Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-05-2010, 09:59 PM - 1 Like   #31
Veteran Member
PentaxPoke's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,411
Dude,

There may be a few other things you will be dissapointed about when comparing the DA* 60-250 to the 70-200 f/4L

a) DA*: cheap micromotor SDM. (too early to tell if the lens will suffer the same reliability issues as previous Pentax SDM lenses). EF f/4L: True ring-ultrasonic USM
b) DA*: significant barrel extension while zooming. EF f/4L: all focus and zoom is internal. No barrel extension.
c) Weight. DA*: 1040g. EF f/4L: 705g

It is tough to compare anything to the EF 70-200 f/4L. Heck, even "Mr. Nikon" himself (Ken Rockwell) says the lens is the "sharpest zoom I've ever used." Unless you are going to completely abandon the EOS system, you might want to think twice before you sell it.


Last edited by PentaxPoke; 05-05-2010 at 10:14 PM.
05-05-2010, 10:13 PM   #32
Veteran Member
wlachan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,626
Canon hit a home run with their EF70-200/4L. There is simply no alternative from anyone else.
05-06-2010, 05:24 AM   #33
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 824
Original Poster
Thanks

Ive decided to keep it, because the EOS body I have is still in good shape and Ill be using that for days when its messy or rainy , and I can use the weatherproof F4L , and as you guys have mentioned, its all internal zoom etc and not as heavy as some of the other lenses.

In the future I may pick up a newer eos body just for that lens to be mated to however
05-06-2010, 08:00 AM   #34
Veteran Member
PentaxPoke's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,411
QuoteOriginally posted by dude163 Quote
In the future I may pick up a newer eos body just for that lens to be mated to however
I'm curious since you were already invested in another brand and have pro-level glass, why the switch in brands instead of a new EOS body?

05-06-2010, 09:52 AM   #35
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 824
Original Poster
the reasons were:

1:I wanted better low light performance , the KX has better high ISO quality and in body shake reduction

2: I recently got into using the old Pentax Takumar manual focus lenses , and I was intrigued bythe fact that I can get L quality glass for under 50 bucks, and the K-X is compatible with all K Mount lenses since the 70s

3: price, the K-X was 300 and 500 cheaper than the t1i and t2i , which leaves me extra money for lenses

4: After doing some research, the K-X is rated a lot higher on dxomark and other sites compared to the Canons

5: I didnt want to spend too much money on a pro level camera until my kids were older, presently they are 6 and 3, I didnt want the 3 yr old smashing up a 2 grand camera , now if something untoward happens, its only 500 bucks

6: Pentax seem to be the quirkier option,and I like that
05-06-2010, 08:35 PM   #36
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by PentaxPoke Quote
c) Weight. DA*: 1040g. EF f/4L: 705g
Well, sure - you're comparing a <3X zoom with a >4X one. That's worth something in itself.
05-07-2010, 11:34 AM   #37
Veteran Member
PentaxPoke's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,411
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
Well, sure - you're comparing a <3X zoom with a >4X one. That's worth something in itself.
Lance was the one that made the suggestion that the DA* 60-250 was "equal to the" EF f/4L. I was just providing some relevant data regarding the comparison.
05-07-2010, 02:33 PM   #38
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
Me too. They're not "equal" - the Canon has some advantages over the pentx, but the reverse is true. But they are "comparable" overall.

05-08-2010, 12:09 AM   #39
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Írebro
Posts: 207
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
I'm not sure about prices outside the US, but here the price of the 70-200/4 IS is the same price as the 60-250 ($1210 vs $1199 USD at BHphoto) and the non-IS version is a little over half the price of the 60-250 ($639 vs $1199).

EDIT: FWIW, I do overall agree the 60-250 seems a bit expensive in comparison to the 70-200/4.
Sweden, EU:
Canon 70-200/4L, 5 558:-
Canon 70-200/4L, 9 999:- with IS
Pentax 60-250/4, 13 895:-
Sigma 70-200/2.8, 6 699:- for Nikon, 7 990:- for Pentax.
Canon 70-200/2.8L, 11 499:-
Canon 70-200/2.8L, 15 999:- with IS

How much is one stop? 1.4 in aperture? So new IS = 4 stops stabilization vs faster glass = just 1 stop?

Anyway, the 70-200/4L or the Sigma 70-200/2.8 looks most worth it.
05-08-2010, 12:18 AM   #40
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Írebro
Posts: 207
QuoteOriginally posted by Lance B Quote
According to B&H, the 70-200 f4 L is US$640 and the DA*60-250 f4 is US$820, so a far cry away from a "3rd of the price" as you state. But the fact is, you cannot compare a non IS lens to the DA*60-250 f4 because the 60-250 is SR when attached to a Pentax K-x.
But on the other hand hybrid IS compensate for tilt and 4 stops, what's the limit of SR?

Also 820 $ in the US? This is the swedish price
13 895 Swedish kronor = 1 811.18546 U.S. dollars

Yeah, just a grand more ...

640 $ for 70-200/4L compare to:
5558 Swedish kronor = 724.474184 U.S. dollars

Swedish VAT is 25% so that's a really good price then imho.

Regarding IS or not, range and maximum aperture I assume any reader around here can understand the differences themselves. For instance maybe the 60-250 gain some image stabilization but maybe the 70-200/4 focus faster?
05-08-2010, 12:21 AM   #41
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Írebro
Posts: 207
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
More or less, yes. Either "Limited" or "*" are used to indicate the higher quality lenses.
And it seems
Limited = Small package
* = Weather sealed
05-08-2010, 12:31 AM   #42
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Írebro
Posts: 207
QuoteOriginally posted by dude163 Quote
the reasons were:

1:I wanted better low light performance , the KX has better high ISO quality and in body shake reduction

2: I recently got into using the old Pentax Takumar manual focus lenses , and I was intrigued bythe fact that I can get L quality glass for under 50 bucks, and the K-X is compatible with all K Mount lenses since the 70s

3: price, the K-X was 300 and 500 cheaper than the t1i and t2i , which leaves me extra money for lenses

4: After doing some research, the K-X is rated a lot higher on dxomark and other sites compared to the Canons

5: I didnt want to spend too much money on a pro level camera until my kids were older, presently they are 6 and 3, I didnt want the 3 yr old smashing up a 2 grand camera , now if something untoward happens, its only 500 bucks

6: Pentax seem to be the quirkier option,and I like that
Well at least if you don't buy a longer zoom for the Pentax but get the K-x you will get a small setup with high sensitivity, dynamic range and image stabilization so I guess for indoor use it would be great. And then you can take your 70-200 for a spin if you need it outside =P

And further on get a later pentax body with weather seals and weather sealed zooms or (but that will be trickier) buy a pro-canon camera with weather seals then and get more L-glass for that or whatever.
05-08-2010, 04:34 AM   #43
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by dude163 Quote
the reasons were:

*snip*

2: I recently got into using the old Pentax Takumar manual focus lenses , and I was intrigued bythe fact that I can get L quality glass for under 50 bucks, and the K-X is compatible with all K Mount lenses since the 70s



6: Pentax seem to be the quirkier option,and I like that
Dude, If you don't mind manual focus you might want to think about the Pentax A 70-210 F4.0. It's a very nice lens and also has a "macro" (read "close focus" ) function at 70mm. And you can probably buy 4 of them for the price of a 60-250. Granted, it's not weather sealed, is kinda heavy, and some copies have zoom creep (mine doesn't). But you can geta lot more other glass with the differences in price. Check it out on the lens database forum. I really enjoy mine.

NaCl(one of the best "bang for the buck" lenses in my bag)H2O
05-08-2010, 08:49 AM   #44
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by aliquis Quote
And it seems
Limited = Small package
* = Weather sealed
Mostly. Except the older * lenses (prior to the DA* series) were not sealed, and the FA31 Limited is not really particularly small.
05-08-2010, 12:47 PM   #45
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 824
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by NaClH2O Quote
Dude, If you don't mind manual focus you might want to think about the Pentax A 70-210 F4.0. It's a very nice lens and also has a "macro" (read "close focus" ) function at 70mm. And you can probably buy 4 of them for the price of a 60-250. Granted, it's not weather sealed, is kinda heavy, and some copies have zoom creep (mine doesn't). But you can geta lot more other glass with the differences in price. Check it out on the lens database forum. I really enjoy mine.

NaCl(one of the best "bang for the buck" lenses in my bag)H2O
I dont mind Manual Focus at all, most macro stuff I have done I had to use MF actually

I will keep an eye open, it looks like the pentax line up is just as good as the canon one, just that I dont know all the nomenclature just yet,

DA FA * LTD WR etc etc!
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!
canon, equivalent, f4l, k-mount, pentax, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Whats the Difference between the Pentax 50-135mm vs the 50-200mm or 55-300mm rustynail925 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 03-12-2010 11:47 AM
New to Pentax from the Canon Camp Pentax equivalent to Canon 70-200mm f/4 L frank2001 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 53 12-23-2009 05:07 PM
Canon FL 200mm f/3.5 on Canon 40D Fixcinater Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 0 11-22-2009 03:56 PM
Pentax Mount Equivalent for Canon 135mm F/2? dantekgeek Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 27 12-18-2008 10:06 AM
Pentax equivalent of a 100-400 L bsierens Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 11-04-2008 10:00 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:02 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