why didn't you just wait until the ship moved farther away?
[/smart aleck]
That only works for things behind you, not along side, like other ships... I have a load more of ship's bums than sides for that reason.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
60-250mm, da*, f4, k-mount, pentax da* 60-250mm, pentax lens, photos, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Test Photos: DA* 60-250mm, Pentax-F 1.7X AFA, and Tamron-F 1/4X Pz-AF MC4 SOldBear Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 1 03-19-2010 05:03 PM
PENTAX 18-250mm VS QUANTARAY 70-300mm@250mm charliezap Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 02-08-2010 11:38 PM
Photos with DA* 60-250mm FengyBoy Post Your Photos! 9 05-02-2009 03:05 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:08 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top