Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-29-2013, 05:46 AM   #16
Veteran Member
stormtech's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In the boonies (NW Penna)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,670
QuoteOriginally posted by Barry Pearson Quote
If I could only keep one of my lenses, it would be the DA* 60-250mm f/4, because I just love that lens. It has been used for more shots than all my other lenses put together over the last 4 years, although that it largely because so many of them were taken at 7 fps!

If I had to travel the world with just two of my lenses, they would be the DA* 60-250mm f/4 and the DA 12-24mm f/4. (I sometimes walk around with just those 2 if I can't be bothered to carry more).
While I will never travel the world, whenever I do go anywhere from the house that is my take along combination also.

Not my pic, but this is my setup when I leave the house - K-5IIs with grip with DA* 60-250 mounted in the Lowepro 75AW Toploader, and DA 12-24 in the lens case attached to the side.



I will never understand why all these lens discussions are in the K-5 section instead of the lens section..........


Last edited by stormtech; 09-29-2013 at 05:53 AM.
09-29-2013, 09:05 AM   #17
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Forney, TX
Posts: 277
I bought a LN rated DA*300 from KEH for under $900 with coupon a couple of weeks ago. I really wanted to like the lens, but I decided to send it back. I took 100s of shots on a tripod, checked it on my Lensalign, and compared it to my 55-300. Maybe I received a bad copy because it backfocused severely requiring a +10 AF adjustment, which still wasn't enough. Also, the AF was terrible for a lens in this price range. I guess expecting similar AF performance to my Sigma 50-150 is asking too much. I also had more than one instance where the AF just stalled, and I had to focus on a different subject or use the quickshift to get it to work again, so I don't know if that is typical behavior or if this copy had a problem with the SDM. I couldn't see this lens being very good for fast action shots. Lastly, I compared several shots with shots from my 55-300. Yes, the 300 is sharper and the bokeh looks much more pleasing, but the IQ improvement was not as good as I expected. Again, this was a used lens, so maybe it was just a bad copy.
I made the decision to return it and wait until the K-3 is released and reviewed and decide between that or a Nikon D800 and hold off on a new telephoto.

Mike
09-29-2013, 09:41 AM   #18
Veteran Member
Barry Pearson's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Stockport
Posts: 870
QuoteOriginally posted by stormtech Quote
While I will never travel the world, whenever I do go anywhere from the house that is my take along combination also.

Not my pic, but this is my setup when I leave the house - K-5IIs with grip with DA* 60-250 mounted in the Lowepro 75AW Toploader, and DA 12-24 in the lens case attached to the side.
That looks good! I'll investigate.
10-01-2013, 08:32 AM   #19
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 59
Original Poster
Yes, and now $1299.00 at London drugs. The Da* 300 is now $1159.00 on Amazon.

Seems Pentax lens prices go up and down but I am still happy I got the DA* 60-250.

What can I do?

10-01-2013, 02:39 PM   #20
Veteran Member
stormtech's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In the boonies (NW Penna)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,670
While this thread belongs in the Lens Discussion section, I thought I would post a comparison here anyway.

We know that the DA* 60-250 being an IF (internal focus) lens, it is only truly 250mm at infinity. When focusing closer, it will be a bit less. I won't get into the dynamics of this as I've come to understand it only enough to know it exists. So I thought I would do a couple quick test shots that would represent real world shooting for myself. The first shot is with the DA* 60-250 @250mm - the second with the FA* 300 f4.5. In my testing there is very little if any difference between the FA* and DA*. These were taken from my deck where I do most of my shooting anymore being I can't move about anymore. I have lots of wildlife here that ranges from small song birds to elk. I shot at this bird house as this represents the distance I would normally shoot. I would estimate this to be ~300' (91 Meters).

This is a lot easier to compare if viewing them in a photo editor so they can be compared side by side. Feel free to download them if you like to make your own comparison.

Images are clickable for a larger view.

Last edited by BigMackCam; 04-17-2016 at 02:13 AM. Reason: Removed link to parked URL
10-27-2014, 03:23 PM   #21
Pentaxian
zzeitg's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South Bohemia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,612
QuoteOriginally posted by daacon Quote
I have all 4 - quality wise I would say the DA* 300 is the sharpest followed closely by the DA* 50-135 and DA* 60-250 , then the DA* 16-50. They have completely different purposes though.

Hi, you've mentioned different purposes of these two lenses. Well, could you bring in some examples, just for me to understand it a little more? What are the typical situations for DA* 300?
I'm just starting to consider if to buy this lens... I mean if it gives sense when already having 50-135 and 60-250. Sometimes I find the reach of ..250 not sufficient. Will these 20% (300:250) be "noticeable" enough?

An alternative might be then buying 1.4 teleconverter which would change my 60-250 to 84-350... Or simply to wait for the "High magnification super-telephoto zoom" announced in the lastest road map (but I don't believe it will have the F4 of DA* 300...).
11-13-2014, 04:57 PM   #22
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Hampshire UK
Posts: 280
QuoteOriginally posted by stormtech Quote
While this thread belongs in the Lens Discussion section, I thought I would post a comparison here anyway.

We know that the DA* 60-250 being an IF (internal focus) lens, it is only truly 250mm at infinity. When focusing closer, it will be a bit less. I won't get into the dynamics of this as I've come to understand it only enough to know it exists. So I thought I would do a couple quick test shots that would represent real world shooting for myself. The first shot is with the DA* 60-250 @250mm - the second with the FA* 300 f4.5. In my testing there is very little if any difference between the FA* and DA*. These were taken from my deck where I do most of my shooting anymore being I can't move about anymore. I have lots of wildlife here that ranges from small song birds to elk. I shot at this bird house as this represents the distance I would normally shoot. I would estimate this to be ~300' (91 Meters).

This is a lot easier to compare if viewing them in a photo editor so they can be compared side by side. Feel free to download them if you like to make your own comparison.

Images are clickable for a larger view.
Surprised to see only one reply to this thread this year! Perhaps, as you suggest, because it's not in the lens board!

I too have been trying to determine which of the 60-250 or 300 DA* lenses are best for my needs and the above post from last year is the most useful set of comparison shots that I've seen to date. The post doesn't say if the clickable larger versions are 100% crops (the large versions are about 3MP) but if they are, or have the same percentage size reduction, the 300mm provides far more detail of the birdhouse and the telegraph/utilities pole it's fixed to. This is obvious on the wood detail, and even more so on the protective cable sheath that runs up the pole, vertical ribbing detail is almost completely absent on the 60-250 shot but is clear on the 300 shot from top to bottom.

This doesn't necessarily mean that the 300 is sharper, though I suspect it is, but it is significantly 'longer' at that distance. I had to resize the 60-250 photo by +28% to make the birdhouse and pole the same size in both images, in a photo editor. Assuming that the 300mm DA* focal length is really 300mm, this makes the effective maximum focal length of the 60-250 a mere 234mm at that distance. I have more research to do before taking the plunge but this set of photos has been very helpful.
11-13-2014, 05:35 PM   #23
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,821
I'm currently trying to decide between the DA*300 4 and the DA*200 2.8. I go back and forth, some days I think I want more reach, somedays I think I need faster and a half pound lighter. . It's a conundrum. Perfect would be an FA 300 2.8, but they run close to 3k and they are way to heavy.

I have the DA*60-250 which I consider more a landscape lens than a telephoto. I almost always use it with the HD AD 1.4 TC when I use it for telephoto, and it still isn't enough. It's about equivalent to my old Vivitar M135 for birds and close to the camera.

If you have the 50-135, I'd seriously consider the 200 and TC. And I'd seriously beg someone to take a picture of a flower pot 12 feet away with the DA *50-135 and DA*60-250 to find out how much reach you'd actually be getting. The only problem I see with the DA*300 4 is the gap from 135 to 300, but that is still manageable probably.

11-14-2014, 07:57 AM   #24
Veteran Member
stormtech's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In the boonies (NW Penna)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,670
I have to agree with Norm - having both lenses for a while now I use the 60-250 more as a landscape/medium telephoto lens. The 300 stays glued to my K-5IIs to catch critters coming by the house. The 60-250 is now primarily used as my go-to-town lens on my wife's K-30. It is great for using in the truck for landscapes and still long enough to catch some critters close to the road. I am so glad to have both and bought them when I could afford them - no way either purchase could happen now.
11-14-2014, 08:17 AM   #25
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,821
QuoteOriginally posted by stormtech Quote
I have to agree with Norm - having both lenses for a while now I use the 60-250 more as a landscape/medium telephoto lens. The 300 stays glued to my K-5IIs to catch critters coming by the house. The 60-250 is now primarily used as my go-to-town lens on my wife's K-30. It is great for using in the truck for landscapes and still long enough to catch some critters close to the road. I am so glad to have both and bought them when I could afford them - no way either purchase could happen now.
I use it as the do everything WR combo with my DA18-135, which is a really good daylight two lens combo. But with the 1.4 TC on it, it's only 5.6...and with the 1.7 it's 6.3. I'm usually better going with my A-400 5.6 for telephoto work, as long as it's not for fast moving small birds.
11-14-2014, 10:22 AM   #26
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,649
QuoteOriginally posted by zzeitg Quote
Hi, you've mentioned different purposes of these two lenses. Well, could you bring in some examples, just for me to understand it a little more? What are the typical situations for DA* 300?
I'm just starting to consider if to buy this lens... I mean if it gives sense when already having 50-135 and 60-250. Sometimes I find the reach of ..250 not sufficient. Will these 20% (300:250) be "noticeable" enough?

An alternative might be then buying 1.4 teleconverter which would change my 60-250 to 84-350... Or simply to wait for the "High magnification super-telephoto zoom" announced in the lastest road map (but I don't believe it will have the F4 of DA* 300...).
I use the 300 for birds and bugs/flowers, i use the 60-250 for general purpose shooting when i might need to take close or need some distance like sports, i use the 50-135 for sports too but generally when inside because you don't need the distance but need the extra stop...i also have the sigma 100-300 f4 that help with a little longer flexibility and does well for birding and other sports that might have a little distance...i have the 1.4 hd and have used on both the 60-250 and the da300 to get a lttle more punch

---------- Post added 11-14-14 at 12:24 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I use it as the do everything WR combo with my DA18-135, which is a really good daylight two lens combo. But with the 1.4 TC on it, it's only 5.6...and with the 1.7 it's 6.3. I'm usually better going with my A-400 5.6 for telephoto work, as long as it's not for fast moving small birds.
I also have the 1.7 and use on the da 300 and does well too for extra distance
11-14-2014, 02:21 PM   #27
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta Canada
Posts: 584
I have both the DA 6-250 and the DA 300 and both are great lenses. I use the DA 60-250 more than the DA 300 due the flexibility of focal lengths. I wouldn't part with the DA 300 as it is great paired with the 1.4X TC for wildlife. The DA 60-250 is a great all around landscape lens.
01-13-2015, 06:09 PM   #28
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,829
My dad is trying to decide between these two lenses also. He has a bad back and an isolated back yard with a lot of birds and small animals that he wants to capture from his bedroom window (open without a screen) or deck. He has my old 50-200 and says it's not long enough but he is worried a fixed focal length will make it too hard since he will be stationary and they could be close or far in the yard (200-300' max).

The question is which would be a better choice. I'm thinking the DA* 60-250 because of his inability to move from where he will setup. However, cropping to size may be a bigger issue given that focus breathing issue with the 250 and he has limited computer skills that make post processing harder. It's really a mess - either he has the shorter zoom and may have to crop (which he can probably manage) or he has the longer prime and has to deal with things sometimes being closer than he wants. He also has the DA 70 and a DA 18-135. He has my old F 35-135, my DA 18-55 and DA 50-200 but those three are not really likely to be used much. I'm not opposed to getting him a TC either which would give him the potential for longer distance on the 60-250 but I haven't seen a lot of pictures with any 1.4x or 1.5x TC's used with the 60-250.
01-13-2015, 06:39 PM - 1 Like   #29
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,821
You didn't say how far your father is from the back yard, but the DA*60-250 + 1.4 TC is not a great birding lens, unless you can be 6-20 feet away from the birds. This one taken from 10 feet away...



This is more typical of harder to get close to birds, further away.



I know the 300 is not a zoom and not as flexible, but many times you want the 300 and HD 1.4 TC.

There is a slide show of DA*60-250 images here taken with the 1.4 TC. There's nothing wrong with the images I just wish it was longer. You might even want to consider something like the Sigma 150-500 or 50-500.

DA 60-250 And FA 1-7 TC Slideshow by Norm_Head | Photobucket

I use a blind and usually get quite close to these birds... the most important thing would be to have feeders close enough to bring the birds to him, but then you get vermin problems, so it's not entirely recommended.

Last edited by normhead; 01-13-2015 at 06:44 PM.
01-13-2015, 06:41 PM   #30
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,829
He also sees cats and foxes and squirrels and he can put up a feeder as close or far as he needs so feedback on range that photos are taken at and at what mm is very helpful.

---------- Post added 01-13-15 at 08:45 PM ----------

Those are great Normhead - how far away were you?
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!
bag, birds, camera, combo, da*, distance, dslr, f4, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, pentax k-5, sports, weight
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Attn DA*300 and DA*60-250 owners crewl1 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 07-10-2013 05:39 AM
DA* question 200 vs 300 vs 60-250 mills Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 03-10-2013 05:33 AM
DA* 60 -250 vs DA* 300 evansph Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 01-25-2012 06:59 AM
DA* 60-250 + TC vs 100-300 Thales454 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 05-09-2011 01:58 PM
DA*60-250 Vs Sigma100-300 knumbnutz Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 04-27-2009 06:10 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:09 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