[aslyfox]

. . . the third-party 70-200 f2.8's would be great. The 70-200's are not light weight or small though.

for information on 70-200mm lenses:

HD Pentax-D FA* 70-200mm F2.8 ED DC AW
Vs. Other 70-200mm Lenses . . .

HD Pentax-D FA* 70-200mm F2.8 ED DC AW
Vs. Tamron's 70-200mm

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/hd-pentax-d-fa-star-70-200mm-f28/introduction.html

[Cerebum]

Cerebum, where are you seeing a 55-300 PLM, a 16-50, and a brand new KP for $1000 USD? I think you get one of those lenses or the other with a new KP at $1000 USD.


Based on what mom2mny has shared, a KP sounds like a great camera and a lens like the 55-300 (any of them but especially the PLM) or one of the third-party 70-200 f2.8's would be great. The 70-200's are not light weight or small though.

Sorry, brain f*rt 18-50mm

KP at B&H £507, used 18-50mm £120 ish leaving £373 for the PLM. B&H have them for £325, so you get change

[pres589]

mom2mny's profile states USA not UK, so $1000 USD not a thousand pounds. A new KP is $700. Unless there's a clearance or used 55-300 PLM from B&H, they're $450 new currently. Used on Evilbay they're about $100 less. I think your suggestion is well past the mentioned budget.

aslyfox, I'm not sure what I'm to take away from your reply, although maybe it was more for mom2mny and not me. Right now there's a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 on Evilbay that shows a sample shot that looks wonderful, an aperture ring (which I would want but anyone with a KP wouldn't care about) and apparently a dead fly inside the lens + no hood for about $150. I don't know if I'd suggest pouncing on that exact lens but smart shopping could get a k-mount shooter something like that for a great price with some advantages over the 55-300's as well as some drawbacks. There are a lot of ways to go about this sort of question.

[Cerebum]

mom2mny's profile states USA not UK, so $1000 USD not a thousand pounds. A new KP is $700. Unless there's a clearance or used 55-300 PLM from B&H, they're $450 new currently. Used on Evilbay they're about $100 less. I think your suggestion is well past the mentioned budget.

aslyfox, I'm not sure what I'm to take away from your reply, although maybe it was more for mom2mny and not me. Right now there's a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 on Evilbay that shows a sample shot that looks wonderful, an aperture ring (which I would want but anyone with a KP wouldn't care about) and apparently a dead fly inside the lens + no hood for about $150. I don't know if I'd suggest pouncing on that exact lens but smart shopping could get a k-mount shooter something like that for a great price with some advantages over the 55-300's as well as some drawbacks. There are a lot of ways to go about this sort of question.

Oh for goodness sake! We are throwing out things he could look at, not signing him up! Is it really necessary to dismiss suggestions, especially as you aren't the OP! Its not as if we are suggesting star lenses! I managed to find a nearly new KP £200 below the normal price, a 15mm limited £100 below normal, in fact every limited i own was below the eBay level. Bargains are out there! All we are saying is what he COULD consider. Prices fluctuate! At today's prices my suggestions were over budget, tomorrow they may not be! At the end of the day they were suggestions and not worthy of two posts to "Put us right!"

[aslyfox]

. . . aslyfox, I'm not sure what I'm to take away from your reply, although maybe it was more for mom2mny and not me.. . .

it was to provide information to @mom2mny and anyone else interested in learning more about 70-200mm lenses options

[gaweidert]

I would recommend the KP and the DA 55-300 PLM lens. A bit more than your budget. I shot these photos last February with my K1 and the older DA55-300 WR lens. I was indoors at night and no flash. #2 is my grandson and #5 is my granddaughter about to unleash her fearsome foot.. (She scored on this shot). These were sub optimal conditions at best, but the combination worked pretty good.

[mom2mny]

I'm probably going to go for the KP and the 55-300 plm lens. I'll buy the camera first and hopefully the lens will go down in price and/or I'll save up some more lens $ by then.

[UncleVanya]

I'm probably going to go for the KP and the 55-300 plm lens. I'll buy the camera first and hopefully the lens will go down in price and/or I'll save up some more lens $ by then.

You certainly won’t regret it. The KP is wonderful camera.

[rod_grant]

I'm probably going to go for the KP and the 55-300 plm lens.

you will enjoy it.

[TwoUptons]

I'm trying to stretch until the hinted-at (it's on the lens roadmap, but that's no guarantee) 70-300 full frame lens comes out.
COVID has given me a break on soccer seasons, so I've been able to do that. And then I'll have something that covers the KP and K1.

I suspect, if the new lens is as good as the DA55-300 PLM, there will be a number of people who switch to get full frame coverage at all focal lengths.
That might be an opportunity to pick up a nice one for a KP used...

In the meantime, the DA50-200 might be an inexpensive stopgap (I use a $40 F 70-210 from the late 1980s for that purpose).

I also have the Tamron 70-300, and it's got some issues. I like it generally, though I haven't used it on the KP yet.
It purple fringes a lot on the K1, and it's at its best closer to 200mm... though the macro feature is very cool.

-Eric

[ThorSanchez]

I am pIanning on replacing my k-r and tamron lens. I was thinking about the KP. However, the question was asked of me if I still think Pentax and DSLR is the way to go for me because I don't have much equipment and I'll be replacing what I use the most. Honestly, I don't know what would be best for my photographic needs. I take a lot of pictures outside of flowers, landscapes and animals. I have kids in sports that I would like to be able to take quality pictures. So, I need a camera that takes quality photos of high school soccer, football and baseball. I enjoy taking pictures of mountain landscapes, birds (telephoto) and macro shots of flowers, bees, etc. I've been told that Pentax might not be the best camera for my needs. What do you think? I would like to spend around $1,000 or less.

I have two middle school aged kids who play soccer year-round. A mixture of outdoor in good lighting, outdoor with mediocre lighting at night, and indoor/futsal with mostly poor lighting.

My kit of choice for outdoor is the K-3ii and the 55-300PLM. It's fast, it's silent, and with a lot of practice and using back-button focus with center-point only I can get pretty reasonable results. Tav, where you set shutter and aperture while letting the camera pick ISO is great. Where this combination starts to show its limitations is in mediocre light. You can very quickly push ISO to 12800 or higher, especially during night games. The K-3ii is not the world's greatest camera at high ISO, although with careful post-processing and exposure you can get usable photos at 6400 or even sometimes 12800. The KP is somewhat better in this regard. The 55-300PLM's max aperture at 300mm is f/6.3.

K-3ii (and similarly the KP) does not have tracking autofocus as robust as that of many other manufacturers. You can often work around that with practice, but I'm very much looking forward to seeing the improvements in the K-3 Mark III.

To get better performance in low light you'd need a 70-200 f/2.8 to get you several stops advantage over the PLM. That's a $1700 lens. The 70-210 f/4 is also reputed to be very good, but with not as wide an aperture. That's about $1000. And, of course, you lose 100mm on the long end and 15mm on the short end.

For indoor we're kind of stuck. You need a shorter lens, preferably a zoom, with a wide aperture and fast focusing. The current 50-135 f/2.8 meets some of those requirements, but is slow to focus. I'm hopeful that they'll eventually update that with a PLM system, but if that happens it's probably year(s) in the future. The 70-200/210 options work here to some degree, but 70mm on APS-C is pretty long for indoor sports if you're near the sidelines. Perhaps the soon-to-arrive 16-50 f/2.8 PLM will be a good, fast-focusing, wider aperture option, although perhaps with less reach than you really want.


To sum up... you can get reasonable performance out of a K-3 or KP and a 55-300PLM for sports in good light. But night and indoor lighting is going to be more of a challenge. The K-3iii looks like an all around improvement for Pentax and sports, but probably at a hefty cost.