should i upgrade my sigma 70-300 to a da 55-300?

indeo · 02-06-2012, 03:07 PM

so ive seen test, forum posts on this, but still, if anybody has any experience with both, is it worth the upgrade, or should i just stay with the sigma?

i would like a faster, fixed lens lens, but dont got the money for it

JinDesu · 02-06-2012, 03:13 PM

Aha, time to annoy you again.

A lot of people will say the DA 55-300 is much sharper than the Sigma 70-300. It's probably one of the best long zooms available to Pentax. It, however, is not a fast zoom, and it's acceptable wide open (but great stopped down to F8). So it's good for outdoors in daytime, and you can probably up the ISO when it comes to shadowy areas.

indeo · 02-06-2012, 03:20 PM

well, should i upgrade? the 55-300 is about 500$ here, the sigma is 160$ so i wont get much money for it. so is it worth the price?

JinDesu · 02-06-2012, 03:34 PM

I don't think there's another long zoom that matches the 55-300 unless you look at 70-200 F2.8s (or maybe even a 70-200 F4, but I don't know many of those).

Is it worth it over the 70-300? I would say yes. Is it worth it compared to the 43 1.9? Mmmmm, tougher - that's your choice! Also, check the lens review thread for the 55-300, there are some comparison pictures that could help.

Bob from Aus · 02-06-2012, 03:45 PM

My Sigma 70-300 has been gathering dust for years. My Sigma from about 220 - 300 was cr..p. I am sure the pentax 55-300 would have to be better in this range. If you have the money the Pentax 60-250 will take you to a brand new world. It won't ever need replacing and will be a permanent part of your kit. The sensational quality of the photos means you probably won't miss the lost 50mm. A great wildlife shot at 250mm beats an OK shot at 300mm any day.

indeo · 02-06-2012, 03:57 PM

yeah 60-250 is probably a good lens, but id think id rather have the 55-300 + 43 limited and cash to spare. im no pro so a lens at that price just wont be put to good use by me

Bob from Aus · 02-06-2012, 04:27 PM

Originally posted by indeo

55-300 + 43 limited and cash to spare.

good one! I can see you know where you want to go with your photography

Ubuntu_user · 02-06-2012, 04:47 PM

I would only upgrade if you currently use your 70-300mm a lot. Since the Pentax is close to the same focal range, you'll use it about the same amount as you use your sigma. Say that you only use it about 3-5 times a year currently, well, then I would definitely say it's not worth the upgrade, unless you were going to be using it for paid shots.
However, if you use it all the time, and you'd like better quality images, then definitely upgrade!

indeo · 02-06-2012, 05:24 PM

i find i use it allot. i am just wondering if i should upgrade before i go to Svalbard. a group of us are going to spend 14 days with skis and sled. ill probably want to photograph allot when there since we are going to spend time on glaciers, mountains and probably see some polar bears

**tcbubbleleo** · 02-06-2012, 05:48 PM

how about getting a used DA-L for about $250.00 here in PF MarketPlace?

indeo · 02-06-2012, 06:13 PM

do you think a 2x teleconverter would be any use on one of these lenses?

tcbubbleleo: yeah maybe, gonna look now. but you know, import taxes and shipping isnt always that cheap, often end up costing the same as a new

excanonfd · 02-06-2012, 06:32 PM

You are not upgrading per say, it's more like exchanging one consumer quality zoom for another. There just isn't a whole lot of difference between the two or three if you Include the Tamron. If you say you are contemplating a 70-200/2.8, a Big Ma or 300/2.8, that's an upgrade! What you are thinking of will just set you back fair amount of cash for little or unnoticeable amount of gain in IQ.

loco · 02-06-2012, 06:35 PM

I have never used the Sigma but I love the DA L 55-300. It is very sharp wide open. A quality lens at a great price. I don't use it a lot, but whenever I do, I wonder why I don't use it more. Just took some photos with it today and am quite pleased.

mikeSF · 02-06-2012, 06:38 PM

that is not much of an upgrade if any. if you did the Tamron 70-200 with 1.5x TC, that would be a nice upgrade, IMO.

indeo · 02-07-2012, 08:07 AM

Originally posted by mikeSF

that is not much of an upgrade if any. if you did the Tamron 70-200 with 1.5x TC, that would be a nice upgrade, IMO.

dont do that!!!! now im drolling over this thing!!

BTW are sigma/tamron teleconverters interchangeable? meaning i can only tamron lenses on a tamron TC? just cause it seems i cant find any tamron TC for sale here in norway but there are sigma 1.4x and 2x

02-06-2012, 03:07 PM	#1
indeo Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Bø, Norway Posts: 40	should i upgrade my sigma 70-300 to a da 55-300? so ive seen test, forum posts on this, but still, if anybody has any experience with both, is it worth the upgrade, or should i just stay with the sigma? i would like a faster, fixed lens lens, but dont got the money for it

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sigma 300/2.8 to Pentax DA 300/4	OrenMc	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	06-24-2011 02:48 PM
DA* 300. Why not just Sigma 100-300/4?	DanielT74	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	26	06-22-2011 01:33 PM
Nikon D7000 + 70-300 VR vs. Pentax K5 + Sigma 100-300	highyellow1	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	41	05-06-2011 07:40 AM
FA* 300 mm f4,5 or Sigma 100-300 f4	mgbirder	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	02-12-2011 07:42 PM
TESTED: Pentax 55-300 vs. Sigma 70-300 vs. Tamron 70-300	falconeye	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	05-14-2009 04:01 PM

02-06-2012, 03:13 PM	#2
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	Aha, time to annoy you again. A lot of people will say the DA 55-300 is much sharper than the Sigma 70-300. It's probably one of the best long zooms available to Pentax. It, however, is not a fast zoom, and it's acceptable wide open (but great stopped down to F8). So it's good for outdoors in daytime, and you can probably up the ISO when it comes to shadowy areas.

02-06-2012, 03:20 PM	#3
indeo Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Bø, Norway Posts: 40 Original Poster	well, should i upgrade? the 55-300 is about 500$ here, the sigma is 160$ so i wont get much money for it. so is it worth the price?

02-06-2012, 03:34 PM	#4
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	I don't think there's another long zoom that matches the 55-300 unless you look at 70-200 F2.8s (or maybe even a 70-200 F4, but I don't know many of those). Is it worth it over the 70-300? I would say yes. Is it worth it compared to the 43 1.9? Mmmmm, tougher - that's your choice! Also, check the lens review thread for the 55-300, there are some comparison pictures that could help.

02-06-2012, 03:45 PM	#5
Bob from Aus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,094	My Sigma 70-300 has been gathering dust for years. My Sigma from about 220 - 300 was cr..p. I am sure the pentax 55-300 would have to be better in this range. If you have the money the Pentax 60-250 will take you to a brand new world. It won't ever need replacing and will be a permanent part of your kit. The sensational quality of the photos means you probably won't miss the lost 50mm. A great wildlife shot at 250mm beats an OK shot at 300mm any day.

02-06-2012, 03:57 PM	#6
indeo Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Bø, Norway Posts: 40 Original Poster	yeah 60-250 is probably a good lens, but id think id rather have the 55-300 + 43 limited and cash to spare. im no pro so a lens at that price just wont be put to good use by me

02-06-2012, 04:27 PM	#7
Bob from Aus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,094	Originally posted by indeo 55-300 + 43 limited and cash to spare. good one! I can see you know where you want to go with your photography

02-06-2012, 04:47 PM	#8
Ubuntu_user Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,545	I would only upgrade if you currently use your 70-300mm a lot. Since the Pentax is close to the same focal range, you'll use it about the same amount as you use your sigma. Say that you only use it about 3-5 times a year currently, well, then I would definitely say it's not worth the upgrade, unless you were going to be using it for paid shots. However, if you use it all the time, and you'd like better quality images, then definitely upgrade!

02-06-2012, 05:24 PM	#9
indeo Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Bø, Norway Posts: 40 Original Poster	i find i use it allot. i am just wondering if i should upgrade before i go to Svalbard. a group of us are going to spend 14 days with skis and sled. ill probably want to photograph allot when there since we are going to spend time on glaciers, mountains and probably see some polar bears

02-06-2012, 05:48 PM	#10
tcbubbleleo Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Temple City CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 726	how about getting a used DA-L for about $250.00 here in PF MarketPlace?

02-06-2012, 06:13 PM	#11
indeo Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Bø, Norway Posts: 40 Original Poster	do you think a 2x teleconverter would be any use on one of these lenses? tcbubbleleo: yeah maybe, gonna look now. but you know, import taxes and shipping isnt always that cheap, often end up costing the same as a new

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-06-2012, 06:32 PM	#12
excanonfd Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 1,421	You are not upgrading per say, it's more like exchanging one consumer quality zoom for another. There just isn't a whole lot of difference between the two or three if you Include the Tamron. If you say you are contemplating a 70-200/2.8, a Big Ma or 300/2.8, that's an upgrade! What you are thinking of will just set you back fair amount of cash for little or unnoticeable amount of gain in IQ.

02-06-2012, 06:35 PM	#13
loco Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Virginia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,846	I have never used the Sigma but I love the DA L 55-300. It is very sharp wide open. A quality lens at a great price. I don't use it a lot, but whenever I do, I wonder why I don't use it more. Just took some photos with it today and am quite pleased.

02-06-2012, 06:38 PM	#14
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	that is not much of an upgrade if any. if you did the Tamron 70-200 with 1.5x TC, that would be a nice upgrade, IMO.

02-07-2012, 08:07 AM	#15
indeo Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Bø, Norway Posts: 40 Original Poster	Originally posted by mikeSF that is not much of an upgrade if any. if you did the Tamron 70-200 with 1.5x TC, that would be a nice upgrade, IMO. dont do that!!!! now im drolling over this thing!! BTW are sigma/tamron teleconverters interchangeable? meaning i can only tamron lenses on a tamron TC? just cause it seems i cant find any tamron TC for sale here in norway but there are sigma 1.4x and 2x