Suggestions for Long Pentax Zoom

[scott_paris4]

<p>I’m looking for suggestions for a longish zoom for a K5, something that goes out to 200mm, or maybe 300. It will be for occasional use, so $1000 plus lenses are out. It’s for use outdoors in good light, so f5.6 is fast enough, although f4 would be nice.<br>

An autofocus 70-200 f4 would be perfect, but apparently there’s no such animal.<br>

It should perform well enough at 200mm to make acceptable 11x14 prints. In reviews most of the lenses in this class seem to perform best in the middle of their range, and be not-so-great at the long end.<br>

Third-party is fine, used (out of production) is fine. I’d like not to spend more than $500, although I could go to $750 if necessary. Less would be good, too.<br>

I have a Pentax 80-320 f4.5-5.6. It’s OK, not great. Maybe it’s the best I can do without spending serious money.<br>

There are lots of lenses in this range, and I can’t try them all. I’m hoping someone knows of a sleeper.<br>

Thanks in advance for any help.</p>

<p> </p>

[stemked]

<p>Hi Scott.</p>

<p>I've know your lens is a touch soft on the long side. It certainly sounds though like you might be interested in the Pentax DA/D 55-300. I don't have the lens(es) myself, but the images I've seen from them are very good. I had the Tamron macro 75-300 f4-5.6 LD which was quite good, until I ripped it appart last month (hood jamed and then...). Decent close focus (1:2) with the lens, which is the only weakness in the Pentax lens. Sigma has a similar lens.<br>

<br />As to 70-80-200s there are BUNCHES of those lenses. If your heat is set on f4 and autofocus then you have some limiations, but I have to say the cheap-o Pentax 80-200 f4.7-5.6 are surpringly good lenses and VERY light. I'll admit I used the 'A' version of this lens with a 1.4X Pentax TC and was very pleased with the resulys (I think this goes under 'don't try this at home') There is an Pentax F70-210 f4-5.6 and of couse the DA 50-200 f4-5.6 which I used a lot this summer (borrowed) and I really like the lens.</p>

<p>I suspect the DA f4 60-250 is out of your price range, correct?</p>

[dshombert]

<p>I have the Pentax 55-300/4-5.8 and I'm very happy with it. The lead photo in the current POTW (here on this board) was taken with it on my K-5, as were several of my contributions to previous (recent) POTW threads. I'm not sure of the current price, but it's well below your $500 threshold.</p>

[scott_paris4]

<p>Douglas: Yes, the 60-250 would be exactly perfect for my purpose. It's just that it's about 3 or 4 times what my wife will let me spend. (Although one of the big on-line stores has a used one for about $1,200. Hmmmm.) And my heart's not set on f4. F5.6 will do.<br>

Dave: Your owl looks pretty nice. The 55-300 seems to be around $450, which is in the ball park. Is its performance pretty consistent in the 200-300 range? </p>

 

[htarragon]

<p>Scott- I have the DA 55-300. I actually have a second one, since my first was crashed to the floor (I may yet get it repaired.) This is my go to lens, it's the one that's on my K-5 95% of the time. I have no problem with the images. Any blurriness is my fault. It balances well with the K-5.<br>

Need I say more?</p>

[htarragon]

<p>By the way, my airborne airplane shots and the ones on the runway in the Daring Young Men thread were taken with the 55-300.</p>

[peter_russell4]

<p>55-300 :)<br>

just to clarify, it comes as DA with metal mount, quickshift focus and hood<br>

or quite a bit cheaper as DA-L with plastic mount, no quickshift and no hood.<br>

Optics identical.<br>

Fine lens :)<br>

Pete</p>

<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7053/6887375438_3d6df244fd_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="481" /></p>

[steve_t.1]

<p>I'll support the idea of the DA 55-300mm as well. I've owned it for about 2 years now, bought it as an upgrade/longer lens option to a Tamron 18-250mm (circa 2005/06 version). I prefer to shoot on a tripod once I'm around 130-150mm, I just am not good enough as a hand holder with longer telephoto. And this is fine for my photographic interests. But yes, the lens works very well, and even better after taking time to do the fine autofocus adjustment for it (and all my other lenses, too) in the camera body functions. <br />From a Popular Photography buying guide- <a href="http://www.popphoto.com/buying-guide/lens/pentax-da-55%E2%80%93300mm-f4%E2%80%9358-ed">http://www.popphoto.com/buying-guide/lens/pentax-da-55%E2%80%93300mm-f4%E2%80%9358-ed</a> They like it except for the loud and somewhat slow autofocus. These are non-issues for me.<br />And the PopPhoto test from 2008 ($350 back then)- <a href="http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2008/12/pentax-da-55-300mm-f4-58">http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2008/12/pentax-da-55-300mm-f4-58</a></p>

[dshombert]

<p>Scott - Yes, I'd say it's consistent. That's more a guess than it is the result of any kind of rigorous comparison. Also, as Steve mentioned, the performance was noticeably better after fine-tuning the autofocus in the camera.</p>

[scott_paris4]

<p>Great Vampire picture, Peter. In fact, that's what the lens is for: aircraft, including radio controlled models, as below.<br>

I was wondering what the "DA-L" was.<br>

The price for the DA seems to vary a lot. $430 on Adorama, $360 on Amazon, but fulfilled by someone I've never heard of. </p><div></div>

[steve_t.1]

<p>I'm with you, Scott. I'm nervous about buying camera gear from Amazon and fulfilled by an unknown 3rd party, as a rule I won't buy from Amazon without it coming from the Amazon warehouse. And if Adorama is the 3rd party, then I just buy directly from them. That lower price might be on the DA-L lens (plastic mount), maybe? That, or it's gray market lacking the North America warranty or other issues, be VERY careful with that.</p>

<p>Speaking of where to buy... at the top of the P.net page, at the "Store" tab, if you go to the known retailers through the P.net links, P.net gets a little $$ back from that retailer, helps to support this website.</p>

[scott_paris4]

<p>Off topic, but as a rule, I stay with Adorama, B&H, and "fulfilled by Amazon". Their published prices may be a little higher, but I've never had a problem with bait-and-switch, delivery or returns.<br>

Good to know about the "Store" tab.<br>

Oh, and the P-51 was shot with a borrowed Nikkor 80-200. Really nice lens, but, alas, too expensive for me.</p>

 

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I have the DA55-300 and FA80-320. I like that the DA is a bit smaller/lighter and usefully has a 55mm short end; the FA's 80mm short end with a relatively long minimum focus distance sometimes bothers me.</p>

<p>The DA also has a non-rotating front element and comes with a good bayonet hood that's reversable for storage, and quick-shift full-time manual focus. The AF is slow and noisy compared to a DA*60-250/4 but so is the FA -- both have long screwdriven focus paths, at least the DA doesn't torque the body like the FA when focusing does since it's moving a lot less lens.</p>

<p>The FA is OK but is a bit softer at the extreme long end. Most lenses of this class will improve contrast and sharpness a bit if stopped down a bit but the DA is probably the best current choice (other than pricier/larger/heavier DA* 60-250/4, Sigma 100-300/4, etc.).</p>

<p>There's another possibility worth at least considering (I don't have personal experience with these) -- Sigma has a 120-400 and 150-500 that are priced somewhere in between, around $1K new. While I'm sure at the 400 or 500 extreme these are no match for a prime, I'd also guess that somewhere short of the max (like up to 300 on the -400, and up to 400 for the -500) these are probably pretty decent and you might find a use for 400 or 500mm. I am not sure why these lenses aren't a bit more popular among Pentaxians -- there are a lot of people who <em>say</em> they want lenses longer than 300mm but relatively few who put their money where their mouth is. The few reviews I've seen suggest the lenses are a least decent if not quite the equal of the $1600-ish Canon 100-400/5.6L or Nikkor 80-400. The truth is if Pentax ever does come out with a lens in this class, most likely it will be priced well above the DA55-300 and somewhere between these Sigmas and the Canon/Nikon. If it's DA*, probably about the same as the latter.</p>

 

[wolf_weber]

<p>A bit more than <em>"not to spend more than $500"</em> could get you the highly rated Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 DI LD (IF) semi Macro... An excellent, not too heavy Zoom lens. Their other SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DI VC Zoom is equally good except for the rather unpleasant bokey. Also you'd be paying for the lens-incorporated VC already part of the K-5. I'd stay away from older lenses, good as they may be, because they usually lack a dg lens coating. Too much trouble having to deal with results of such in the post-shooting process. If only Pentax could or would give us a 1.4x tele-converter <strong>(...)</strong>, the Tamron 2.8 might be the best choice for the money <em>out there</em>... A Tamron CS rep. informed me that none of their older converters, not even the SP models, would be suitable. Too bad.</p>

<h1 > </h1>

<h1 > </h1>

[ukhov]

<p>Those Tamrons about 77mm filter size,if I can remember ?</p>

[bobbollinger]

<p>For what it is worth, here is a photo I took in June with the Tamron 70-300 f4-5.6 LD Di lens on my K10d, at 300mm and f5.6, 1/60 second, hand-held with shake reduction on, ISO 200. This has not been cropped. This lens has some "macro" capability-- I think 2:1, so better than none. I have been fairly pleased with the lens, and I think it is still fairly affordable.</p><div></div>

[wolf_weber]

<p>Correct, Yury, takes 77mm filters. But because of the 1.5 crop factor you can easily get away with 72mm via an adapter. Absolutely no vignetting, in my experience. <br>

Bob, that lens is very good indeed. If you don't mind <strong>the bokeh</strong>, quite apparent in your picture. Also, why pay for <em>anti-shake</em> when it's incorporated in the camera's (the K-5) body..?</p>

[peter_russell4]

<blockquote>

<p>Scott said "Great Vampire picture, Peter. In fact, that's what the lens is for: aircraft..."</p>

<p>Seems to do the job, f8 and hammering at the AF in AF-C<br>

I do prefer the DA for the quickshift<br>

<img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7190/6887375434_c779060de4_c.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="663" /></p>

</blockquote>

[markus maurer]

<p>If you don't mind manual focussing and a front heavy lens the Pentax-A 70-210mm F4 is one of the best zooms in that range ever made.</p>

[scott_paris4]

<p>Thanks to everybody for your suggestions.<br>

Looks like the DA 55-300 is the winner, and, as it happens B&H had a particularly good price on it last week, so I ordered one.<br>

Peter, the DC-3 is another great image. A favorite aircraft of mine. Accounts vary, but I believe the last one straggled off the production line in the year I was born. I'm not sayin' when that was. </p>