[imno007]

Hi, I've got my eyes set on the Pentax 55-300 lens now (the DA version, not the DAL), but I'm just wondering if there's another lens out there that covers the same range and either has more features/better performance for a comparable price or has equal features/quality for less money - or, of course, I'd take better performance for less money.

There doesn't seem to be a lot of choice. All I've seen so far are a bunch of posts about the Sigma 100-300 lenses or the Tamron 70-300 - both of which seem to be generally considered as less worthy than the Pentax, at least in terms of the quality of images they produce.

Is that is for choices?

TIA!

[Marc Sabatella]

What you see is what you get here - better costs more, cheaper isn't as good.

[reeftool]

The 70-300 lenses from Sigma and Tamron are similar in quality. There are many threads in the forum about both. They are priced in the under $200 range from most dealers. The Pentax has a little more zoom range and people who own both the Penatx and one of the Tamrons, or Sigmas claim the 55-300 is better on the long end. The Sigma 100-300/4 is jumping up to a higher class and price. It is well spoken of and will set you back a grand. Long glass is expensive. Long fast glass is very, very expensive.

[imno007]

Okay, guys, thanks for the replies. Just confirms what I'd already pretty much decided: that the Pentax 55-300 is the best way for to go.

[imno007]

The 70-300 lenses from Sigma and Tamron are similar in quality. There are many threads in the forum about both. They are priced in the under $200 range from most dealers. The Pentax has a little more zoom range and people who own both the Penatx and one of the Tamrons, or Sigmas claim the 55-300 is better on the long end. The Sigma 100-300/4 is jumping up to a higher class and price. It is well spoken of and will set you back a grand. Long glass is expensive. Long fast glass is very, very expensive.

For the record, I mistakenly listed the Sigma 100-300 (definitely too much for my budget), but the one I was actually considering was the Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG OS.

Looks like the Pentax might shoot better in low light, though..?

[Bramela]

I think you should find the 55-300 a very acceptable lens, for the price. As Marc said, there are better lens but at higher prices.
Old saying applies " You get what you pay for"

I have the 55-300 and have no problems with it up to date. Sample :

[AndrewG NY]

Basically any improvement in speed, performance/quality will literally weigh and cost twice as much as the DA 55-300.

[imno007]

Thanks for the replies, and thanks for posting the image, Bramela, that's the kind of nice pic I'm use to seeing with the lens. I'm not expecting anything bad with it, believe me, I'm just always driven to find the best bang for the buck I can. Can't be spending too much on lenses right now because I want to get a decent telescope soon.

[lurchlarson]

For the record, I mistakenly listed the Sigma 100-300 (definitely too much for my budget), but the one I was actually considering was the Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG OS.

Looks like the Pentax might shoot better in low light, though..?

You don't need to pay the extra money for this lens. Assuming you have a Pentax DSLR you already have shake reduction in the body. Go with the Pentax 55-300.

[Ken T]

For the record, I mistakenly listed the Sigma 100-300 (definitely too much for my budget), but the one I was actually considering was the Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG OS.

Looks like the Pentax might shoot better in low light, though..?

I have the Sigma 70-300 but since I got the DA 55-300, I don't even remember where I 've put the Sigma .

DA 55-300 & K20D

[Rondec]

I really like the DA 55-300. I had an old Sigma 70-300 prior that I struggled to use. It never really sharpened up very much, even stopped down and the colors always seemed kind of muddy to me. I'd say the newer Sigmas are better, so don't take that as a knock on Sigma. The 55-300 is a relatively small lens and quite sharp throughout. Has a very nice focal range -- I particularly like the fact that it goes to 55 on the wide end, rather than 70.





To get better than this lens, you would have to spend a lot more. I'm thinking of the Sigma 100-300 f4, or the DA * 60-250 f4. Both are sharper wide open, useable with TC's and an awful lot bigger.

[imno007]

Very nice, some really impressive shots, guys, thanks. As the old saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words. You've convinced me!

lurchlarson, I do have a Pentax DSLR, the k-x, so the 55-300 will do nicely.

Thanks again!

[reeftool]

Just to mention, I have the Sigma 70-300. It came with the package deal when I bought my K10D. I use it a lot and it has performed well for me. From seeing the posted shots and other peoples comments, I would buy the 55-300 if doing it over today. However, I don't think it's that much of an upgrade to make me dump the Sigma.

[trevorgrout]

I got a 55-300 after a lot of research on this forum. I am soooo glad I did because it take fantastic pictures. Went to Hawaii recently and the 55-300 was absolutely essential it getting a long enough reach. I am attaching a picture of the view on the Marine base. This was taken with the kx and the 55-300. Just love this lens. I realized that this lens is too long for close ups and indoors....I am wanting to get the DA 40 limited. But that will have to wait a few months. I am going to have to give plasma for a while

[GerryL]

You said you wanted value for your money..so, go for the DA L 55-300mm.
It is cheaper then the DA version but has the same lens formula and IQ.