Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-15-2010, 06:47 PM   #16
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,314
If the op wants good quality for wildlife and can do manual focus why not a K mount 300F4

Best bang for the buck IMO

07-15-2010, 07:24 PM   #17
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
I have had two copies of the DA 50-200mm and now have the DA 50-200mm WR. One copy of the DA50-200mm was soft, the other one was good but the WR is the best of the lot sharpness wise.
I too have the DA 55-300mm but I find I like the DA 50-200mm WR for the compact size and less focus hunting. Of course longer is better for animals and shooting subjects from further away, but if you're not shooting such subjects, the 50-200mm range is good enough.
07-15-2010, 07:31 PM   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Oklahoma USA
Posts: 1,476
When I bought my k100, the 55-300 had not been released, so the only choice was the 70-300 Tamron or Sigma (most seem to prefer the former.) I bought the 50-200 DA, and have not been disappointed, although I have not compared it to any other lens except the 100-300mm 4.5-5.6F (at 200mm), thinking that since I had been pretty content with 210mm with 35mm, 200mm on a small digital sensor would be plenty.

But then, as an experiment, I got a used 100-300mm (just for the 200-300mm capability), and have gotten a surprising amount of use out of it. Based on that I'd get either the 55-300 if you have the funds, or maybe the Tamron if not. The only exception would be if size was a prime consideration, in which case the 50-200mm seems to be good for what it is. The 50-200mm is likely to be available used, since some people have traded it for the 55-300, whereas it's probably less likely to find as much of a break on a used 55-300.

Paul
07-16-2010, 04:20 AM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,553
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
In my experience with computers, I would believe that one day ASP-C will become a sort of obselete technology.
If you look at cameras, the only cameras in danger of becoming obsolete are the dedicated small fixed lens camera. The thing making them obsolete is cell phones with camera, not cameras with bigger sensors.

135 format sensors becoming cheaper mean APS-C sensors become cheaper still, so APS-C isn't going to go away. There is pressure on the lower end DSLR however and that is coming from mirror-less systems. The traditional APS-C DSLR will survive however, but the emphasis will be on bodies that have the performance to tempt people away from mirror-less, but not spend the money on 135 format, i.e. high end APS-C DSLRs. I would bet those high end APS-C DSLR are going to need to be small as well, (sound familiar?).

I think the future inter-changeable lens camera market will be something like; 60% own mirror-less systems, 30% own a high end APS-C DSLR, and 9% own a 135 format camera, 1% or less own medium format.

Thank you
Russell


Last edited by Russell-Evans; 08-10-2010 at 01:53 AM.
07-16-2010, 06:28 AM   #20
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,012
QuoteOriginally posted by Russell-Evans Quote
If you look at cameras, the only cameras in danger of becoming obsolete are the dedicated small fixed lens camera. The thing making them obsolete is cell phones with camera, not cameras with bigger sensors.

135 format sensors becoming keeper mean APS-C sensor become cheaper still, so APS-C isn't going to go away. There is pressure on the lower end DSLR however and that is coming from mirror-less systems. The traditional APS-C DSLR will survive however, but the emphasis will be on bodies that have the performance to tempt people away from mirror-less, i.e. high end APS-C DSLRs, but not spend the money on 135 format.. I would bet those high end APS-C DSLR are going to need to be small as well, (sound familiar?).

I think the future inter-changeable lens camera market will be something like; 60% own mirror-less systems, 30% own a high end APS-C DSLR, and 9% own a 135 format camera, 1% or less own medium format.

Thank you
Russell
I think you're right on with this prediction. The trend is toward smaller systems. The IQ and noise issues of small sensors are improving. My comment about the inexpensive Sigma being usable for FF was not in anticipating a FF digital but for film use. A lot of us still own film bodies and shoot a roll from time to time and prefer lenses that can get dual use. Obviously nobody paying out thousands for a FF body is going to buy 129$ lenses for it.

For what it's worth, Pentax has the best compatibility across the line of all the camera manufacturers for their old lenses. ALL Pentax lenses can be used on their digital cameras, something none of the others can claim. Many DA lenses work perfectly fine with film cameras. A small sensor, mirrorless camera will have adapters to use the older lenses.
07-16-2010, 07:06 AM   #21
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,765
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
I have had two copies of the DA 50-200mm and now have the DA 50-200mm WR. One copy of the DA50-200mm was soft, the other one was good but the WR is the best of the lot sharpness wise.
I too have the DA 55-300mm but I find I like the DA 50-200mm WR for the compact size and less focus hunting. Of course longer is better for animals and shooting subjects from further away, but if you're not shooting such subjects, the 50-200mm range is good enough.
My original DA50-200 was and is much sharper than many would lead you to believe. The DA55-300 is twice its size, and that does mean that it is less ideal as a travel and general-purpose lens.

To be frank about the extra reach, whether it is my M200, DA50-200, or DA55-300, I still have almost exactly the same feeling that I would like more reach when my subject is a bird or other wildlife. I actually find the M200 to be my favorite wildlife lens of the three, as its crops on the K20d are often better to my eyes than 300mm on the excellent DA55-300. As Lowell said, the real wildlife lenses are the longer fixed lenses.
07-16-2010, 10:23 AM   #22
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Original Poster
Oh wow fantastic discussion - thank you all for your expertise.

I think the K 300 f4 is a very good suggestion - but I am not a good enough photographer yet. My only lens other than my kit is a SMC A 28mm f2.8 - a very nice lens on a crop sensor giving me an almost-normal FOV. At this focal length and my skill, I can handle manual focus, but I think I will need a good number of years of practice before I will be capable of manually focusing at 300mm on a moving target!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but DOF decreases and focal length increases, correct?

Anyways sharpness and overall quality of the lens I buy is not paramount - no matter what I buy, my skills will likely be holding the glass back, not the other way around. Therefore all of these lenses look promising, and I suppose I have some thinking to do.

The highly regarded Tamron (for the price) has 2 versions - digital and film. What would the difference be between the two? For the most part, the specs are identical.

My thing with full frame compatibility is half a fear of obsolescence (which I think you explained very well, I feel much more comfortable now), but actually has more to do with the crop factor of the smaller sensor and the potential for very high ISOs. I like the idea of a 24mm being very wide, and being able to use a 50mm 1.4 indoors without feeling claustrophobic. The sensor crop seems to have had the largest effect on the low light and wide angle scene, because the lowest f-stops available are now mild telephoto. Also, the idea of a clean high iso camera is just fun to me.

If I take as many pictures in 5 years from now as I do right now, I could see myself shelling out for a nice full frame, and I feel like Pentax will have one by then!


What is the major downside to this? I've heard "optimized for digital" but what does that really mean? What is the benefit to buying a lens for ASP-C?

Thanks so much!
07-16-2010, 02:08 PM   #23
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,314
Optomized for digital addresses two issues

There are some problems possible with reflections off the rear element, or other parts at the rear of the lens.

There was a problem with early generation sensors and vignetting caused by the lens design and the need (on early sensors to have the light hitting the sensor near perpendicular

Optomized for digital addresses these two issues. Personally I have experienced the first, but only on one of more than 20 film lenses. I have never seen the second.

08-03-2010, 07:35 AM - 1 Like   #24
Pentaxian
Clarkey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brampton, ON, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,623
Ah, I was wondering why I hadn't heard back from you (OP).
Yes, I have my 50-200mm for travel and portraiture (at which it is actually a really good lens - I would recommend it for this purpose as it is so small and light), but I have the 55-300mm for wildlife.
It is excellent - check out some of the reviews here.

Whatever you do, if you get an AF lens, get it with quickshift- especially with the 55-300mm, which is LOUD and slow when focussing (tends to tick wildlife off a bit).
08-03-2010, 09:48 AM   #25
Veteran Member
GerryL's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,731
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
I have had two copies of the DA 50-200mm and now have the DA 50-200mm WR. One copy of the DA50-200mm was soft, the other one was good but the WR is the best of the lot sharpness wise.
I too have the DA 55-300mm but I find I like the DA 50-200mm WR for the compact size and less focus hunting. Of course longer is better for animals and shooting subjects from further away, but if you're not shooting such subjects, the 50-200mm range is good enough.
This does not just pertain to focus hunting but I find that since the focusing doesn't need to rack up all the way to 300mm, the 200mm focuses faster in any situation.
This is also the reason why I still keep it even though I have other long lenses.
08-03-2010, 09:01 PM   #26
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Original Poster
Thanks everyone.

You all have me convinced on the 300mm front, but it's not in the budget right now. I bought a cheap Takumar Bayonet 70-200 for now, with the intention of an AF 300 in the long run.

What a great site.
08-03-2010, 09:40 PM   #27
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,485
If Price is really a concern, Tamron LD Di 70-300. 200mm on a zoom is never enough in my opinion. If price is Less of a concern, the DA (or DAL) 55-300 though I have no experience with that lens. For the range, I do truly believe that the Tamron 70-300 is a lot of bang for the buck.

Show Tamron - a set on Flickr

08-04-2010, 12:06 AM   #28
Site Supporter
Bramela's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Newcastle Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,281
Further to Jeff's comments above. I have owned the DA55-300 for sometime and I assure you, for the price, I can highly recommend it.
It is not a ***** lens, but for the price bracket I have no complaints, whatsoever.
Attached Images
 
08-04-2010, 07:45 AM   #29
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JeffJS Quote
If Price is really a concern, Tamron LD Di 70-300. 200mm on a zoom is never enough in my opinion. If price is Less of a concern, the DA (or DAL) 55-300 though I have no experience with that lens. For the range, I do truly believe that the Tamron 70-300 is a lot of bang for the buck.

Show Tamron - a set on Flickr

I've compared the tamron and the sigma quite a bit and this does look like quite a fantastic lens. Thank you for your recommendation - I'm considering it as a Christmas present to myself .
08-06-2010, 11:46 PM   #30
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 81
I see that the package with the KX and the 55-300 is available again. Is that the same lens most are referring to in this thread?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
animals, camera, da, hours, pentax help, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Newbie K-x Owner Looking for Opinions about Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD iankh Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 2 02-08-2010 04:57 AM
The Online Photographer: SMC Pentax DA* 200mm f/2.8 ED[IF] SDM Review k100d Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 07-08-2008 07:45 PM
The Online Photographer Reviews the DA*200mm Art Vandelay II Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 0 07-08-2008 06:26 PM
Your opinions about two 200mm f/3.5 lenses bc_the_path Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 0 06-30-2008 11:32 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:26 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top