Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 
Log in or register to remove ads.

Showing results 1 to 2 of 2 Search:
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 02-13-2010, 12:58 PM  
Better than 55-300mm?
Posted By edumad
Replies: 5
Views: 2,040
Those are good results from the Tokina. Better than what I've seen from the Sigma I believe.
Getting that would not require selling the 55-300mm I believe :)
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 02-12-2010, 07:47 AM  
Better than 55-300mm?
Posted By edumad
Replies: 5
Views: 2,040
My "dilema"...
I'd like to get a lens on the tele side (300mm+).
I currently have the 55-300mm which is a great versatile lens but just doesn't satisfy me enough on the tele end.

I need some advice on the options I contemplate, and if my views are correct. Basically, an assessment of my assessment

If I make a sacrifice on gear (might include the 55-300mm) I think I can afford the following options (used):
1. 70-200mm F2.8 + 1.7/2x TC
2. 300mm F2.8 Adaptall2 + 1.7x tc
3. SMC-A* 300mm F4
4.One of Sigmas large zooms:
135-400mm, 50-500/150-500/170/500mm
Less pricey alternatives
5. Tokina/Sigma 400mm F5.6
6. CZJ 300 F4 M42
7. Pentacon F5.6 M42

Numer 1 would give me a great lens for medium tele, but longer tele only with a TC, which decreases quality and F stops. Should still give great results. But this might be the priciest option.
I like this option because it also leaves room to grow without redoing the gear.

Number 2 might be gotten a bit cheaper than 1, provides a very fast 300mm, but a "semi" AF >400mm lens. It'd be ok for stationary subjects, harder on moving ones. Loss of intermediate AF zoom (I have some primes might not sell).

Number 3, great lens, A version for ease. But is it better than the 55-300mm? Not sure. This would be cheaper still, especially if I don't go for one in pristine condition.
F and FA versions too expensive as they are uncommon.

Number 4, with the flexible and far reaching zoom, it would be a good alternative although not very portable. Quality would be about the same as 55-300mm, but only for the later versions, which I might not afford...

Number 5. There are MF and AF versions, both affordable, keeping the 55-300mm if its the MF version. Quality wise I'm not sure they'd be woth it...

Number 6 and 7 I can make it, but is it worth it for the IQ they have? Not high on my list...

It would be nice to get some feedback from users of one or more of these alternatives.
Search took 0.00 seconds | Showing results 1 to 2 of 2

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:34 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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