faster lens or a k-5?

sanox · 07-20-2011, 09:33 PM

I've been shooting my daughter's basketball games with a k-x and a tamron 70-200 f2.8 the past month or so. I'm a beginner and although I did get some pretty nice pics, I feel the tamron AF is a little slow. I've seen this same lens coupled with the k-5 on a youtube video and it seemed to focus waaay faster on the k-5. Some say the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is a much faster lens especially the old non-hsm, non-macro version. Do I buy the Sigma lens or do I spend almost twice as much and get the K-5???...and do not say buy both. haha, not an option right now.

**Just1MoreDave** · 07-20-2011, 09:47 PM

One thing I learned on my AA-powered camera: batteries affect AF speed a lot. I would try non-rechargeable lithiums, because they are 1.5 volts vs. 1.2 for NiMH rechargeables. That adds up over 4 batteries. It may not work but it's only $10 and the batteries last forever.

I don't know if there are any AF tests between K-x and K-5. Just one video doesn't prove anything, because a well-lit, high contrast target might have been used, while your shooting conditions are less ideal.

DaveHolmes · 07-20-2011, 09:50 PM

I've shot a fair bit of Ice Hockey with the K-x and without a 2.8 lens (DA50-200WR) and although it focuses slower than my other lenses, I too have had good results...

I wonder if longer focal lengths have a tendency to focus slower? Marc usually has the answers to queries like this...

NicoleAu · 07-20-2011, 09:57 PM

One of the advantages the K5 would have is also the TAV setting, for indoor sports. Better ISO capabilities and my friends with the K5 tell me the AF is better on it than on the K-x. I think it's possibly better for sports than the K-x, but i have no real-life experience.

hcc · 07-21-2011, 12:25 AM

'Good glass is worth every penny'.

'Good glass is good investment'.

'A lens is an investment, a [camera] body a sink'

Simply do consider invest in some good glass (fast prime). It is worth every cents and you will be able to use it for a lifetime, incl. in your future K-.. in a few years.

In my case, I have a K-7 and I shoot often indoor volleyball. With a fast lens (f1.8 or better f1.4), I get some excellent results with f1.4 and f1.8 lenses.

07-20-2011, 09:33 PM	#1
sanox Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: La Palma, CA Posts: 25	faster lens or a k-5? I've been shooting my daughter's basketball games with a k-x and a tamron 70-200 f2.8 the past month or so. I'm a beginner and although I did get some pretty nice pics, I feel the tamron AF is a little slow. I've seen this same lens coupled with the k-5 on a youtube video and it seemed to focus waaay faster on the k-5. Some say the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is a much faster lens especially the old non-hsm, non-macro version. Do I buy the Sigma lens or do I spend almost twice as much and get the K-5???...and do not say buy both. haha, not an option right now.

07-21-2011, 12:25 AM	#5
hcc Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,005	'Good glass is worth every penny'. 'Good glass is good investment'. 'A lens is an investment, a [camera] body a sink' Simply do consider invest in some good glass (fast prime). It is worth every cents and you will be able to use it for a lifetime, incl. in your future K-.. in a few years. In my case, I have a K-7 and I shoot often indoor volleyball. With a fast lens (f1.8 or better f1.4), I get some excellent results with f1.4 and f1.8 lenses. Last edited by hcc; 07-21-2011 at 02:22 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is there any lens faster than F1.2 that will fit a Pentax?	Christopher M.W.T	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	29	09-30-2010 12:20 AM
A lens faster than the da f3.2 21mm limited?	troglodyte	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	37	08-21-2010 04:50 PM
Is a f4.0 medium format lens faster than a 35mm f4.0 lens?	hangu	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	24	07-17-2010 05:01 PM

07-20-2011, 09:47 PM	#2
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	One thing I learned on my AA-powered camera: batteries affect AF speed a lot. I would try non-rechargeable lithiums, because they are 1.5 volts vs. 1.2 for NiMH rechargeables. That adds up over 4 batteries. It may not work but it's only $10 and the batteries last forever. I don't know if there are any AF tests between K-x and K-5. Just one video doesn't prove anything, because a well-lit, high contrast target might have been used, while your shooting conditions are less ideal.

07-20-2011, 09:50 PM	#3
DaveHolmes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 1,501	I've shot a fair bit of Ice Hockey with the K-x and without a 2.8 lens (DA50-200WR) and although it focuses slower than my other lenses, I too have had good results... I wonder if longer focal lengths have a tendency to focus slower? Marc usually has the answers to queries like this...

07-20-2011, 09:57 PM	#4
NicoleAu Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Central Coast, NSW, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 539	One of the advantages the K5 would have is also the TAV setting, for indoor sports. Better ISO capabilities and my friends with the K5 tell me the AF is better on it than on the K-x. I think it's possibly better for sports than the K-x, but i have no real-life experience.