[Scorpio71GR]

,I am the same. Very few shots on my Tamron 70-200 are at f2.8. However many shots on my 60-250 are at or around f4. The only time I need f2.8 if there is extremely low light or I need more subject isolation. I rarely if ever shoot portraits so f2.8 is not so important to me.

[normhead]

That would be awesome! And since my one is not the awesome *Pentax Lens, but a Tamron 70-200 I'd be more than happy to switch I like the lens, but I just don't use it enough, carrying dfa 15-30, 28-105 and 70-200 2.8 for a full landscape kit is a burden lol. I'd like to lighten my kit up, and f4 would be plenty for me.

You know there's a DA*60-250 already out there that was a full frame design.

[clackers]

But how often do you actually shoot below f/4? Of the 4750 shots I've taken with the DFA* 70-200, only 643 were below f/4.

Just sounds like you're not shooting to your purchase's advantage, Paul!

Can't comment on your shooting style ... perhaps the 643 are your keepers, or you don't do low light, or you don't do background separation, or high shutter speeds, or you use it as a very, very good landscape lens.

[clackers]

You know there's a DA*60-250 already out there that was a full frame design.

Apparently if you remove/modify the internal baffle (which might sometimes result in a lowering of contrast or appearance of reflections shooting towards light) it works really, really well. And of course it has a reputation of being very sharp.

[Scorpio71GR]

I have the Tamron 70-200 and the DA*60-250. If I am shooting sports or action shots I take the Tamron. If I am shooting portraits I take the Tamron. If I know I am going to be shooting were subject isolation important I will take the Tamron. If I am out for a hike or general photo walk I take the 60-250. It is more compact, fits in a bag better, and weighs less. Unfortunately as we get older the weight of the camera bag becomes more and more of an issue. I can no longer carry the amount of gear I did twenty years ago. Being in respiratory failure I have to count every ounce I put in my bag. Then I have to consider how long and far I want to walk. Sometimes it is jot fun getting old and you have to make comprises to continue to enjoy doing the things you like. Carrying lighter gear over long distances has become my compromise so I can continue to enjoy photography.

[clackers]

I have the Tamron 70-200 and the DA*60-250. If I am shooting sports or action shots I take the Tamron. If I am shooting portraits I take the Tamron. If I know I am going to be shooting were subject isolation important I will take the Tamron. If I am out for a hike or general photo walk I take the 60-250. It is more compact, fits in a bag better, and weighs less. Unfortunately as we get older the weight of the camera bag becomes more and more of an issue. I can no longer carry the amount of gear I did twenty years ago. Being in respiratory failure I have to count every ounce I put in my bag. Then I have to consider how long and far I want to walk. Sometimes it is jot fun getting old and you have to make comprises to continue to enjoy doing the things you like. Carrying lighter gear over long distances has become my compromise so I can continue to enjoy photography.

Fair enough. For you, APS-C bodies and lenses are going to be lighter, or even m43, they're your circumstances.

[awscreo]

You know there's a DA*60-250 already out there that was a full frame design.

Didn't actually know there's a f4 zoom for ff available. I'll have a look. Is it a screw drive motor, or a silent one?

I'd like to see sharpness comparisons, for landscape work I want it to be very sharp at f5.6-8

[Scorpio71GR]

Clackers I have looked into a M43 system. I am not quite there yet. The premium lenses do not appear to be much cheaper. So I decided to hang onto my K3 and K-01. The K3 and DA*50-135 are still an unmatched combo for size and IQ. I can take that combo anywhere without really any issue. I'm quietly waiting for the K3 successor.

[awscreo]

You know there's a DA*60-250 already out there that was a full frame design.

Im also curious if it's significantly lighter than Tamron 70-200, that's a second most important feature for my outdoors kit

[biz-engineer]

Im also curious if it's significantly lighter than Tamron 70-200, that's a second most important feature for my outdoors kit

For outdoor shooting , you have the Pentax F 70-210 f4-5.6 https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-F-70-210mm-F4-5.6-Zoom-Lens.html that is even cheaper, smaller and lighter than the new Tamron 70-210 f4 lens.

[awscreo]

For outdoor shooting , you have the Pentax F 70-210 f4-5.6 SMC Pentax-F 70-210mm F4-5.6 Reviews - F Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database that is even cheaper, smaller and lighter than the new Tamron 70-210 f4 lens.

Would it stack up optically though? I'm looking for sharpness across the frame for those nice landscape shots I can pixel peep )

[LensBeginner]

Would it stack up optically though? I'm looking for sharpness across the frame for those nice landscape shots I can pixel peep )

That one is a nice lens... it has a non-documented low dispersion element inside, and is very good optically.
Only downside... on the Italian forums is called "il demolitore" ("the demolisher") because of the racket of its screw-drive AF

[clackers]

Clackers I have looked into a M43 system. I am not quite there yet. The premium lenses do not appear to be much cheaper. So I decided to hang onto my K3 and K-01. The K3 and DA*50-135 are still an unmatched combo for size and IQ. I can take that combo anywhere without really any issue. I'm quietly waiting for the K3 successor.

It's so good, Scorpio, that DA*50-135. If I had to walk a long way, I'd carry it instead of my Tamron 70-200 and just shoot my K-1 in crop mode.

[LensBeginner]

But how often do you actually shoot below f/4? Of the 4750 shots I've taken with the DFA* 70-200, only 643 were below f/4.

Agreed: a friend of mine who shoots classical concerts with a Nikon FF usually uses f/4 because of DoF (and lens performance when stopped down). If the f/4 lens is optimized wide open... why not?

Didn't actually know there's a f4 zoom for ff available. I'll have a look. Is it a screw drive motor, or a silent one?

I'd like to see sharpness comparisons, for landscape work I want it to be very sharp at f5.6-8

It uses a SDM motor, but I've never heard of it failing, must be of another kind.
It's a very nice lens, only downside I've heard is the bokeh, which some find kinda busy.
Also see:
SMC Pentax-DA* 60-250mm F4 ED [IF] SDM Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

[clackers]

Agreed: a friend of mine who shoots classical concerts with a Nikon FF usually uses f/4 because of DoF (and lens performance when stopped down). If the f/4 lens is optimized wide open... why not?]

But lenses aren't optimized wide open, LB … give an example of an f4 lens that isn't at its sharpest a couple of stops down?