[narual]

If my sorely delinquent client finally catches up on my invoices like they promised, I'm considering buying myself a K3. But I'd also like the 60-250 lens. I can barely justify one of them, definitely not both (at least not anytime soon).

I currently use a K5 and my longest decent lens is the (currently broken) DA* 50-135.

Do you folks think it would be better to pick up the K3 or the 60-250? I could possibly swing a used DAL 55-300 to get an option at the long end (or would cropping from the 50-135 be better?)

Thanks!

[elliott]

The 60-250, the K-3 will come down in price eventually, the 60-250 won't.

[disya2]

I favor my copy of 60-250 even more than FA limiteds. I really like images it produces and reluctantly mount other lenses when something wider is needed. If not its size and weight I would even consider selling FA 77 ltd for I don't really use it after getting the lens. My thoughts after couple months with the lens in possession:
SMC Pentax-DA* 60-250mm F4 ED [IF] SDM Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

There is one severe drawback, however. Whenever I use it indoors in dimly lit conditions my K-5 often struggles to lock focus. Brighter lenses do lock in the same scene almost instantly. I'm not sure if the lens is to blame. Maybe something is wrong with its SDM mechanism. Outdoors AF works good enough.

So from that perspective I think K-3 or K-5II would do better because of updated AF module.

[Ole]

I support getting the glass first in particular since your 50-135 is broken. The 55-300 may not satisfy you image quality wise, since you've probably been spoiled by your DA* lens.

[olypdd]

55-300 might be out resolved by the K3s sensor, in other words not good enough glass for the K3 sensor whereas the 60-250 shines on the K3 from the reviews I've read. Which does not surprise me. Love mine and walk around with it often except when I need to go wide.

I would also recommend getting the glass first, and if you pick up a used one, find out first if the SDM motor was updated/replaced.

[DSims]

I don't know why you'd buy the camera if you need the lens. What would you need the K-3 for anyway?

The IQ of the DA*50-135 is a little better than the DA*60-250, but the 60-250 is much better than the DA55-300 (so don't even consider it, not after owning the other lenses you have).



I'd say get the DA*50-135 fixed, and get a *300 (or possibly a DA/FA*200) lens. This will keep your IQ in line with what you're already getting with your other top lenses.

But if you don't want to do this, at least get the DA*60-250.

[freerider]

You might want to check out the comparison in the forum's in depth review of the HD 55-300.

HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED WR Review - Introduction - PentaxForums.com

I recently faced a similar choice and decided to get the 60-250mm.

[dave2k]

I think the answer depends on what are the key considerations for your photography. Do you need high performance in AF? Do you desire to have super-sharp photos? Do you plan to travel much with your equipment? Do you plan to produce shots to make enlargements? I definitely appreciate the AF improvements of the K-3 as I shoot a lot of sports. I love to use my 60-250 for daytime sports due to the sharpness and quick AF. However, I recently went on a trip and decided there was no way I could take my 60-250 along with a number of other lenses. I quickly picked up a used 55-300 DA L and it was quite easy to take on my travels. While the sharpness can't compete with the 60-250, I definitely have shots that are sharp enough for enlargements. Also the reach to 300 is nice to have. That said, I also have some great prior shots from my K-5. I agree with an earlier poster that the camera cost will go down but the lens cost is pretty stable and the lenses hold their value better. And you'll probably keep your lenses longer than your bodies.

[normhead]

I'd say the DA*60-250. You can crop a lot more with a K-3, but with a 60-250 you can frame tight enough to avoid cropping. But, surely you can get your DA* 50-135 repaired. That's a great lens. The 135 with the 1.4 TC would give you close to 200mm ƒ4, and be a lot more portable.... how much reach do you need?

[wtlwdwgn]

My vote is also for the 60-250. As is said, "Camera bodies come and go but good glass lasts forever." Just my two cents.

[CarlG]

My vote is also for the 60-250. As is said, "Camera bodies come and go but good glass lasts forever." Just my two cents.

As everyone with their expensive lenses in for repairs would support --

[RonHendriks1966]

Vote for the lens.


If your 50-135mm has just SDM-problems, then convert it to screw. Then sell it, but the price does drop.

[bdery]

It really dépends on your needs, uses, and what you find lacking with your K-5. But all things being equal, go with the lens. It's a jewel.

[mattb123]

Faced with the same decision a while back I got the 60-250 to use with my K-5 and I have no regrets. Then I made some money shooting with it and bought a K-3.

[Quest4ADV]

Eat Ramen for a month and get both