DA* 60-250 vs DA* 300

Mark K5 · 08-27-2013, 10:22 AM

I am having a difficult time choosing.

I have the DA* 16-50 and DA* 50-135.

One part of me is thinking get the DA* 300 but them I have to get a new bag and the total weight is getting out of hand.

Another part of me is saying get the DA* 60-250 and sell the DA* 50-135 and then my kit remains in my Hadley Pro bag with just a little more weight and a just a net $400.00 upgrade.

Does anyone have a picture of the same item with the DA* 300 and the DA* 60-250 at 250 to compare?

Any advise appreciated.

**pearsaab** · 08-27-2013, 10:25 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Mark K5

I am having a difficult time choosing.

I have the DA* 16-50 and DA* 50-135.

One part of me is thinking get the DA* 300 but them I have to get a new bag and the total weight is getting out of hand.

Another part of me is saying get the DA* 60-250 and sell the DA* 50-135 and then my kit remains in my Hadley Pro bag with just a little more weight and a just a net $400.00 upgrade.

Does anyone have a picture of the same item with the DA* 300 and the DA* 60-250 at 250 to compare?

Any advise appreciated.

mark i have all three lens (300, 60-250 and 50-135)...what kind of picture are you looking for and i can take when i get home from work tonight...amy

daacon · 08-27-2013, 10:48 AM

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. I often find the zoom capabilities of the 60-250 invaluable if something comes a little closer to me. The DA* 300 being a prime (and a damn sharp one at that) has a whole different usage IMHO.

So I would say if it is pure 'quality / sharpness' factor the DA* 300 is #1 (however I would be personally be hard pressed to pick out the difference without some serious pixel peeping) - I would think more along the lines do you find yourself in situations where backing off < 250 is common place or are you more the > 300 shooter.

I can also take some shots later (maybe not today but if you really want to compare let me know and I can as well).

davek · 08-27-2013, 10:58 AM

I'm in a similar boat as the OP, trying to decide whether my next lens should be a DA300 or the 60-250 to go with my 50-135... I'd like to see the comparison shots (50-135, 60-250, 300) as well.

percy · 08-27-2013, 11:05 AM

I can unreservedly recommend the DA* 300 - it's a fantastic lens.

Not wanting to hijack this thread but I'm seriously considering a DA* 60-250 too, to complement the DA*50-135 and DA* 300 I've got. The sharpness of the 60-250 is pretty well documented, but one of the uses I would have for it is motor sport so I'd be quit interested in any comments regarding it's autofocus performance.

bgdisc · 08-27-2013, 11:10 AM

Thanks to the OP for starting this thread. I'm also considering the DA* 300. I have the DA* 16-50 and the Tamron 70-200 f2.8. My main use for the DA*300 would be for shooting college football. My primary concern is the AF on the K-5 and whether it will be significantly faster than the 70-200. The extra reach would be nice, but then it only goes to f4.

Mark K5 · 08-27-2013, 11:25 AM

As for the photos I take, I also have a DA 40 but I find that I 90 + % of the time I use & love my DA* 16-50.

The DA* 50-135 is a nice lens but it seems I most always want to zoom in more than it allows.

I have ordered the DA* 300 but in researching for a new bag and thinking about the weight and practicality of caring all that combined with some of the reviews my am thinking that maybe the $200.00 extra for the DA* 60-250 maybe the best for me.

I would really appreciate if you could post some 250 vs 300 pictures.

I ordered through Amazon and have to go across the border to pickup it up with some other items and that would be the perfect time to return and order the DA* 60-250.

Not sure if is buyer's remorse but I am leaning to the Zoom based on where things are now.

We are starting to travel quite a bit more now so I am wanting to keep the kit as small and versatile as possible and love and take advantage of the DA* WR.

RonHendriks1966 · 08-27-2013, 12:02 PM

Well I went true some lenses over time.

I started with K20D + DA*16-50 and DA*50-135

My first prime was the DA40 and that killed the use off the 16-50, plain because off IQ and ease off use for the smaller lens.

I bought the DA*60-250 because I neede some longer lens and had an opertunity for second hand. The 50-135mm never left my house again. The 60-250mm is better in all regards except for the f2.8-f3.5 part where the 60-250mm can't come. I also bought the FA*85mm in this range.
Made a thread about it:
DA*60-250mm/f4 test

Then I bought the DA*300mm and this makes toast off the 60-250 at the long end at f4. You gain more in length, since the DA*60-250 is only 250mm when focussing toward infinity.

Then I bought the Sigma 70-200mm/f2.8 EX DG OS HSM because off the f2.8-f3.5 range, wich for me mainly is only using it on f3.2 for indoor sports. At that time while the DA*60-250mm is the better lens it didn't gave any use and I sold it.

I guess that I would have use for a DA*135mm/f2.0 and sell the Sigma at that time again.

So looking at your request I would say to buy the DA*60-250.

**pearsaab** · 08-27-2013, 12:53 PM

the da 300 is my absolute favorite lens...it is sharp at f4 and you can also use it for macro...i do alot of bird pictures and i use the 300 or the 500...the 60-250 is an excellent lens as well...more flexible because of the zoom...both focus quickly and have used both for bike, running, kayaking and field hockey...honestly i think you would be happy with either ...it really depends on how you want to use them

what kind of pictures are you going to use them for and maybe i can give you examples

Mark K5 · 08-27-2013, 05:06 PM

I am trying to figure out how much Zoom i loose by going for only 250mm instead of the 300.

I am looking for travel photos.

**pearsaab** · 08-27-2013, 05:24 PM

Originally posted by Mark K5

I am trying to figure out how much Zoom i loose by going for only 250mm instead of the 300.

I am looking for travel photos.

not sure if this helps but all the pictures from 390-479 were taken with the 60-250mm this past weekend
Davis and Elkins College 8-25-2013 - a set on Flickr

Barry Pearson · 08-28-2013, 01:17 AM

Originally posted by daacon

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. I often find the zoom capabilities of the 60-250 invaluable if something comes a little closer to me. The DA* 300 being a prime (and a damn sharp one at that) has a whole different usage IMHO.

So I would say if it is pure 'quality / sharpness' factor the DA* 300 is #1 (however I would be personally be hard pressed to pick out the difference without some serious pixel peeping) - I would think more along the lines do you find yourself in situations where backing off < 250 is common place or are you more the > 300 shooter.

I have the DA* 300mm and the DA* 60-350mm, and I agree fully with your statements "They have completely different purposes" and "situations where backing off < 250 is common place". When I can predict the position reasonably well, I use the 300mm. Where I can't, I use the 60-250mm. (Because I can't run backwards at 400 miles per hour if a plane changes direction!)

I did tests of both lenses on the same target about a year and a half ago, including shots with the 60-250mm at 250mm. In the centre, at f/4, they were both impressively sharp, with only the extra image size to distinguish them. Unfortunately, I didn't choose a subject which would test the edge sharpness, and it is there that I suspect the 60-250mm the wouldn't be as good.

As you say, it is important to choose according to the subject and purpose. They are not simple alternatives.

Barry Pearson · 08-28-2013, 01:24 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Mark K5

I am trying to figure out how much Zoom i loose by going for only 250mm instead of the 300.

I am looking for travel photos.

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).

(But if size and weight were more important than large images, I would take my Q system instead!)

Mark K5 · 08-30-2013, 10:29 AM

I have ordered the DA* 60-250mm.

$1349.00 Fulfilled by Amazon. They were great with no re-stocking on the DA* 300 and they covered the return freight and insurance.

I'll wait till after I have the new lens to sell the DA* 50-135.

Thanks everyone for the input and I should be able to post some great pictures in September.

Cheers

Le Ugim · 09-28-2013, 04:16 PM

Too bad I am one month late. Mark K5, you could have looked at Broadway Camera and have your lense at $1289.99.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Attn DA300 and DA60-250 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

08-27-2013, 10:22 AM	#1
Mark K5 Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Albums Posts: 59	*DA 60-250 vs DA* 300** I am having a difficult time choosing. I have the DA* 16-50 and DA* 50-135. One part of me is thinking get the DA* 300 but them I have to get a new bag and the total weight is getting out of hand. Another part of me is saying get the DA* 60-250 and sell the DA* 50-135 and then my kit remains in my Hadley Pro bag with just a little more weight and a just a net $400.00 upgrade. Does anyone have a picture of the same item with the DA* 300 and the DA* 60-250 at 250 to compare? Any advise appreciated.

08-27-2013, 10:25 AM - 1 Like	#2
pearsaab Otis Memorial Pentaxian Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2011 Location: Richmond, Virginia USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,900	Originally posted by Mark K5 I am having a difficult time choosing. I have the DA* 16-50 and DA* 50-135. One part of me is thinking get the DA* 300 but them I have to get a new bag and the total weight is getting out of hand. Another part of me is saying get the DA* 60-250 and sell the DA* 50-135 and then my kit remains in my Hadley Pro bag with just a little more weight and a just a net $400.00 upgrade. Does anyone have a picture of the same item with the DA* 300 and the DA* 60-250 at 250 to compare? Any advise appreciated. mark i have all three lens (300, 60-250 and 50-135)...what kind of picture are you looking for and i can take when i get home from work tonight...amy

08-27-2013, 10:48 AM	#3
daacon Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Alberta,Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 20,914	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. I often find the zoom capabilities of the 60-250 invaluable if something comes a little closer to me. The DA* 300 being a prime (and a damn sharp one at that) has a whole different usage IMHO. So I would say if it is pure 'quality / sharpness' factor the DA* 300 is #1 (however I would be personally be hard pressed to pick out the difference without some serious pixel peeping) - I would think more along the lines do you find yourself in situations where backing off < 250 is common place or are you more the > 300 shooter. I can also take some shots later (maybe not today but if you really want to compare let me know and I can as well).

08-27-2013, 10:58 AM	#4
davek Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Elmira, On, Canada Posts: 461	I'm in a similar boat as the OP, trying to decide whether my next lens should be a DA300 or the 60-250 to go with my 50-135... I'd like to see the comparison shots (50-135, 60-250, 300) as well.

08-27-2013, 11:05 AM	#5
percy Senior Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Herefordshire, UK Posts: 197	I can unreservedly recommend the DA* 300 - it's a fantastic lens. Not wanting to hijack this thread but I'm seriously considering a DA* 60-250 too, to complement the DA50-135 and DA 300 I've got. The sharpness of the 60-250 is pretty well documented, but one of the uses I would have for it is motor sport so I'd be quit interested in any comments regarding it's autofocus performance.

08-27-2013, 11:10 AM	#6
bgdisc Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: United States Photos: Gallery Posts: 95	Thanks to the OP for starting this thread. I'm also considering the DA* 300. I have the DA* 16-50 and the Tamron 70-200 f2.8. My main use for the DA*300 would be for shooting college football. My primary concern is the AF on the K-5 and whether it will be significantly faster than the 70-200. The extra reach would be nice, but then it only goes to f4.

08-27-2013, 11:25 AM	#7
Mark K5 Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Albums Posts: 59 Original Poster	As for the photos I take, I also have a DA 40 but I find that I 90 + % of the time I use & love my DA* 16-50. The DA* 50-135 is a nice lens but it seems I most always want to zoom in more than it allows. I have ordered the DA* 300 but in researching for a new bag and thinking about the weight and practicality of caring all that combined with some of the reviews my am thinking that maybe the $200.00 extra for the DA* 60-250 maybe the best for me. I would really appreciate if you could post some 250 vs 300 pictures. I ordered through Amazon and have to go across the border to pickup it up with some other items and that would be the perfect time to return and order the DA* 60-250. Not sure if is buyer's remorse but I am leaning to the Zoom based on where things are now. We are starting to travel quite a bit more now so I am wanting to keep the kit as small and versatile as possible and love and take advantage of the DA* WR.

08-27-2013, 12:02 PM	#8
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Well I went true some lenses over time. I started with K20D + DA16-50 and DA50-135 My first prime was the DA40 and that killed the use off the 16-50, plain because off IQ and ease off use for the smaller lens. I bought the DA60-250 because I neede some longer lens and had an opertunity for second hand. The 50-135mm never left my house again. The 60-250mm is better in all regards except for the f2.8-f3.5 part where the 60-250mm can't come. I also bought the FA85mm in this range. Made a thread about it: *DA60-250mm/f4 test** Then I bought the DA300mm and this makes toast off the 60-250 at the long end at f4. You gain more in length, since the DA60-250 is only 250mm when focussing toward infinity. Then I bought the Sigma 70-200mm/f2.8 EX DG OS HSM because off the f2.8-f3.5 range, wich for me mainly is only using it on f3.2 for indoor sports. At that time while the DA60-250mm is the better lens it didn't gave any use and I sold it. I guess that I would have use for a DA135mm/f2.0 and sell the Sigma at that time again. So looking at your request I would say to buy the DA*60-250.

08-27-2013, 12:53 PM	#9
pearsaab Otis Memorial Pentaxian Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2011 Location: Richmond, Virginia USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,900	the da 300 is my absolute favorite lens...it is sharp at f4 and you can also use it for macro...i do alot of bird pictures and i use the 300 or the 500...the 60-250 is an excellent lens as well...more flexible because of the zoom...both focus quickly and have used both for bike, running, kayaking and field hockey...honestly i think you would be happy with either ...it really depends on how you want to use them what kind of pictures are you going to use them for and maybe i can give you examples

08-27-2013, 05:06 PM	#10
Mark K5 Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Albums Posts: 59 Original Poster	I am trying to figure out how much Zoom i loose by going for only 250mm instead of the 300. I am looking for travel photos.

08-27-2013, 05:24 PM	#11
pearsaab Otis Memorial Pentaxian Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2011 Location: Richmond, Virginia USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,900	Originally posted by Mark K5 I am trying to figure out how much Zoom i loose by going for only 250mm instead of the 300. I am looking for travel photos. not sure if this helps but all the pictures from 390-479 were taken with the 60-250mm this past weekend Davis and Elkins College 8-25-2013 - a set on Flickr

08-28-2013, 01:17 AM	#12
Barry Pearson Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Stockport Posts: 964	Originally posted by daacon 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. I often find the zoom capabilities of the 60-250 invaluable if something comes a little closer to me. The DA* 300 being a prime (and a damn sharp one at that) has a whole different usage IMHO. So I would say if it is pure 'quality / sharpness' factor the DA* 300 is #1 (however I would be personally be hard pressed to pick out the difference without some serious pixel peeping) - I would think more along the lines do you find yourself in situations where backing off < 250 is common place or are you more the > 300 shooter. I have the DA* 300mm and the DA* 60-350mm, and I agree fully with your statements "They have completely different purposes" and "situations where backing off < 250 is common place". When I can predict the position reasonably well, I use the 300mm. Where I can't, I use the 60-250mm. (Because I can't run backwards at 400 miles per hour if a plane changes direction!) I did tests of both lenses on the same target about a year and a half ago, including shots with the 60-250mm at 250mm. In the centre, at f/4, they were both impressively sharp, with only the extra image size to distinguish them. Unfortunately, I didn't choose a subject which would test the edge sharpness, and it is there that I suspect the 60-250mm the wouldn't be as good. As you say, it is important to choose according to the subject and purpose. They are not simple alternatives.

08-28-2013, 01:24 AM - 1 Like	#13
Barry Pearson Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Stockport Posts: 964	Originally posted by Mark K5 I am trying to figure out how much Zoom i loose by going for only 250mm instead of the 300. I am looking for travel photos. 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). (But if size and weight were more important than large images, I would take my Q system instead!)

08-30-2013, 10:29 AM	#14
Mark K5 Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Albums Posts: 59 Original Poster	I have ordered the DA* 60-250mm. $1349.00 Fulfilled by Amazon. They were great with no re-stocking on the DA* 300 and they covered the return freight and insurance. I'll wait till after I have the new lens to sell the DA* 50-135. Thanks everyone for the input and I should be able to post some great pictures in September. Cheers

09-28-2013, 04:16 PM	#15
Le Ugim New Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 24	Too bad I am one month late. Mark K5, you could have looked at Broadway Camera and have your lense at $1289.99.