Zoom Lens? K-X

NecroticSoldier · 03-06-2010, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by Ash

Enjoy the Tamron - it's good value for money, although I still would personally have gone with the DA 55-300. Even without quick sift, the L version is optically the same as the original quick shift version and outperforms the Tamron and Sigma in every facet of image quality.

It's only about... 15g heavier, so I wouldn't mind it... and less than 50$ more expensive so I'd say it's a good trade in for the quick shift and metal bayonet. Plus the DA L isn't readily available anywhere here I don't think.

Yeah! LONG LIVE PENTAX LENSES ;P. Just I don't got the money ;(.

I'll be quite happy with this lens. It's my budget lens until I have enough money.

Last edited by NecroticSoldier; 03-06-2010 at 05:08 PM. Reason: Adding more.

KxBlaze · 03-06-2010, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by NecroticSoldier

I'm going to save up for a new lens soon and I've been looking at a Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD Macro lens. Seems like a good price. I won't want to spend more than $300 on a zoom lens. I would like some suggestions of zoom lenses preferably with AF and... Quick-shift is not necessary but good to have. best to have 50 or higher as I'm happy with my 18-55 kit lens. Macro function is not a must either. Thanks guys!

I have a Kx with the tamron 70-300mm macro lens and I can say its worth the price but definately not more. I bought it brand new $155 at BHPhoto. The AF is pretty slow, its kinda loud (i dont care about that), the macro is ok at best, but again this lens is approx $150 and for 150 you will not find a lens that can zoom upto 300mm, have AF and macro capabilities. All in all the lens is well worth the 150.

audiobomber · 03-09-2010, 02:04 PM

Originally posted by Ash

Enjoy the Tamron - it's good value for money, although I still would personally have gone with the DA 55-300.

Originally posted by Mike.P®

I would also have gone with the 55-300mm.

A 55-300mm on a film camera? Wouldn't that vignette pretty badly? (OP has a K1000).

NecroticSoldier · 03-09-2010, 05:14 PM

Originally posted by audiobomber

A 55-300mm on a film camera? Wouldn't that vignette pretty badly? (OP has a K1000).

Whoops, forgot to update sooner, that I also have a K-X. Sorry about that!

GeneV · 03-09-2010, 05:52 PM

This is the zoom I use most with the K-x, but for the long end, I am partial the 55-300 and the 50-200 as well.

NecroticSoldier · 03-09-2010, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by GeneV

This is the zoom I use most with the K-x, but for the long end, I am partial the 50-300 as well.

Are those primes?

tokyoso · 03-09-2010, 07:33 PM

Originally posted by NecroticSoldier

Are those primes?

those are the fabled DA Limited series...

NecroticSoldier · 03-09-2010, 07:53 PM

Originally posted by tokyoso

those are the fabled DA Limited series...

Whoops... LOL ;( I'll never be able to get those!

henryjing · 03-09-2010, 08:22 PM

Originally posted by GeneV

This is the zoom I use most with the K-x, but for the long end, I am partial the 50-300 as well.

Cool, may I ask where did you get this case?

JP_Seattle · 03-10-2010, 05:20 AM

Don't know if you already decided on picking up the Tamron yet or not. I just sold one and purchased a DA 55-300mm. While I owned the Tamron, I enjoyed it and got some great shots with it. On contrasty zoom shots you will see purple fringing, but it is not too hard to fix. All in all I thought it was a great budget lens...... until I mounted the DA 55-300 to my K-x. In my opinion, there is quite a difference in overall image quality in favor of the DA 55-300. It looks sharper in the center and edges, colors are rendered very well, and the contrast looks great. Given the choice to do it all over again, I probably just would have bought the K-x with the DA L 55-300. I don't mind my DA L 18-55 kit lens and I think it is actually a pretty darn good performer also. The quick shifting focus and the original lens hood are nice touches but not a necessity. The DA L is optically the same as the DA model so you can get the same pictures. You could purchase a cheap lens hood from eBay for under $5 and 99% of the time I don't think you would miss the quick shift.

In my search to purchase a 55-300mm lens recently, I discovered a few companies advertising Pentax 55-300mm lenses (most of them say it is the DA model) on eBay. Do not be fooled by their low prices. They are all DA L models. One company (Ryther Camera from New Jersey) actually changed their ad to correctly advertise the right DA L lens. For $285 you get a new DA L 55-300mm with no box or warranty.

Adorama was running a special on the DA 55-300mm lens through Amazon.com for $339.90 + free shipping. For $55 difference, I sprung for the DA brand new with a box, lens hood, warranty, quick shift, and a reputable company to back me up if I have any problems. I would advise you to do the same if that is in your budget... otherwise I would try to get a used DA or DA L 55-300mm on pentaxforums marketplace. I have seen several DA L lenses go for $250 and DA lenses go for $280. PM me if you want to go that route. I know of a guy that is looking to sell a like new DA 55-300. I believe he wants $290 for it (shipped) but don't quote me on that. I could put you in touch with him and you could ask.

Cheers and good luck finding what you are looking for. The Tamron served me well and if you never check out a Pentax DA 55-300mm you will think the Tamron is just fine.

My lens collection started out with so many varied 3rd party lenses and slowly (and unintentionally) they are all being replaced by Pentax lenses. The last few that I have purchased (F 50mm 1.4, DA 50-200mm, DA 55-300mm) have shown me that Pentax is on top of their game in the lens department! For what I consider budget lenses, these crank out very high quality photos with my K-x like a copy machine... one right after another. Now I am so backed up with post-processing work because I am not used to having to process so many "keeper" photos after I go out shooting.

I will definitely be considering all Pentax lenses first from now on. It will save a lot of time, money, and shutter actuations in the long run.

-Jason

GeneV · 03-10-2010, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by henryjing

Cool, may I ask where did you get this case?

The Pentax online store. It is the Ned Bunnell-designed case. Together, these primes take up about as much space as a super zoom. It would be nice if Pentax made a smaller case that held only two or three. This one barely fits in my PacSafe waist pack with the K-x.

For the long end, I would also add that with the DA 50-200, rather than the 55-300, the total package is very small.

GeneV · 03-10-2010, 09:11 AM

Originally posted by tokyoso

those are the fabled DA Limited series...

They are all there but the 35mm macro. I have the DA40 and the FA35/2, so I found it hard to justify another 35.

These little primes are such a great match for the size, weight and low light capabilities of the K-x.

tokyoso · 03-10-2010, 06:25 PM

Originally posted by GeneV

The Pentax online store. It is the Ned Bunnell-designed case. Together, these primes take up about as much space as a super zoom. It would be nice if Pentax made a smaller case that held only two or three. This one barely fits in my PacSafe waist pack with the K-x.

For the long end, I would also add that with the DA 50-200, rather than the 55-300, the total package is very small.

That's a nice case. How did you fit 4? it says fits 3 da limiteds.

can it fit a lens plus an AF 540 ?

audiobomber · 03-10-2010, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by GeneV

Together, these primes take up about as much space as a super zoom.

Pretty big superzoom. The 18-250 is only 75mm x 85.5mm (2.8" x 4.4 ").

03-09-2010, 05:52 PM	#20
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	This is the zoom I use most with the K-x, but for the long end, I am partial the 55-300 and the 50-200 as well. Attached Images Last edited by GeneV; 03-10-2010 at 09:09 AM. Reason: correct lens identification

03-09-2010, 06:45 PM	#21
NecroticSoldier Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Scarborough, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 488 Original Poster	Originally posted by GeneV This is the zoom I use most with the K-x, but for the long end, I am partial the 50-300 as well. Are those primes? Last edited by NecroticSoldier; 03-09-2010 at 06:45 PM. Reason: Wrong response

03-10-2010, 09:05 AM	#26
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by henryjing Cool, may I ask where did you get this case? The Pentax online store. It is the Ned Bunnell-designed case. Together, these primes take up about as much space as a super zoom. It would be nice if Pentax made a smaller case that held only two or three. This one barely fits in my PacSafe waist pack with the K-x. For the long end, I would also add that with the DA 50-200, rather than the 55-300, the total package is very small. Last edited by GeneV; 03-10-2010 at 09:12 AM.

03-10-2010, 07:03 PM	#29
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by GeneV Together, these primes take up about as much space as a super zoom. Pretty big superzoom. The 18-250 is only 75mm x 85.5mm (2.8" x 4.4 "). Last edited by audiobomber; 03-11-2010 at 06:03 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What is a good aperture rating for a zoom lens (or any lens)?	justtakingpics	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	04-09-2011 06:32 PM
Is there something that can make my lens into a zoom lens?	CrossStealth	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	15	02-14-2010 01:26 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax k-2000 + kit lens (18-55) + sigma zoom lens 70-300mm	dexmus	Sold Items	6	11-09-2009 05:25 PM
Is the Pentax - 75-300mm F4.5-5.8 SMCP-FA J AL Zoom Lens a good budget zoom?	Kornbread	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	01-16-2009 03:45 PM
For Sale - Sold: Unusual Lens: Pentax M 40-80mm f2.8-4 Zoom Lens	Youngster	Sold Items	2	12-09-2008 07:17 PM

03-06-2010, 05:07 PM	#16
NecroticSoldier Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Scarborough, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 488 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ash Enjoy the Tamron - it's good value for money, although I still would personally have gone with the DA 55-300. Even without quick sift, the L version is optically the same as the original quick shift version and outperforms the Tamron and Sigma in every facet of image quality. It's only about... 15g heavier, so I wouldn't mind it... and less than 50$ more expensive so I'd say it's a good trade in for the quick shift and metal bayonet. Plus the DA L isn't readily available anywhere here I don't think. Yeah! LONG LIVE PENTAX LENSES ;P. Just I don't got the money ;(. I'll be quite happy with this lens. It's my budget lens until I have enough money. Last edited by NecroticSoldier; 03-06-2010 at 05:08 PM. Reason: Adding more.

03-06-2010, 05:33 PM	#17
KxBlaze Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,602	Originally posted by NecroticSoldier I'm going to save up for a new lens soon and I've been looking at a Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD Macro lens. Seems like a good price. I won't want to spend more than $300 on a zoom lens. I would like some suggestions of zoom lenses preferably with AF and... Quick-shift is not necessary but good to have. best to have 50 or higher as I'm happy with my 18-55 kit lens. Macro function is not a must either. Thanks guys! I have a Kx with the tamron 70-300mm macro lens and I can say its worth the price but definately not more. I bought it brand new $155 at BHPhoto. The AF is pretty slow, its kinda loud (i dont care about that), the macro is ok at best, but again this lens is approx $150 and for 150 you will not find a lens that can zoom upto 300mm, have AF and macro capabilities. All in all the lens is well worth the 150.

03-09-2010, 02:04 PM	#18
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Ash Enjoy the Tamron - it's good value for money, although I still would personally have gone with the DA 55-300. Originally posted by Mike.P® I would also have gone with the 55-300mm. A 55-300mm on a film camera? Wouldn't that vignette pretty badly? (OP has a K1000).

03-09-2010, 05:14 PM	#19
NecroticSoldier Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Scarborough, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 488 Original Poster	Originally posted by audiobomber A 55-300mm on a film camera? Wouldn't that vignette pretty badly? (OP has a K1000). Whoops, forgot to update sooner, that I also have a K-X. Sorry about that!

03-09-2010, 07:33 PM	#22
tokyoso Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Tokyo Photos: Albums Posts: 723	Originally posted by NecroticSoldier Are those primes? those are the fabled DA Limited series...

03-09-2010, 07:53 PM	#23
NecroticSoldier Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Scarborough, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 488 Original Poster	Originally posted by tokyoso those are the fabled DA Limited series... Whoops... LOL ;( I'll never be able to get those!

03-09-2010, 08:22 PM	#24
henryjing Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: United States Posts: 467	Originally posted by GeneV This is the zoom I use most with the K-x, but for the long end, I am partial the 50-300 as well. Cool, may I ask where did you get this case?

03-10-2010, 05:20 AM	#25
JP_Seattle Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Seattle, WA Photos: Albums Posts: 206	Don't know if you already decided on picking up the Tamron yet or not. I just sold one and purchased a DA 55-300mm. While I owned the Tamron, I enjoyed it and got some great shots with it. On contrasty zoom shots you will see purple fringing, but it is not too hard to fix. All in all I thought it was a great budget lens...... until I mounted the DA 55-300 to my K-x. In my opinion, there is quite a difference in overall image quality in favor of the DA 55-300. It looks sharper in the center and edges, colors are rendered very well, and the contrast looks great. Given the choice to do it all over again, I probably just would have bought the K-x with the DA L 55-300. I don't mind my DA L 18-55 kit lens and I think it is actually a pretty darn good performer also. The quick shifting focus and the original lens hood are nice touches but not a necessity. The DA L is optically the same as the DA model so you can get the same pictures. You could purchase a cheap lens hood from eBay for under $5 and 99% of the time I don't think you would miss the quick shift. In my search to purchase a 55-300mm lens recently, I discovered a few companies advertising Pentax 55-300mm lenses (most of them say it is the DA model) on eBay. Do not be fooled by their low prices. They are all DA L models. One company (Ryther Camera from New Jersey) actually changed their ad to correctly advertise the right DA L lens. For $285 you get a new DA L 55-300mm with no box or warranty. Adorama was running a special on the DA 55-300mm lens through Amazon.com for $339.90 + free shipping. For $55 difference, I sprung for the DA brand new with a box, lens hood, warranty, quick shift, and a reputable company to back me up if I have any problems. I would advise you to do the same if that is in your budget... otherwise I would try to get a used DA or DA L 55-300mm on pentaxforums marketplace. I have seen several DA L lenses go for $250 and DA lenses go for $280. PM me if you want to go that route. I know of a guy that is looking to sell a like new DA 55-300. I believe he wants $290 for it (shipped) but don't quote me on that. I could put you in touch with him and you could ask. Cheers and good luck finding what you are looking for. The Tamron served me well and if you never check out a Pentax DA 55-300mm you will think the Tamron is just fine. My lens collection started out with so many varied 3rd party lenses and slowly (and unintentionally) they are all being replaced by Pentax lenses. The last few that I have purchased (F 50mm 1.4, DA 50-200mm, DA 55-300mm) have shown me that Pentax is on top of their game in the lens department! For what I consider budget lenses, these crank out very high quality photos with my K-x like a copy machine... one right after another. Now I am so backed up with post-processing work because I am not used to having to process so many "keeper" photos after I go out shooting. I will definitely be considering all Pentax lenses first from now on. It will save a lot of time, money, and shutter actuations in the long run. -Jason

03-10-2010, 09:11 AM	#27
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by tokyoso those are the fabled DA Limited series... They are all there but the 35mm macro. I have the DA40 and the FA35/2, so I found it hard to justify another 35. These little primes are such a great match for the size, weight and low light capabilities of the K-x.

03-10-2010, 06:25 PM	#28
tokyoso Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Tokyo Photos: Albums Posts: 723	Originally posted by GeneV The Pentax online store. It is the Ned Bunnell-designed case. Together, these primes take up about as much space as a super zoom. It would be nice if Pentax made a smaller case that held only two or three. This one barely fits in my PacSafe waist pack with the K-x. For the long end, I would also add that with the DA 50-200, rather than the 55-300, the total package is very small. That's a nice case. How did you fit 4? it says fits 3 da limiteds. can it fit a lens plus an AF 540 ?