Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

**jpzk** · 11-26-2009, 03:28 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

I would think one of the 70-200 F2.8's is what yoou would want to get.

the DA300 replaces the long end of the 100-300 you sold, and a 70-200F2.8 gets you the middle range again plus an advantage of 1 stop over what you sold.

At the other end, if you are not into ultra wide, the 16-50 should do everything you want, but I personally would never selel the sigma 10-20, but then again, that's just me.

You're making me feel sorry for having sold those lenses!

Oh well, as long as the buyers are happy, so am I.
True enough that I gain 1 stop which would be quite handy in a lot of situations, and that it would cover the missing link.
Thanks for the reply.

**jpzk** · 11-26-2009, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by Ash

My first thought before seeing all the responses was the Tamron 70-200 with Tamron 1.4x TC, which gives you range between 70 and 280mm. Very fast, good IQ and cost-effective.

If you don't need all the FLs - just a few selecteds, then perhaps a set of 100, 200 and 300 primes would be nice - depends on your budget.

Why didn't I think about that? Good point as a matter of fact!
A 200 prime would be just about right, albeit on the long side a bit. The beautiful DA*200 F2.8 seems like a candidate but ... price-wise ... Ughhhh!
The more I read, the more I tend to lean toward the Tamron.
I'll have to search for some good reviews: I wonder (I will find out) if Photozone would have reviewed it?

JP

**jpzk** · 11-26-2009, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by ivoire

I'm in agreement with Ash.... Tamron 70-200mm and TC

You seem to have a Tamron 70-200 Macro... is this the F2.8 version which we are talking about here?

pcarfan · 11-26-2009, 03:38 PM

Originally posted by jpzk

Consideration under review! I will be looking into that one as well.
Is this a manual focus?

These are AF lenses, and bot the Pentax-F and FA series are optically identical. IQ wise I rate it only a notch below the limiteds and a tad better than the sigma 100-300.

It should be smaller than the 80-200's, and would be easier to put in a bag along with your 300. You do lose 135 to 300. but as I have my 100-300, it works better.

**jpzk** · 11-26-2009, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by pcarfan

These are AF lenses, and bot the Pentax-F and FA series are optically identical. IQ wise I rate it only a notch below the limiteds and a tad better than the sigma 100-300.

It should be smaller than the 80-200's, and would be easier to put in a bag along with your 300. You do lose 135 to 300. but as I have my 100-300, it works better.

Thanks for the reply!

ivoire · 11-26-2009, 04:45 PM

Originally posted by jpzk

You seem to have a Tamron 70-200 Macro... is this the F2.8 version which we are talking about here?

Yes it is. My review of the lens is posted here:

PentaxForums.com Third-Party Pentax Lens Review Database - 70-200 f/2.8 Di LD Macro

**jpzk** · 11-26-2009, 06:01 PM

Originally posted by ivoire

Yes it is. My review of the lens is posted here:

PentaxForums.com Third-Party Pentax Lens Review Database - 70-200 f/2.8 Di LD Macro

Excellent!
Thank you for the link to the reviews.
Cheers!
JP

**jpzk** · 11-26-2009, 07:42 PM

Oh Boy!
I just came back from the store and tested, i.e.: TOOK 4 pics this way:

1. K20D at 1600 ISO
2. K20D at 2000 ISO
3. K7 at 1600 ISO
4. K7 at 2000 ISO
Using a DA*16-50 f2.8 at 50mm; inside the store; BUT I made a mistake and forgot to take the K7 pictures in RAW, which I did with the K20D.
They were taken on a tripod to avoid blurr and because of the low shutter speed, even at 2000 ISO ... that could have an impact on the degree of noise, right?

So ... how do I post those photos here in the thread? Is it really worth doing this since one camera was used in RAW (K20D) and the other (K7) in JPEG? Should I go back and repeat the entire procedure?

Thus far, I can see quite a difference in noise between both cameras, when the photos are seen at 100% enlarged. Definitely more noise with the K7.

JP

Maybe this should be moved to "DSLR Discussions" ... I was to quick to post this.

Raybo · 11-26-2009, 07:52 PM

Originally posted by jpzk

Oh Boy!
I just came back from the store and tested, i.e.: TOOK 4 pics this way:

1. K20D at 1600 ISO
2. K20D at 2000 ISO
3. K7 at 1600 ISO
4. K7 at 2000 ISO
Using a DA*16-50 f2.8 at 50mm; inside the store; BUT I made a mistake and forgot to take the K7 pictures in RAW, which I did with the K20D.
They were taken on a tripod to avoid blurr and because of the low shutter speed, even at 2000 ISO ... that could have an impact on the degree of noise, right?

So ... how do I post those photos here in the thread? Is it really worth doing this since one camera was used in RAW (K20D) and the other (K7) in JPEG? Should I go back and repeat the entire procedure?

Thus far, I can see quite a difference in noise between both cameras, when the photos are seen at 100% enlarged. Definitely more noise with the K7.

JP

Get a free account at Photo Bucket and upload your images....
Image hosting, free photo sharing & video sharing at Photobucket

Once uploaded all you need to do is copy and paste the image code to your message.

**jpzk** · 11-26-2009, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by Raybo

Get a free account at Photo Bucket and upload your images....
Image hosting, free photo sharing & video sharing at Photobucket

Once uploaded all you need to do is copy and paste the image code to your message.

It's been such a long time since I posted photos here that I couldn't remember how to do it.
Thanks for the reminder ... I hope my Photobucket account (which I had completely forgotten about) is still valid.

JP

Raybo · 11-26-2009, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by jpzk

It's been such a long time since I posted photos here that I couldn't remember how to do it.
Thanks for the reminder ... I hope my Photobucket account (which I had completely forgotten about) is still valid.

JP

You're starting to sound like me!

I forget about so much stuff it makes my head spin!

ivoire · 11-26-2009, 08:31 PM

a cropped sample from the Tamron70-200mm f2.8

Andi Lo · 11-26-2009, 10:45 PM

Originally posted by ivoire

a cropped sample from the Tamron70-200mm f2.8

Such an ugly PF... it must be a horrible lens!

Joking aside from the 70-200 candidates that you suggested I am leaning to the Tammy as well. That or the 50-135... The 70-200 will suit me better but I heard so much rave reviews on the 50-130. I think I'll grab whiever good deal comes at me first.

**jpzk** · 11-27-2009, 12:11 PM

Originally posted by Raybo

You're starting to sound like me!

I forget about so much stuff it makes my head spin!

No kidding!
Brain-freeze seems to be "in" theses days ... at least for me.
So, I haven't had the chance to load the pics to PBucket yet, but will soon.
JP

**jpzk** · 11-27-2009, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by Andi Lo

Such an ugly PF... it must be a horrible lens!

Joking aside from the 70-200 candidates that you suggested I am leaning to the Tammy as well. That or the 50-135... The 70-200 will suit me better but I heard so much rave reviews on the 50-130. I think I'll grab whiever good deal comes at me first.

I know both lenses have great reviews now.
I am undecided between both, but leaning toward the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 because of its larger "latitude"
JP

11-26-2009, 03:36 PM	#18
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251 Original Poster	Originally posted by ivoire I'm in agreement with Ash.... Tamron 70-200mm and TC You seem to have a Tamron 70-200 Macro... is this the F2.8 version which we are talking about here? Last edited by jpzk; 11-26-2009 at 03:38 PM. Reason: info missing

11-26-2009, 07:42 PM	#23
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251 Original Poster	Oh Boy! I just came back from the store and tested, i.e.: TOOK 4 pics this way: 1. K20D at 1600 ISO 2. K20D at 2000 ISO 3. K7 at 1600 ISO 4. K7 at 2000 ISO Using a DA16-50 f2.8 at 50mm; inside the store; BUT I made a mistake and forgot to take the K7 pictures in RAW, which I did with the K20D. They were taken on a tripod to avoid blurr and because of the low shutter speed, even at 2000 ISO ... that could have an impact on the degree of noise, right? So ... how do I post those photos here in the thread? Is it really worth doing this since one camera was used in RAW (K20D) and the other (K7) in JPEG? Should I go back and repeat the entire procedure? Thus far, I can see quite a difference in noise between both cameras, when the photos are seen at 100% enlarged. Definitely more noise with the K7. JP Maybe this should be moved to "DSLR Discussions" ... I was to quick to post this. Last edited by jpzk; 11-26-2009 at 07:51 PM. Reason: spelling*

11-26-2009, 08:31 PM	#27
ivoire Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,381	a cropped sample from the Tamron70-200mm f2.8 Last edited by ivoire; 11-03-2010 at 08:44 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Lens advice	mnseawa	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	06-05-2010 10:00 AM
I need lens help/advice	noquarter15	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	03-21-2010 02:05 PM
lens advice	bsod	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	19	06-05-2009 09:08 AM
Lens Advice please...	Amanda	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	11-14-2008 04:17 PM
6 new lens at once; need advice	weatherwise2	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	12-15-2007 03:45 PM

11-26-2009, 03:28 PM	#16
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251 Original Poster	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge I would think one of the 70-200 F2.8's is what yoou would want to get. the DA300 replaces the long end of the 100-300 you sold, and a 70-200F2.8 gets you the middle range again plus an advantage of 1 stop over what you sold. At the other end, if you are not into ultra wide, the 16-50 should do everything you want, but I personally would never selel the sigma 10-20, but then again, that's just me. You're making me feel sorry for having sold those lenses! Oh well, as long as the buyers are happy, so am I. True enough that I gain 1 stop which would be quite handy in a lot of situations, and that it would cover the missing link. Thanks for the reply.

11-26-2009, 03:34 PM	#17
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ash My first thought before seeing all the responses was the Tamron 70-200 with Tamron 1.4x TC, which gives you range between 70 and 280mm. Very fast, good IQ and cost-effective. If you don't need all the FLs - just a few selecteds, then perhaps a set of 100, 200 and 300 primes would be nice - depends on your budget. Why didn't I think about that? Good point as a matter of fact! A 200 prime would be just about right, albeit on the long side a bit. The beautiful DA*200 F2.8 seems like a candidate but ... price-wise ... Ughhhh! The more I read, the more I tend to lean toward the Tamron. I'll have to search for some good reviews: I wonder (I will find out) if Photozone would have reviewed it? JP

11-26-2009, 03:38 PM	#19
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	Originally posted by jpzk Consideration under review! I will be looking into that one as well. Is this a manual focus? These are AF lenses, and bot the Pentax-F and FA series are optically identical. IQ wise I rate it only a notch below the limiteds and a tad better than the sigma 100-300. It should be smaller than the 80-200's, and would be easier to put in a bag along with your 300. You do lose 135 to 300. but as I have my 100-300, it works better.

11-26-2009, 04:38 PM	#20
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251 Original Poster	Originally posted by pcarfan These are AF lenses, and bot the Pentax-F and FA series are optically identical. IQ wise I rate it only a notch below the limiteds and a tad better than the sigma 100-300. It should be smaller than the 80-200's, and would be easier to put in a bag along with your 300. You do lose 135 to 300. but as I have my 100-300, it works better. Thanks for the reply!

11-26-2009, 04:45 PM	#21
ivoire Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,381	Originally posted by jpzk You seem to have a Tamron 70-200 Macro... is this the F2.8 version which we are talking about here? Yes it is. My review of the lens is posted here: PentaxForums.com Third-Party Pentax Lens Review Database - 70-200 f/2.8 Di LD Macro

11-26-2009, 06:01 PM	#22
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251 Original Poster	Originally posted by ivoire Yes it is. My review of the lens is posted here: PentaxForums.com Third-Party Pentax Lens Review Database - 70-200 f/2.8 Di LD Macro Excellent! Thank you for the link to the reviews. Cheers! JP

11-26-2009, 07:52 PM	#24
Raybo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 872	Originally posted by jpzk Oh Boy! I just came back from the store and tested, i.e.: TOOK 4 pics this way: 1. K20D at 1600 ISO 2. K20D at 2000 ISO 3. K7 at 1600 ISO 4. K7 at 2000 ISO Using a DA*16-50 f2.8 at 50mm; inside the store; BUT I made a mistake and forgot to take the K7 pictures in RAW, which I did with the K20D. They were taken on a tripod to avoid blurr and because of the low shutter speed, even at 2000 ISO ... that could have an impact on the degree of noise, right? So ... how do I post those photos here in the thread? Is it really worth doing this since one camera was used in RAW (K20D) and the other (K7) in JPEG? Should I go back and repeat the entire procedure? Thus far, I can see quite a difference in noise between both cameras, when the photos are seen at 100% enlarged. Definitely more noise with the K7. JP Get a free account at Photo Bucket and upload your images.... Image hosting, free photo sharing & video sharing at Photobucket Once uploaded all you need to do is copy and paste the image code to your message.

11-26-2009, 08:15 PM	#25
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251 Original Poster	Originally posted by Raybo Get a free account at Photo Bucket and upload your images.... Image hosting, free photo sharing & video sharing at Photobucket Once uploaded all you need to do is copy and paste the image code to your message. It's been such a long time since I posted photos here that I couldn't remember how to do it. Thanks for the reminder ... I hope my Photobucket account (which I had completely forgotten about) is still valid. JP

11-26-2009, 08:20 PM	#26
Raybo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 872	Originally posted by jpzk It's been such a long time since I posted photos here that I couldn't remember how to do it. Thanks for the reminder ... I hope my Photobucket account (which I had completely forgotten about) is still valid. JP You're starting to sound like me! I forget about so much stuff it makes my head spin!

11-26-2009, 10:45 PM	#28
Andi Lo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia Posts: 2,924	Originally posted by ivoire a cropped sample from the Tamron70-200mm f2.8 Such an ugly PF... it must be a horrible lens! Joking aside from the 70-200 candidates that you suggested I am leaning to the Tammy as well. That or the 50-135... The 70-200 will suit me better but I heard so much rave reviews on the 50-130. I think I'll grab whiever good deal comes at me first.

11-27-2009, 12:11 PM	#29
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251 Original Poster	Originally posted by Raybo You're starting to sound like me! I forget about so much stuff it makes my head spin! No kidding! Brain-freeze seems to be "in" theses days ... at least for me. So, I haven't had the chance to load the pics to PBucket yet, but will soon. JP

11-27-2009, 12:13 PM	#30
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251 Original Poster	Originally posted by Andi Lo Such an ugly PF... it must be a horrible lens! Joking aside from the 70-200 candidates that you suggested I am leaning to the Tammy as well. That or the 50-135... The 70-200 will suit me better but I heard so much rave reviews on the 50-130. I think I'll grab whiever good deal comes at me first. I know both lenses have great reviews now. I am undecided between both, but leaning toward the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 because of its larger "latitude" JP

Sold lens ... now need advice on what I need

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!