Reading mode: Light Dark

Tele zoom choice

Go to last post
P

Photoman8888

Active member
Messages
75
Reaction score
1
Location
Hong Kong, HK
I am considering getting a DA* 60-250. I have read many reviews and comparisons with Sigma 70-200, Sigma 100-300 and Tamron 70-200 as well. I gathered Tamron has a very slow AF even though it is the sharpest according to the review. Therefore I am not considering that for now. Given IQ and color is important for my choice, I am seeking advice on the following:

1. In real life shooting, does IQ differences between these lens are that significant?
2. Is F2.8 vs F4 make a big difference on most photo situation?

3. Is the newly announced Sigma 70-200 OS with 4 stop shake reduction would be much better than the K7 built-in SR?

4. Is the color on the DA* really better than the Sigma like some reviews suggest?
5. The DA* extends out when zooming. will this affect the balance on handling?
6. Is the AF of DA* on a K7 be fast enough for sport pictures?

I do like the DA* being slightly shorter, lighter, wider range and WR. Besides the price, am I giving up too much by going from F2.8 to F4? Will Pentax offers F2.8 in this zoom range, like Cannon or Nikon soon?

Any advice would be most appreciated.
 
Photoman8888 said:
1. In real life shooting, does IQ differences between these lens are that > significant?
Click to expand...
Stopped down the IQ is too close to be an issue IMHO, but if your prime interrest is shooting at the widest aperture then you may want the lens that gives the best performance there.
Photoman8888 said:
2. Is F2.8 vs F4 make a big difference on most photo situation?
Click to expand...
f/2.8 means you can have one stop faster shutter speed with same ISO as f/4.

It also means a shorter depth-of-field, but this is partly compensated in the 60-250 by having 50 longer reach - you see, DOF at 250 is smaller than at 200 with the same aperture.
Photoman8888 said:
3. Is the newly announced Sigma 70-200 OS with 4 stop shake reduction would > be much better than the K7 built-in SR?
Click to expand...
The cheaper Sigma lenses has an un-exact report of focal length to the camera which means the SR function can't be as effective as with Pentax own lenses. I don't know if this Sigma suffers from the same issue. If it does, then Sigma OS is more effective than Pentax SR because the Sigma is not giving the correct info to the SR system to work. But if the Sigma does gives the right info, then I say no real difference in IQ.

But there is a difference when shooting, with lens stabilisation you get a stabilised image in the viewfinder, and you may like this or you may feel that it doesn't matter. I don't know, it is up to you.
Photoman8888 said:
4. Is the color on the DA* really better than the Sigma like some reviews suggest?
Click to expand...
Pentax lenses has nicer colour rendition IMHO than Sigma lenses, but this is also a matter of personal preferencies and taste.
Photoman8888 said:
5. The DA* extends out when zooming. will this affect the balance on handling?
Click to expand...
Not really no.
Photoman8888 said:
6. Is the AF of DA* on a K7 be fast enough for sport pictures?
Click to expand...
Some says yes, some says no.
K-7 is not superfast with any lens.

Many has suceeded in getting good sports pictures with the K-7, but there are those that complaints and says it is too much work because the continous AF is too slow.
It depends on your experience.

Pentax has never been a brand for professional sports photography. Pentax is more landscape, portraits, macro and street oriented. For consumer sports shooting, the K-7 does fine, but it doesn't meet the highest professional demands in terms of speed.
Photoman8888 said:
I do like the DA* being slightly shorter, lighter, wider range and WR. Besides the > price, am I giving up too much by going from F2.8 to F4?
Click to expand...
You loose 1 EV stop of shutter speed, which may be important to you.
With f/4 you also get darker viewfinder than with f/2.8.

And you loose the small DOF at 200 and below that you can get with the f/2.8 70-200 zooms.
Photoman8888 said:
Will Pentax offers F2.8 i> n this zoom range, like Cannon or Nikon soon?
Click to expand...
Only Hoya (Pentax) knows that. Nothing is announced yet.

--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo
 
Been following threads on this general topic for months now.

In the market for a tele too and can't decide.

Speed (f/2.8 vs. f/4) vs features (WR/longer/wider) seems to be the key issues to ponder. Depends on what you mostly plan to shoot I think.

My concerns are that I really want something very long for getting shots of birds or far away sports action. But I also want speed for indoor use and WR for bad weather shooting. And, of course, I do not want to spend a fortune!

Been thinking I should just get the DA*200 or DA*300 and a tele-converter. I'd only use the tele-converter outside so speed loss might not be that big an issue. But having a fixed focal length might not work well indoors.

So I might do the DA*60-250 plus tele-converter.

WR and SDM/HSM is what pushes me to those choices.

Price and speed makes me consider the Sigma or Tamron 70-200's.

How do you plan to use the lens?
--
Ed

 
Thanks a lot for your detail advice. I am not a pro, but I do admit I am a pixel peeker. I do not even mind paying a lot more for the DA* as long as it is a good lens.

Currently, I have the kit lens 10-50, 50-200, Tamron 18-250 and the latest DA* 16-50. I am so impressed with the IQ and build quality of the DA* 16-50, I have not change the lens for the last few months and I am enjoying taking photo with it. Despite the convenience, I am not too happy with the Tamron 18-250 for being too slow and if not on bright sun light, the IQ is not all that good, especially when I take it above 180 focal length. That is why I want to find a good tele lens that has comparable IQ as my DA* 16-50. I understand the DA* 50-135 is excellent and has F2.8 but, 135 is just too short for me. I also read many good review on the Sigma 100-300 F4. Can I ask your opinion on:

1. does the DA* 60-250 has reasonable bohak?

2. I read some said the K7 has equivalent of 4 stop SR. Is this true? I never tested it myself. If so, then I do not need SR on the lens.

3. I never intend to shoot sport photo like a pro. But I do like to have to option to occasionally take some action pictures. I am more into landscape, architecture, protrait, wild life and snap shots (that's where the fast AF would be nice).
 
I intend to use the lens for landscape, wild life, protrait and snap shots. I do not like to use tripod unless I absolutely need to. Weight is another factor for my choice.

I have hard time to decide for the same factors as your do. However, I am a little bit leaning towards DA* 60-250 for these reasons:
  • much lighter and smaller than the Sigma 100-300 to carry around, like hiking.
  • better range. I do use 60 to 100 quite a bit.
  • I do not need a super fast AF, but needs to be reasonable fast.
  • most of the time (not all) I will shoot outdoor. Therefore F4 may be fine. Although I do concern about the darker viewfinder, DOF and bohak not as good as F2.8.
  • maintains better resale value.
I am trying to find out from this post if the Sigma 100-300 has better IQ than the DA* 60-250 as suggested in many reviews. This is important for me.
 
K-7's SR is one-two stops at best according to dpreview's tests,
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk7/page14.asp

so if the sigma lens' OS is really 4 stops your hand-held success at long lengths will be greater with the sigma.

Why not consider the DA 55-300mm? It has a superb reputation and is sharp wide open at the long end. I have one and like it. I'd replace it only if I could pick up a couple long end stops either by OS or aperture.
 
Photoman8888 said:
I am considering getting a DA* 60-250. I have read many reviews and comparisons with Sigma 70-200, Sigma 100-300 and Tamron 70-200 as well. I gathered Tamron has a very slow AF even though it is the sharpest according to the review. Therefore I am not considering that for now. Given IQ and color is important for my choice, I am seeking advice on the following:

1. In real life shooting, does IQ differences between these lens are that significant?
Click to expand...
No.
Photoman8888 said:
2. Is F2.8 vs F4 make a big difference on most photo situation?
Click to expand...
Well you need double the light to shoot at F4 as F2.8.
If you need f2.8 then f4 just wont cut it.
For portraiture the f2.8 could be usefull.
Photoman8888 said:
3. Is the newly announced Sigma 70-200 OS with 4 stop shake reduction would be much better than the K7 built-in SR?
Click to expand...
Yes, But in General SR is of limited use accept for static targets.
Photoman8888 said:
4. Is the color on the DA* really better than the Sigma like some reviews suggest?
Click to expand...
Yes and No, If you intend to shoot Jpeg then Yes , If you shoot Raw the no as you can have any color balance you like.
Photoman8888 said:
5. The DA* extends out when zooming. will this affect the balance on handling?
Click to expand...
Depends on user, It would put me off in that class of lens.
Photoman8888 said:
6. Is the AF of DA* on a K7 be fast enough for sport pictures?
Click to expand...
Yes . Some sports shots cannot be taken with any lens/camera combo as their not fast enough.

But in general the 60-250 is OK. SDM makes the most out of Pentax's tracking ability.
The HSM Sigma will be no better.
Photoman8888 said:
I do like the DA* being slightly shorter, lighter, wider range and WR. Besides the price, am I giving up too much by going from F2.8 to F4?
Click to expand...
If you need f2.8 then its a no brainer if not then the 60-250 has a lot of compelling reasons to purchase.
If your asking the question then I suspect you don't need f2.8
Photoman8888 said:
Will Pentax offers F2.8 in this zoom range, like Cannon or Nikon soon?
Click to expand...
Who knows.
Photoman8888 said:
Any advice would be most appreciated.
Click to expand...
Done my best others may disagree.

--
My PPG

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home#section=ARTIST&subSection=1471087&subSubSection=0&language=EN
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
 
Dave Martin said:
Why not consider the DA 55-300mm? It has a superb reputation and is sharp wide open at the long end. I have one and like it. I'd replace it only if I could pick up a couple long end stops either by OS or aperture.
Click to expand...
I see the sigma 70-300mm OS goes for about $399; if it is sharp wide open & its OS is effective, it might be a good choice.... I haven't found performance info for it yet.
 
I've had the Sigma 100-300 EX, Tamron 70-200 f2.8, plus the cheaper Sigma and Tamron 70-300's and the DA 55-300. I now have the DA*60-250 and prefer that above all the others. My main reasons are:
  1. Optically the best of them all, excellent wide open at all focal lengths.
  2. Faster and more sure AF than the Tamron, more accurate than any of the Sigmas I've had or tried.
  3. Smallest size of the better zooms, whereas the others don't fit many bags, the 60-250 does.
If I didn't have the 60-250, I would probably opt for the Sigma 70-200 and a TC, but the current Sigma K mount TC doesn't AF with the latest HSM lens. :(

So, in reality, as I value small size and weight, I would probably choose the 55-300 despite the IQ loss, but even so it's pretty decent and low priced, but it's no speed freak, you have to learn how to get the best from it and live with the deficiencies..
Photoman8888 said:
I am considering getting a DA* 60-250. I have read many reviews and comparisons with Sigma 70-200, Sigma 100-300 and Tamron 70-200 as well. I gathered Tamron has a very slow AF even though it is the sharpest according to the review. Therefore I am not considering that for now. Given IQ and colour is important for my choice, I am seeking advice on the following:

1. In real life shooting, does IQ differences between these lens are that significant?
Click to expand...
I found it to be.
Photoman8888 said:
2. Is F2.8 vs F4 make a big difference on most photo situation?
Click to expand...
Not in my opinion as most of the f2.8 lenses need to be stopped down to get better IQ, the 60-250 is better at f4.0 than the Tamron 70-200 is at f4.0.
Photoman8888 said:
3. Is the newly announced Sigma 70-200 OS with 4 stop shake reduction would be much better than the K7 built-in SR?
Click to expand...
Probably, but I've found the K-7 (and K20D) SR to be much better than the reviews seem to s.
Photoman8888 said:
4. Is the color on the DA* really better than the Sigma like some reviews suggest?
Click to expand...
You bet! :D
Photoman8888 said:
5. The DA* extends out when zooming. will this affect the balance on handling?
Click to expand...
Not as much as the size and weight of the others.
Photoman8888 said:
6. Is the AF of DA* on a K7 be fast enough for sport pictures?
Click to expand...
It's not as fast as a Canon or Nikon, but is about the same as the HSM on the Sigmas, it's more a camera issue than the lens. The big difference is that the Pentax AF is more consistently accurate, there is a good reason why you get the double check AF, it's accurate! I've recently been using a Canon 7D and the 100-400 L IS lens for bird shooting and my keeper rate was no higher, but my shots that were in critical focus were less on the Canon combo than the K-7 + 60-250.
Photoman8888 said:
I do like the DA* being slightly shorter, lighter, wider range and WR. Besides the price, am I giving up too much by going from F2.8 to F4? Will Pentax offers F2.8 in this zoom range, like Cannon or Nikon soon?
Click to expand...
There is no knowing, but my bet is no. I expect we shall see a zoom or prime that reaches 400mm with an f5.6 max aperture at 400mm.
Photoman8888 said:
Any advice would be most appreciated.
Click to expand...
--
Richard Day - 'Carpe Diem!'
Gloucester UK
 
Photoman8888 said:
1. does the DA* 60-250 has reasonable bohak?
Click to expand...
For a zoom lens yes, I believe the bokeh is just fine.
Photoman8888 said:
2. I read some said the K7 has equivalent of 4 stop SR. Is this true? I never tested > it myself. If so, then I do not need SR on the lens.
Click to expand...
That is the maximum for the SR and yes, it is true.

However, it may not be 4 in all conditions. It varies a lot depending on may parameters - lens in use, your hands, focal length and so on. But max is 4 stops.
Photoman8888 said:
3. I never intend to shoot sport photo like a pro. But I do like to have to option > to occasionally take some action pictures. I am more into landscape, architecture, > protrait, wild life and snap shots (that's where the fast AF would be nice).
Click to expand...
AF on the K-7 with the 60-250 is consistent and accurate.
If you want fast AF, there is not much difference among those lenses.
The limit is the AF processor in the K-7.

--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo
 
Roland Mabo said:
Photoman8888 said:
1. does the DA* 60-250 has reasonable bohak?
Click to expand...
For a zoom lens yes, I believe the bokeh is just fine.
Roland Mabo said:
2. I read some said the K7 has equivalent of 4 stop SR. Is this true? I never tested > it myself. If so, then I do not need SR on the lens.
Click to expand...
That is the maximum for the SR and yes, it is true.

However, it may not be 4 in all conditions. It varies a lot depending on may parameters - lens in use, your hands, focal length and so on. But max is 4 stops.
Roland Mabo said:
3. I never intend to shoot sport photo like a pro. But I do like to have to option > to occasionally take some action pictures. I am more into landscape, architecture, > protrait, wild life and snap shots (that's where the fast AF would be nice).
Click to expand...
AF on the K-7 with the 60-250 is consistent and accurate.
If you want fast AF, there is not much difference among those lenses.
The limit is the AF processor in the K-7.

--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo
Click to expand...
Many thanks to your advice. The pros for the Sigma offering is HSM and F2.8. If HSM is no faster than the DA* 60-250 then that really brings me one step closer to the DA*.
 
Dave Martin said:
K-7's SR is one-two stops at best according to dpreview's tests,
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk7/page14.asp

so if the sigma lens' OS is really 4 stops your hand-held success at long lengths will be greater with the sigma.

Why not consider the DA 55-300mm? It has a superb reputation and is sharp wide open at the long end. I have one and like it. I'd replace it only if I could pick up a couple long end stops either by OS or aperture.
Click to expand...
From my own experience, I am sure it was at least 2 stops but I am not sure if there is any higher.
 
Richard, I am so glad that you responded. Actually one of the reasons that make me seriously consider DA* 60-250 was your wonderful photo (a lot of birds) that you posted. They are amazing shots and I agree with most people that you must have a tripod hand to do that kind of photos.
richardday said:
I've had the Sigma 100-300 EX, Tamron 70-200 f2.8, plus the cheaper Sigma and Tamron 70-300's and the DA 55-300. I now have the DA*60-250 and prefer that above all the others. My main reasons are:
  1. Optically the best of them all, excellent wide open at all focal lengths.
  2. Faster and more sure AF than the Tamron, more accurate than any of the Sigmas I've had or tried.
  3. Smallest size of the better zooms, whereas the others don't fit many bags, the 60-250 does.
If I didn't have the 60-250, I would probably opt for the Sigma 70-200 and a TC, but the current Sigma K mount TC doesn't AF with the latest HSM lens. :(

So, in reality, as I value small size and weight, I would probably choose the 55-300 despite the IQ loss, but even so it's pretty decent and low priced, but it's no speed freak, you have to learn how to get the best from it and live with the deficiencies..
Click to expand...
Comments from someone who have all 3 lens would probably as accurate of assessment as I could get. I do like the small size and lighter weight. But for better IQ I can put up with 1 Kg weight of the DA* 60-250. However, I think that would probably close to the limit I would like to carry most of the time. I wish Pentax do offer a lighter one like Cannon 70-200 L F4 around 0.7 KG.
richardday said:
Photoman8888 said:
I am considering getting a DA* 60-250. I have read many reviews and comparisons with Sigma 70-200, Sigma 100-300 and Tamron 70-200 as well. I gathered Tamron has a very slow AF even though it is the sharpest according to the review. Therefore I am not considering that for now. Given IQ and colour is important for my choice, I am seeking advice on the following:

1. In real life shooting, does IQ differences between these lens are that significant?
Click to expand...
I found it to be.
richardday said:
2. Is F2.8 vs F4 make a big difference on most photo situation?
Click to expand...
Not in my opinion as most of the f2.8 lenses need to be stopped down to get better IQ, the 60-250 is better at f4.0 than the Tamron 70-200 is at f4.0.
Click to expand...
what is the IQ like on the Sigma 100-300 shooting at F2.8 and F4 in comparing to the DA* shooting at F4?
richardday said:
richardday said:
3. Is the newly announced Sigma 70-200 OS with 4 stop shake reduction would be much better than the K7 built-in SR?
Click to expand...
Probably, but I've found the K-7 (and K20D) SR to be much better than the reviews seem to s.
richardday said:
4. Is the color on the DA* really better than the Sigma like some reviews suggest?
Click to expand...
You bet! :D
Click to expand...
This is good to know. I am very happy with the DA* 16-50 color and contrast. Would you say the 60-250 just as good or better?
richardday said:
richardday said:
5. The DA* extends out when zooming. will this affect the balance on handling?
Click to expand...
Not as much as the size and weight of the others.
richardday said:
6. Is the AF of DA* on a K7 be fast enough for sport pictures?
Click to expand...
It's not as fast as a Canon or Nikon, but is about the same as the HSM on the Sigmas, it's more a camera issue than the lens. The big difference is that the Pentax AF is more consistently accurate, there is a good reason why you get the double check AF, it's accurate! I've recently been using a Canon 7D and the 100-400 L IS lens for bird shooting and my keeper rate was no higher, but my shots that were in critical focus were less on the Canon combo than the K-7 + 60-250.
Click to expand...
I do not really need a super fast AF. I just need a reasonable fast one for snap shots.
richardday said:
richardday said:
I do like the DA* being slightly shorter, lighter, wider range and WR. Besides the price, am I giving up too much by going from F2.8 to F4? Will Pentax offers F2.8 in this zoom range, like Cannon or Nikon soon?
Click to expand...
There is no knowing, but my bet is no. I expect we shall see a zoom or prime that reaches 400mm with an f5.6 max aperture at 400mm.
Click to expand...
This is a shame, as most big names would have a pro quality 70-200 F2.8 offering, except Pentax.
richardday said:
richardday said:
Any advice would be most appreciated.
Click to expand...
--
Richard Day - 'Carpe Diem!'
Gloucester UK
Click to expand...
 
awaldram said:
Photoman8888 said:
I am considering getting a DA* 60-250. I have read many reviews and comparisons with Sigma 70-200, Sigma 100-300 and Tamron 70-200 as well. I gathered Tamron has a very slow AF even though it is the sharpest according to the review. Therefore I am not considering that for now. Given IQ and color is important for my choice, I am seeking advice on the following:

1. In real life shooting, does IQ differences between these lens are that significant?
Click to expand...
No.
awaldram said:
2. Is F2.8 vs F4 make a big difference on most photo situation?
Click to expand...
Well you need double the light to shoot at F4 as F2.8.
If you need f2.8 then f4 just wont cut it.
For portraiture the f2.8 could be usefull.
Click to expand...
This is one of my concern.
awaldram said:
awaldram said:
3. Is the newly announced Sigma 70-200 OS with 4 stop shake reduction would be much better than the K7 built-in SR?
Click to expand...
Yes, But in General SR is of limited use accept for static targets.
awaldram said:
4. Is the color on the DA* really better than the Sigma like some reviews suggest?
Click to expand...
Yes and No, If you intend to shoot Jpeg then Yes , If you shoot Raw the no as you can have any color balance you like.
Click to expand...
I am currently shooting most Jpeg and is moving towards RAW. But I need to find a good PP software first. Any recommendations?
awaldram said:
awaldram said:
5. The DA* extends out when zooming. will this affect the balance on handling?
Click to expand...
Depends on user, It would put me off in that class of lens.
awaldram said:
6. Is the AF of DA* on a K7 be fast enough for sport pictures?
Click to expand...
Yes . Some sports shots cannot be taken with any lens/camera combo as their not fast enough.

But in general the 60-250 is OK. SDM makes the most out of Pentax's tracking ability.
The HSM Sigma will be no better.
Click to expand...
Good to know for comparison.
awaldram said:
awaldram said:
I do like the DA* being slightly shorter, lighter, wider range and WR. Besides the price, am I giving up too much by going from F2.8 to F4?
Click to expand...
If you need f2.8 then its a no brainer if not then the 60-250 has a lot of compelling reasons to purchase.
If your asking the question then I suspect you don't need f2.8
Click to expand...
I am not sure. If I need to stop down 1 step (in most zoom lens) to get good IQ and If DA* 60-250 gets good IQ at F4 (a big if and I am trying to find out here) then the differentiation is not as big. Except F2.8 should still give me a brighter view finder.
awaldram said:
awaldram said:
Will Pentax offers F2.8 in this zoom range, like Cannon or Nikon soon?
Click to expand...
Who knows.
awaldram said:
Any advice would be most appreciated.
Click to expand...
Done my best others may disagree.

--
My PPG

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home#section=ARTIST&subSection=1471087&subSubSection=0&language=EN
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
Click to expand...
 
The sigma 100-300 f4 is excellent throughout its full range.

Many have reported on the lens excellent performance with a 1.4 converter, and in my own experience is is also a fine choice with a 2.0 converter.
John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top