Lens Tournament: DA* 60-250mm F4 vs FA* 200mm F4 Macro

Adam · 10-20-2014, 08:00 PM

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the knockout round of the Greatest Pentax Lens Tournament! The rules are simple: Two lenses enter. You must choose one. The winner moves to Knockout Round Two. The loser is gone. Check out the bracket here, which is based on the user nomination results.

In this telephoto knockout match, the SMC Pentax-DA* 60-250mm F4 zoom faces the SMC Pentax-FA* 200mm F4 Macro.

Make your choice by voting in the poll above. You will need to log in or register if you don't yet have a forum account.
Feel free to argue, persuade, and generally carry on after that. Voting will be open for exactly 24 hours.

Lens info:

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)

PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

JinDesu · 10-20-2014, 08:01 PM

HOW IS THIS A FAIR VOTE!? GAH!

Had to vote for the FA*200, despite desiring both lenses very badly.

Wild Mark · 10-21-2014, 02:43 AM

OK, so the A*200mm macro dipped out to allow the DA*300mm to progress, but perhaps its autofocus sibling has a different fate? Surely the AF version has further to go in this context.

A vote from me for the FA200mm f4 macro

starjedi · 10-21-2014, 04:22 AM

Originally posted by JinDesu

HOW IS THIS A FAIR VOTE!? GAH!

Had to vote for the FA*200, despite desiring both lenses very badly.

One big difference is that FA*200 is full frame and 60-250 is merely a cropped APS-C... Keep in mind that thing will change as FF is in near future...

**Digitalis** · 10-21-2014, 04:42 AM

This isn't even remotely fair...

Marktax · 10-21-2014, 06:47 AM

I recall when the 200 macro was 600 bucks and out of reach for me. Should have sold my car or something . . .

DSims · 10-21-2014, 09:26 AM

I know the DA*60-250 is a favorite of some people, but its IQ can't even compete with the DA*300, let alone the FA*200/4 macro.

This one isn't even close - FA*200/4 macro is clearly one of the best Pentax lenses of all time, and its selling price is a strong indicator of this fact.

Reltih · 10-21-2014, 09:39 AM

Again, good lenses meet each other too soon. The FA* 200 F4 has better IQ, faster focus speed and very hard to find. As a result, I voted for it.

normhead · 10-21-2014, 09:48 AM

Quote:

I know the DA*60-250 is a favorite of some people, but its IQ can't even compete with the DA*300, let alone the FA*200/4 macro.

Actually the DA*60-250 it wipes the DA*300 a every focal length, except for 300mm, where the 300mm wins easily...at least with the FA*200 macro, you can compare tham at one focal length.

Check out the stats on photo zone comparing the 60-250 to the FA*300 ƒ4.5. or 200 2.8. The DA*60-250 has better resolution, the primes have better control of CA..."can't even compete?" hardly.

Maybe you have some criteria I don't know about.

DSims · 10-21-2014, 12:50 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Actually the DA*60-250 it wipes the DA*300 a every focal length, except for 300mm, where the 300mm wins easily...at least with the FA*200 macro, you can compare tham at one focal length.

Ha Ha Norm, very funny.

Originally posted by normhead

Check out the stats on photo zone comparing the 60-250 to the FA*300 ƒ4.5. or 200 2.8. The DA*60-250 has better resolution, the primes have better control of CA..."can't even compete?" hardly.

Maybe you have some criteria I don't know about.

Even the photozone numbers show the DA*300 coming out better. But I usually judge according to the photos (strange criteria, isn't it?).

normhead · 10-21-2014, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by DSims

Ha Ha Norm, very funny.

Even the photozone numbers show the DA*300 coming out better. But I usually judge according to the photos (strange criteria, isn't it?).

Ya but only if you compare the DA*60-250 on a 10 MP camera and the DA*300 on a 16 MP camera. meanwhile the DA*60-250 comes out better than the FA* 300 4.5 at 10 MP.

DA* 300 best resolution at 16 MP- 2412
DA* 60-250 best resolution at 10 MP - 2278.

FA 31 @ 16 MP best resolution 2596
FA 31 @ 10 Mp best resolution 2244

The DA*60-250 beats the 31 at 10 MP
But the 300 doesn't beat the 31 at 16 Mp

I seem to come to a different conclusion than you.

DSims · 10-21-2014, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Ya but only if you compare the DA*60-250 on a 10 MP camera and the DA*300 on a 16 MP camera. meanwhile the DA*6-250 come out better than the FA* 300 4.5 at 10 MP.

DA* 300 best resolution at 16 MP- 2412
DA* 60-250 best resolution at 10 MP - 2278.

FA 31 @ 16 MP best resolution 2596
FA 31 @ 10 Mp best resolution 2244

The DA*60-250 beats the 31 at 10 MP
But the 300 doesn't beat the 31 at 16 Mp

I seem to come to a different conclusion than you.

They use categories (ex, very good, good, ...) so you can make approximate comparisons, even though the numbers aren't comparable. While these few specific measurements provide helpful guidelines as to what to expect and which apertures are likely optimal, they don't "give you the whole picture," so to speak.

You work magic with the DA*60-250 because of your style of photography and your skill in post processing. But lens to lens, the FA*200/4 macro provides better IQ due to the inherent qualities of the lens itself. No one had to tell me this; the first time a saw a number of photos from this lens it was obvious.

I have no doubt the DA*60-250/4 is a nearly ideal lens for you, but as might be expected from a zoom, it suffers a bit wide open and it suffers at the borders.

OTOH, the FA*200/4 is one of the best macro lenses ever created - a category where virtually all the lenses have very good IQ already.

Maybe I should always check which lenses you own before I comment on them? I recently made a post on why I sold my Tamron 90 macro - did you catch that?

Honestly, I'm almost jealous because I always wanted the DA*60-250 to be a solution for me. But from the photos I saw to my experience trying it out, it never panned out for me. Too bad, because it covers such a nice range.

**Pål Jensen** · 10-21-2014, 04:10 PM

I bought the FA* 200/4 Macro the day it was released. I truly think this is indeed Pentax best lens ever.

Incidentally, it must be totally mindblowing with the Q system.

normhead · 10-21-2014, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by DSims

They use categories (ex, very good, good, ...) so you can make approximate comparisons, even though the numbers aren't comparable. While these few specific measurements provide helpful guidelines as to what to expect and which apertures are likely optimal, they don't "give you the whole picture," so to speak.

You work magic with the DA*60-250 because of your style of photography and your skill in post processing. But lens to lens, the FA*200/4 macro provides better IQ due to the inherent qualities of the lens itself. No one had to tell me this; the first time a saw a number of photos from this lens it was obvious.

I have no doubt the DA*60-250/4 is a nearly ideal lens for you, but as might be expected from a zoom, it suffers a bit wide open and it suffers at the borders.

OTOH, the FA*200/4 is one of the best macro lenses ever created - a category where virtually all the lenses have very good IQ already.

Maybe I should always check which lenses you own before I comment on them? I recently made a post on why I sold my Tamron 90 macro - did you catch that?

Honestly, I'm almost jealous because I always wanted the DA*60-250 to be a solution for me. But from the photos I saw to my experience trying it out, it never panned out for me. Too bad, because it covers such a nice range.

I missed your Tamron 90 post.... the big disappointment with the DA*60-250 is that at 12 feet distance, because of the internal focus, it's about the equivalent of a 135mm lens at full reach... my F-70-210 provides much more magnification even though technically it's shorter. The idea that it's 250mm at infinity. well really, how often do I shoot at infinity? If it was sold as a 50 to 135 as measured at 12 feet, most people would be overjoyed with it. To get what I expected from it, I have to put the 1.4 TC on it. Then it performs at 10-30 feet as the lens I thought I was buying, judging from my Sigma 70-300 and Tamron 90. I can honesty get the same shots of birds at my feeder with the Tamron 90 and 1.4 as I do with the DA*60-250 in a much lighter and faster focusing package. I like the lens... but I bet a Tamron 70-200 would give me more effective range and 2.8.

DSims · 10-21-2014, 09:34 PM

Originally posted by normhead

I missed your Tamron 90 post.... the big disappointment with the DA*60-250 is that at 12 feet distance, because of the internal focus, it's about the equivalent of a 135mm lens at full reach... my F-70-210 provides much more magnification even though technically it's shorter. The idea that it's 250mm at infinity. well really, how often do I shoot at infinity? If it was sold as a 50 to 135 as measured at 12 feet, most people would be overjoyed with it. To get what I expected from it, I have to put the 1.4 TC on it. Then it performs at 10-30 feet as the lens I thought I was buying, judging from my Sigma 70-300 and Tamron 90. I can honesty get the same shots of birds at my feeder with the Tamron 90 and 1.4 as I do with the DA*60-250 in a much lighter and faster focusing package. I like the lens... but I bet a Tamron 70-200 would give me more effective range and 2.8.

Very interesting - I think I've heard some of this before, but I had no idea how dramatic the FL difference is at closer distances.

I'm guessing the FA*200/4 macro has no problem acting like a 200mm FL at 12'.

View Poll Results: Which lens should advance to the next round?
DA* 60-250mm F4	43	40.95%
FA* 200mm F4 Macro	62	59.05%
Voters: 105. You may not vote on this poll

10-20-2014, 08:00 PM	#1
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,597	*Lens Tournament: DA 60-250mm F4 vs FA* 200mm F4 Macro** Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the knockout round of the Greatest Pentax Lens Tournament! The rules are simple: Two lenses enter. You must choose one. The winner moves to Knockout Round Two. The loser is gone. Check out the bracket here, which is based on the user nomination results. In this telephoto knockout match, the SMC Pentax-DA* 60-250mm F4 zoom faces the SMC Pentax-FA* 200mm F4 Macro. Make your choice by voting in the poll above. You will need to log in or register if you don't yet have a forum account. Feel free to argue, persuade, and generally carry on after that. Voting will be open for exactly 24 hours. Lens info: SMC Pentax-DA* 60-250mm F4 ED [IF] SDM Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database SMC Pentax-FA* 200mm F4 Macro ED [IF] Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

10-21-2014, 09:39 AM	#8
Reltih Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 84	Again, good lenses meet each other too soon. The FA* 200 F4 has better IQ, faster focus speed and very hard to find. As a result, I voted for it. Last edited by Reltih; 10-21-2014 at 09:08 PM.

10-21-2014, 01:07 PM	#11
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by DSims Ha Ha Norm, very funny. Even the photozone numbers show the DA300 coming out better. But I usually judge according to the photos (strange criteria, isn't it?). Ya but only if you compare the DA60-250 on a 10 MP camera and the DA300 on a 16 MP camera. meanwhile the DA60-250 comes out better than the FA* 300 4.5 at 10 MP. DA* 300 best resolution at 16 MP- 2412 DA* 60-250 best resolution at 10 MP - 2278. FA 31 @ 16 MP best resolution 2596 FA 31 @ 10 Mp best resolution 2244 The DA60-250 beats the 31 at 10 MP But the 300 doesn't beat the 31 at 16 Mp I seem to come to a different conclusion than you. Last edited by normhead; 10-21-2014 at 02:44 PM.*

10-21-2014, 02:51 PM	#12
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by normhead Ya but only if you compare the DA60-250 on a 10 MP camera and the DA300 on a 16 MP camera. meanwhile the DA6-250 come out better than the FA 300 4.5 at 10 MP. DA* 300 best resolution at 16 MP- 2412 DA* 60-250 best resolution at 10 MP - 2278. FA 31 @ 16 MP best resolution 2596 FA 31 @ 10 Mp best resolution 2244 The DA60-250 beats the 31 at 10 MP But the 300 doesn't beat the 31 at 16 Mp I seem to come to a different conclusion than you. They use categories (ex, very good, good, ...) so you can make approximate comparisons, even though the numbers aren't comparable. While these few specific measurements provide helpful guidelines as to what to expect and which apertures are likely optimal, they don't "give you the whole picture," so to speak. You work magic with the DA60-250 because of your style of photography and your skill in post processing. But lens to lens, the FA200/4 macro provides better IQ due to the inherent qualities of the lens itself. No one had to tell me this; the first time a saw a number of photos from this lens it was obvious. I have no doubt the DA60-250/4 is a nearly ideal lens for you, but as might be expected from a zoom, it suffers a bit wide open and it suffers at the borders. OTOH, the FA200/4 is one of the best macro lenses ever created - a category where virtually all the lenses have very good IQ already. Maybe I should always check which lenses you own before I comment on them? I recently made a post on why I sold my Tamron 90 macro - did you catch that? Honestly, I'm almost jealous because I always wanted the DA60-250 to be a solution for me. But from the photos I saw to my experience trying it out, it never panned out for me. Too bad, because it covers such a nice range. Last edited by DSims; 10-21-2014 at 03:10 PM.

10-20-2014, 08:01 PM	#2
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	HOW IS THIS A FAIR VOTE!? GAH! Had to vote for the FA*200, despite desiring both lenses very badly.

10-21-2014, 02:43 AM	#3
Wild Mark Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Newcastle Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,954	OK, so the A200mm macro dipped out to allow the DA300mm to progress, but perhaps its autofocus sibling has a different fate? Surely the AF version has further to go in this context. A vote from me for the FA200mm f4 macro

10-21-2014, 04:22 AM	#4
starjedi Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: New Jersey Posts: 932	Originally posted by JinDesu HOW IS THIS A FAIR VOTE!? GAH! Had to vote for the FA200, despite desiring both lenses very badly. One big difference is that FA200 is full frame and 60-250 is merely a cropped APS-C... Keep in mind that thing will change as FF is in near future...

10-21-2014, 04:42 AM	#5
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	This isn't even remotely fair...

10-21-2014, 06:47 AM	#6
Marktax Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Washington DC Photos: Albums Posts: 610	I recall when the 200 macro was 600 bucks and out of reach for me. Should have sold my car or something . . .

10-21-2014, 09:26 AM	#7
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	I know the DA60-250 is a favorite of some people, but its IQ can't even compete with the DA300, let alone the FA200/4 macro. This one isn't even close - FA200/4 macro is clearly one of the best Pentax lenses of all time, and its selling price is a strong indicator of this fact.

10-21-2014, 09:48 AM	#9
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Quote: I know the DA60-250 is a favorite of some people, but its IQ can't even compete with the DA300, let alone the FA200/4 macro. Actually the DA60-250 it wipes the DA300 a every focal length, except for 300mm, where the 300mm wins easily...at least with the FA200 macro, you can compare tham at one focal length. Check out the stats on photo zone comparing the 60-250 to the FA300 ƒ4.5. or 200 2.8. The DA60-250 has better resolution, the primes have better control of CA..."can't even compete?" hardly. Maybe you have some criteria I don't know about.

10-21-2014, 12:50 PM	#10
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by normhead Actually the DA60-250 it wipes the DA300 a every focal length, except for 300mm, where the 300mm wins easily...at least with the FA200 macro, you can compare tham at one focal length. Ha Ha Norm, very funny. Originally posted by normhead Check out the stats on photo zone comparing the 60-250 to the FA300 ƒ4.5. or 200 2.8. The DA60-250 has better resolution, the primes have better control of CA..."can't even compete?" hardly. Maybe you have some criteria I don't know about. Even the photozone numbers show the DA300 coming out better. But I usually judge according to the photos (strange criteria, isn't it?).

10-21-2014, 04:10 PM	#13
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	I bought the FA* 200/4 Macro the day it was released. I truly think this is indeed Pentax best lens ever. Incidentally, it must be totally mindblowing with the Q system.

10-21-2014, 04:23 PM	#14
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by DSims They use categories (ex, very good, good, ...) so you can make approximate comparisons, even though the numbers aren't comparable. While these few specific measurements provide helpful guidelines as to what to expect and which apertures are likely optimal, they don't "give you the whole picture," so to speak. You work magic with the DA60-250 because of your style of photography and your skill in post processing. But lens to lens, the FA200/4 macro provides better IQ due to the inherent qualities of the lens itself. No one had to tell me this; the first time a saw a number of photos from this lens it was obvious. I have no doubt the DA60-250/4 is a nearly ideal lens for you, but as might be expected from a zoom, it suffers a bit wide open and it suffers at the borders. OTOH, the FA200/4 is one of the best macro lenses ever created - a category where virtually all the lenses have very good IQ already. Maybe I should always check which lenses you own before I comment on them? I recently made a post on why I sold my Tamron 90 macro - did you catch that? Honestly, I'm almost jealous because I always wanted the DA60-250 to be a solution for me. But from the photos I saw to my experience trying it out, it never panned out for me. Too bad, because it covers such a nice range. I missed your Tamron 90 post.... the big disappointment with the DA60-250 is that at 12 feet distance, because of the internal focus, it's about the equivalent of a 135mm lens at full reach... my F-70-210 provides much more magnification even though technically it's shorter. The idea that it's 250mm at infinity. well really, how often do I shoot at infinity? If it was sold as a 50 to 135 as measured at 12 feet, most people would be overjoyed with it. To get what I expected from it, I have to put the 1.4 TC on it. Then it performs at 10-30 feet as the lens I thought I was buying, judging from my Sigma 70-300 and Tamron 90. I can honesty get the same shots of birds at my feeder with the Tamron 90 and 1.4 as I do with the DA*60-250 in a much lighter and faster focusing package. I like the lens... but I bet a Tamron 70-200 would give me more effective range and 2.8.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Lens Tournament: DA* 300mm F4 vs A* 200mm F4 Macro	Adam	Pentax Forums Giveaways	17	10-23-2014 04:43 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA* 60-250mm F4 ED[IF] SDM	DVaughan007	Sold Items	4	05-01-2014 05:15 PM
Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 Di LD Macro VS SMC Pentax-DA* 60-250mm F4 ED [IF] SDM	WVRICK	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	39	01-22-2014 05:46 PM
For Sale - Sold: SMC Pentax DA* 60-250mm f4 ED (IF) SDM lens	bonovox	Sold Items	15	12-28-2012 07:33 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax 60-250mm F4 DA lens	BobDantonio	Sold Items	5	08-14-2012 06:33 PM

10-21-2014, 09:34 PM	#15
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by normhead I missed your Tamron 90 post.... the big disappointment with the DA60-250 is that at 12 feet distance, because of the internal focus, it's about the equivalent of a 135mm lens at full reach... my F-70-210 provides much more magnification even though technically it's shorter. The idea that it's 250mm at infinity. well really, how often do I shoot at infinity? If it was sold as a 50 to 135 as measured at 12 feet, most people would be overjoyed with it. To get what I expected from it, I have to put the 1.4 TC on it. Then it performs at 10-30 feet as the lens I thought I was buying, judging from my Sigma 70-300 and Tamron 90. I can honesty get the same shots of birds at my feeder with the Tamron 90 and 1.4 as I do with the DA60-250 in a much lighter and faster focusing package. I like the lens... but I bet a Tamron 70-200 would give me more effective range and 2.8. Very interesting - I think I've heard some of this before, but I had no idea how dramatic the FL difference is at closer distances. I'm guessing the FA200/4 macro* has no problem acting like a 200mm FL at 12'.