[Quazimoto]

from your full sized sample, at long end, your lens looks better at f2.8 than my pentax 50-135 at f2.8

Yeah, that is almost certainly the case from what I see as well.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

Here's another sample photo shot at f/2.8. This photo is hot out of the camera, and was shot using the actual lens for sale just a few minutes ago. Please note that I put the focus on the side of the soap dispenser, not on the pump/nozzle, which is actually behind the focal plane. As always, click on the image for the full-size 12MP image.

[LeDave]

What filter length does it use? 77mm?

[Edgar_in_Indy]

What filter length does it use? 77mm?

Filter size is 67mm. This lens is not nearly as big as the 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses that take the 77mm filters. It's close to the size of the Pentax 55-300mm lens, and is almost identical to the Pentax 50-135mm in dimensions.

[Pepe Guitarra]

I am very interested, but when you say: My copy will never sell, but this one I will, I have the feeling that the copy you are selling is of a lesser quality somehow. Usually one buys the best thing, not the lesser thing. In other words, no body as a child said: I want to be the vice-president of the US. Do you know what I mean?

[Edgar_in_Indy]

I understand what you're saying, but the two lenses perform identically as far as I can tell. The only tangible difference is that my original 50-150mm has a couple of noticeable specs of dust behind the front element, whereas this copy for sale does not. I don't know if my lens always had the dust from the time it was new, or if they showed up later, but it does not bother me since most lenses will get dust in them eventually, and it does not affect the photos.

The reason I will never sell my original copy is very simple. I bought it brand new 1.5 years ago just before it was discontinued, so I still have 2.5 years remaining on the original warranty, and on top of that I bought a Mack Camera 7-year warranty. This is important to me since I don't have any plans of ever parting with my 50-150mm. It is imminently useful, and there's nothing else out there than can match the size, weight, image quality, performance, and speed of this lens. And I've not heard of anything on the horizon that will be released to rival it.

I ended up with this second copy recently when I saw it being offered on eBay with a Buy-it-Now price well below its market value by somebody who obviously didn't realize how rare and special it is in Pentax mount. Perhaps he based his price on what he saw Canon or Nikon versions sell for.

This lens almost never shows up on eBay, but I have a search alert setup for this lens, so I was notified of it immediately. I snatched it up with the aim of raising some cash to purchase a K-30. If there was a problem with the lens, I would have taken advantage of PayPal/eBay's (overly)generous buyer-protection policies and returned it. For determining my asking price, I checked with the seller of the last 50-150mm to show up on the Marketplace, and he said his sold for $850. That's why I chose $875, so it would give me some negotiating room. I personally think it's worth more than that, since I would never dream of selling mine for less than $1000, and that would only be if I really needed the money.

As far as your vice-president analogy, apparently it doesn't apply in the case of Joe Biden. In the following short clip, he claims that he and his parents actually did dream of him becoming vice-president when he was a child. So I don't know if they had some kind of premonition, or were just slightly pessimistic. And no, I don't know why he's yelling in the video.

You Tube

You Tube

[Pepe Guitarra]

,,, As far as your vice-president analogy, apparently it doesn't apply in the case of Joe Biden. In the following short clip, he claims that he and his parents actually did dream of him becoming vice-president when he was a child. ... [/url]

Well, good try, but he said, president, later on, he remembered that he was the VP, and trew in the VP thing. But, good search on Youtube. See also, that his mother thought he and his brother could be millionaires, not poor Pentaxians who wish they had money to buy a lens.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

Well, good try, but he said, president, later on, he remembered that he was the VP, and threw in the VP thing.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

Here are a few pictures of my white K-x modeling the Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8. I've always liked how it looks on the camera.

[alamo5000]

Lets be honest, I would like this lens. I would like a lot of lenses.

I think this lens is great but I also know that sigma soon will have a 120-300mm f2.8 constant coming out soon...

Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM AF Lens (For Pentax)

For true sports photography that extra 150mm might be a good thing to have. 200mm might be fine, 150mm might be great too...

But I also want a sigma 50-500 for a number of reasons. For shooting Polo tournaments (quite fun actually) the 50-500mm will be great...the events are held in bright daylight. Also I live very far in the country so I could do a lot of bird shots and wildlife...for shooting hockey (from the stands) indoors, not so sure. 150mm? is it enough? 50-150 leaves no seams in my zoom range... however a 70-200mm gives me more zoom which for field sports might be good to have the extra reach.

I have a 55-300 now but it starts at f4. It works great but I don't really don't know what the heck I want.

If I had a lot of money I could drop 25 grand on lenses no problem. I am not sure what i want, only that my funds are not unlimited.

[GlennG]

Edgar, impressive photos, all. I'm tempted. Did you ever couple the 50-150 (your other copy) with a good 1.4 teleconverter to get a keen 70-210 f/4?

[Edgar_in_Indy]

Edgar, impressive photos, all. I'm tempted. Did you ever couple the 50-150 (your other copy) with a good 1.4 teleconverter to get a keen 70-210 f/4?

No, I have a Sigma 100-300 F4 for when I need to go beyond 150mm, and I used to have a Sigma 150-500mm. Honestly, if I ever wanted the 70-210mm range, I'd probably be much more inclined to just pick up a 70-200mm f/2.8, since older non-HSM/non-OS copies can be had for very reasonable prices. But the great thing about the 50-150mm (besides the amazing IQ and fast AF) is the reasonably compact size and weight.

Before buying my 50-150mm, I had considered a 70-200mm, but to me the 50-70mm is much more important than the 150-200mm range. You can always crop a little closer, but you can't do the same in reverse to make a shot wider. I use this lens inside a lot, so the 50mm gets used quite a bit.

[Pepe Guitarra]

I have a question: The DA 50-135 was designed for cropped sensor cameras, is this Sigma also designed for crop sensor cameras? Thanks, Pepe

[Edgar_in_Indy]

I have a question: The DA 50-135 was designed for cropped sensor cameras, is this Sigma also designed for crop sensor cameras? Thanks, Pepe

Yes, it was designed for crop sensors. It was meant to be a 70-200mm FF equivalent (actually works out to 75-225mm equiv), but they took advantage of the smaller APS-C sensor to make the lens much smaller and lighter than the 70-200mm FF lenses.

[TomTextura]

I think this lens is great but I also know that sigma soon will have a 120-300mm f2.8 constant coming out soon...

Not so sure about the "soon" part. It could very well be never for all I know. Sigma originally announced that it would be available in K-mount but that was over a year ago and all official traces of that announcement have vanished from the web last I checked. I believe that BHPhoto listing has been there since shortly after the now old announcement but there's no mention of it being available for Pentax on the Sigma website. It's also over three times as expensive than this lens being offered here. I'd be interested in this lens being offered if only it were WR and I wasn't already very happy with my DA*50-135. It looks solid and like a good performer. Maybe Sigma will find it worth releasing that 120-300mm f/2.8 (that is "splash" resistant BTW) if/when Pentax comes out with a FF camera. Interestingly, Sigma doesn't seem to market the "splash" resistance feature that they originally did anymore either. That might be telling or their confidence in the weather seals; they want to avoid liability on such a pricey lens.

I am quite jealous of the OP's 120-300mm f/4. I'm not much of a telephoto shooter but would like to have such a lens in my kit for the occasions I do want/need the long reach.