[Tommot1965]

actually they do, they have the 50-135 2.8, which actually is a 70-200 on a APS-C camera.

Id say if Arpe wants a 70-200 with a 1.4 TC..hes after a longer FL than a 70-200 on a Full frame body...which is what the 50-135 is on a crop sensor....

some Nikon shooters dont want a FF body..as they want that extra reach,, unfortunately Pentax users were not offered that chance ..

the 60-250 F4 looks pretty good though...

[JeremyP]

actually they do, they have the 50-135 2.8, which actually is a 70-200 on a APS-C camera.

I also would like a Pentax 70-200 F2.8, not a 70-200 equivalent. I doubt most people buy a lens based on the full-frame equivalent. They know they have an APS-C camera, and want the extra reach it provides.

I already own the Sigma 70-200 F2.8, but I wish Pentax would make one also, just like Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Sony and Tamron do.

I agree, the 60-250 F4 does look good, but then you have to own two lenses instead of one lens and a TC. If you need/want 70-200 F2.8 (100-300 equivalent), you're still out of luck with Pentax.

[Tommot1965]

Tommot1965: What kind of low light situations were you shooting in? I'm looking at the K-5 to shoot sports in gymnasiums and hockey rinks. Not sure if this is considered "low light" or not.

I am an amatuer, so try not to be too technical with any answers.

for me the biggest misses were just family shots indoors..birthdays and such.shot with a sigma 17-50 F2.8..

my sports were mostly shot with a sigma 70-200F2.8....and this lens/body combo didn't have too many problems in the FF area ...

[tela]

i found that with my HSM 17-50 Sigma..it would constantly front focus in low light at the wide end {17mm}
I also tried a pentax SDM lens , same issue..but using a screw drive primes..no problems at all...all up I tired 4 different lenses and three showed FF and only the screw drive prime was on the money .

Im afraid I returned the camera..it was my second body with the same issue ....I ended up with a nikon D300s..lol...

Just curious, did the Focus Adjustment feature help?
I had a similar problem but that feature resolved it.

[Tommot1965]

Just curious, did the Focus Adjustment feature help?
I had a similar problem but that feature resolved it.

unfortunately no.

the lens was spot on from 35mm to 50 mm...just in its wider FOV the problems arose..

it was the same for the other lenses I tried too { apart from the prime }.....the wider the FOV..the worse the FF .

my telephoto lenses on the other hand were ok ...

[JeremyP]

for me the biggest misses were just family shots indoors..birthdays and such.shot with a sigma 17-50 F2.8..

my sports were mostly shot with a sigma 70-200F2.8....and this lens/body combo didn't have too many problems in the FF area ...

"birthdays and such" doesn't sound like it should be too challenging for a modern $1,300 camera! That doesn't sound very promising.

[Tommot1965]

I think the Af on the K5 with a wide angle lens struggles in tungsten/ low light ...so yes not too good !

[opiedog]

from the kx i switched to the d7000 not the k5.

lenses? if you're into primes, pentax is the way to go.

for zooms, nikon has more including 3rd party from sigma, toky and tammy.
yes, some nikon glass is expensive, but at least it's available.

[philbaum]

A friend and i often shoot for a local theatre organization. The highlight of their summer is in August when they put on a Shakespeare play in a local park. Without consulting each other, last year my Canon friend shows up with a 70-200 f2.8 lens and i show up with the Pentax 50-135 f2.8 lens. Within 1/2 hour, he's no longer using his new lens, but i am. I wander over to see why he's changed it out. The reason is that he's missing too many shots at the wide end, The Pentax 50mm was more important to this venue than the 200mm advantage.

So don't overlook the wide end advantage of 50mm, its far more useful in cityscapes than one might image.

The main thing that is brilliant about the Pentax design is that there are no TELESCOPING PLASTIC TUBES. The 50-135 never changes its volume because the zooming mechanical elements are all contained within a fixed outer plastic cylinder. Making the 50-135 water resistant is EASY because the seals are static on non-moving parts (with the exception of a manual/af switch and the mount).

Everytime it rains, i slap on my 50-135 lens and its optics are second to no other mfr lenses. Its like primes at every focal length.

I used to have the Tamron 18-250. For the shooting i was doing around small or large towns, i found that i rarely used anything larger than 135.

I'm sure folks can make an excellent case for the 70-200 designs on an aps, all i'm saying is there is some very sweet things about the 50-135, very innovative and sharp throughout.

[Tommot1965]

phill
nothing wrong with a 50-135 fl lens.

none of the 70-200 F2.8 that im aware have the plastic tubes you are disscussing..as all of them are IF..

my nikon Vr II also houses all its optics in a metal outer casing..but ive paid a premium for that ...but in this life you get what you pay for unfortunately .


my next purchase will be a D700 FF body..so when needed Ill be able to use my 70-200 on it to take advantage of the wider FOV that a FF body has at 70mm

[GLXLR]

there is tons of difference between these cameras, they are not even in the same league features wise... you do have to dig a little deeper than the spec sheet to find this out though...

d7000 has:

1fps less shooting speed
half the buffer size
lesser auto bracket options
crap button layout
no shake reduction
no weather sealing

plus more (less)

This is biased towards the Pentax. In my opinion, the buffer size depends on your style of shooting whether or not a con (and according to high speed shooting figures for both cameras, I would hardly call it half). The Nikon also has more options for the AF system (which is also still ahead of the Pentax). The button layout imo, although strange, should be the user's call. Many people think the D7000 has a logical layout and it's all user preference and getting used to.

Although as for weather sealing and my trusty money saving, image recovering image stabilization, K-5 wins.

I also would like a Pentax 70-200 F2.8, not a 70-200 equivalent. I doubt most people buy a lens based on the full-frame equivalent. They know they have an APS-C camera, and want the extra reach it provides.

I already own the Sigma 70-200 F2.8, but I wish Pentax would make one also, just like Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Sony and Tamron do.

I agree, the 60-250 F4 does look good, but then you have to own two lenses instead of one lens and a TC. If you need/want 70-200 F2.8 (100-300 equivalent), you're still out of luck with Pentax.

My biggest gripe with the 60-250mm is the expense and slow AF. Why pay $1400 for a lens when the AF isn't up to speed for it's use? (Slower than my DA* 50-135mm). I love the way Pentax has done their lens lineup, but they need to do something about the SDM motors in their high end lenses. Why is it that all the lenses I'm looking forward to getting hindered by the slow AF motor? For small primes, I love screw mount cause it saves space/weight in the lens and makes my set up more compact.

[XMACHINA]

All the 70-200 type lenses, AFAIK, use telescoping plastic tubes which mean a big change in air volume for every zoom action.

This is incorrect. In fact, I can't think of a single 70-200mm f/2.8 lens from any manufacturer that's designed as you describe. It seems as if you're thinking of consumer level 50-200mm second-kit lenses can not serve as a fair comparison to the 50-135.

[philbaum]

phill
nothing wrong with a 50-135 fl lens.

none of the 70-200 F2.8 that im aware have the plastic tubes you are disscussing..as all of them are IF..

my nikon Vr II also houses all its optics in a metal outer casing..but ive paid a premium for that ...but in this life you get what you pay for unfortunately .


my next purchase will be a D700 FF body..so when needed Ill be able to use my 70-200 on it to take advantage of the wider FOV that a FF body has at 70mm

That makes sense on a FF, but a 70mm on Pentax aps =105mm, makes less sense for me.

I know 2 wedding photographers who are using the D700 and seem happy with them. I believe that having a few good lenses one enjoys using, is more important than having a lot of lenses that are left at home.

Best wishes,

[Tommot1965]

I believe that having a few good lenses one enjoys using, is more important than having a lot of lenses that are left at home.

Best wishes,

That is very true phil

[liukaitc]

Yeah like me using 16-50 90% the time. despite the bad reputation of the 16-50, I love using it so much.