Pentax 55-300 or what?

Was looking to replace my old non-WR 50-200, or supplement it.

Would like a little more reach for airshows But what should I get? Reviews praise the 55-300, but is there maybe a Sigma / Tamron that I could get instead, for similar money and no decrease in performance?

In that pricepoint, I would argue that the DA 55-300 is second to none. It's a great lens, and I have only rendered it personally obsolete because I just got the DA* 60-250 (if you can afford it, an astounding lens). But the 55-300 has served me faithfully for three years. It's a fantastic lens.

-Heie

55-300 seems pretty good at airshows
Pete



--
K-5 some Len

I don't think your going to get better optical quality, because the 55-300 really is an exceptional value for money lens.
What sigma n tamron may bring to the table is quiet AF and better build feel.

The D-AL has cheaper build plastic mount but doesn't bother me and at 250 aus dollars, makes a compelling argument.

The FA 100-300 (silver lens) is a very good lens at a fraction of the price.
I have two of them.
I bought the first before the 55-300 was released, then got another later.
I can't compare if with the 55-300, but just throwing another option out there.

--
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/kevinjohnhutt

I have a bargain Quantaray 100-300 f/4.5-6.7 that is almost competitive with the 55-300. For under $50 I have a zoom that focuses a bit faster and is nearly as sharp, but contrast is lower - that makes images 'feel' softer but free software like Picasa or gimp can boost contrast. It's slower past 200mm or so, and at f/6.7 you'd need a bright day for the quick focus not to hunt. It's identical to the Sigma DL but relabeled by Ritz; either can be found for under $75 pretty often.

These were focused manually on the Firewood sign, 300mm f/8:



It's decent and inexpensive, but for extra range and overall IQ it's really hard to recommend anything other than a 55-300, the only question is DA or DA L! For a few less dollars the DA L gives you identical optics, just no hood or quickshift + non-metal mount. I bought a $10 metal 58mm hood, I mount it outside the cPL filter so the whole hood turns to tune the filter. I have the DA version but still prefer this hood; it's a bit shorter than the original but fits other lenses.
--
Jim in Oregon -- K5 user, Alpha a200 & Lumix G1 veteran
talking to myself at http://granitix.blogspot.com

Sigma has a 70-300 F4-5.6 for $169, but I have NO IDEA how good the quality is. I DO know that my DA 55-300 is far and away my favorite, and most used lens. I used it exclusively last September at the Charlotte tour date of the Top 10 from "So You Think You Can Dance." Still not being sure how much I trusted the quality on high-iSO shots on the K-5, I set the auto-ISO maximum to 800 and shot in AV mode, keeping the aperture at its minimum value (the 60-500 holds to F4 almost all the way to 200 mm).

Since I was sitting only 40-50 feet from the nearest end of the stage -- maybe 100 feet from the far end, I rarely had the need to use 300mm -- especially since I was trying to capture an entire dancer, often two or more. The stage lighting was not always bright, as some of the dances were set for "mood lighting" and lit very dimly, with things like soft blue light. Even in those circumstances, I got excellent pics. I was shooting with continuous AF at jpeg-only and 7fps. At times I fired off almost enough consecutive shots to fill the buffer (all hand-held), while following a dancer across the stage. Almost all the pics remained in at least relatively sharp focus.

I was quite impressed. Of course a great deal of the credit goes to the K-5. Still, for a "sliding" lens in this price range I was really apprehensive and suspicious if I'd get many (or any) shots that were very good. Instead, I fired off more than 1,600 shots over 2 hours, and I'd say well more than half are keepers.
Jeff
--
May the Blessings Be.

Echoing the others... you cannot beat it for the money.... it's a GREAT lens. I don't use it all that often, but when I do it always delivers.









Amy
--



Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.
Google+: http://gplus.to/DangRabbit
Twitter: http://twitter.com/DangRabbit
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/DangRabbitPhotography
PAD Project: http://www.DangRabbit.com/photography/pad
Gallery: http://www.DangRabbit.com/photography

Love the frog Amy! Great colour, contrast and sharp as a tack (at web resolution anyway).

Anybody else notice the mosquito on its back?

However a slightly strange striped bokeh around the bubbles behind it.

I too want this lens to replace my 50-200. This is one of my favourite lenses for composition. I have taken a lot of good pictures at > 100mm, but the 50-200 is pretty horrible wide open this long, particularly the bokeh which can have a double image "camera shake" look to it. Stopped down to between f8 and f16 it is OK but then either the shutter speed is too slow or ISO too high unless I am in very bright sunshine.

Just got to decide what to give up in order to buy it...

JeffAHayes said:

Sigma has a 70-300 F4-5.6 for $169, but I have NO IDEA how good the quality is.

Click to expand...

Sigma makes two versions of this lens, the one you mention and an APO version that runs about $230. By all accounts I've read the APO version is worth the extra money. I have that version and the Pentax 55-300. The Pentax has a bit more range on the bottom which I find useful and optically it is better. However it is noisy and tends to hunt focus more than I like (especially frustrating for shooting sports) and focus is kind of slow in general. The APO Sigma does not hunt near as often, focuses much faster, and the IQ is really quite good. The fringes fall off at the long end but the center (which is usually where the subject is) stays pretty sharp. I would say the Sigma is more rugged but I've not had any problems with the Pentax. The Sigma also has a "close focus" function not a real macro by any means but fun to play with on occasion. Neither lens has disappointed me I use one or the other depending on my intentions for the day. For reference I shoot a K5 and always use the center focus point.
--
Some things you have to love because they're too darn hard to like

I just got tht the APO version of the Sigma and am quite pleased with the sharpness. I have yet to run into any purple fringing or other CA. The bokeh also seems to be okay - $199 at Amazon - The photos below all with this lens and all handheld except the first. The second is all the way out and wide-open

I have both the Sigma 70-300 APO and the DA 55-300. The DA 55-300 is sharper at 300 than the Sigma although you need to get it up to at least F8 so do not get your expectations up too high for the DA at 300mm. For it's price range it is fine. The Sigma at 300 requires F11 to get okay sharpness across half the frame (the corners are never sharp at 300 on the Sigma) so the big weakness of the Sigma APO is 300mm . Contrast on the 55-300 is also much better from 200-300 than the Sigma and the color overall with the DA 55-300 is much punchier (most likely due to the different lens coatings). However, from 70-150 or so the Sigma is very sharp (probably about F 5.6 to F 8 ) and has very smooth out of focus both for foreground and background so it works really well, oddly, as a outdoor good light portrait lens. On the other hand I am not a big fan of the out of focus rendering with the DA 55-300, but it depends on the focus length and other factors. As others have mentioned the Sigma also has the 1:2 macro feature which is very handy and the DA does not get very close. I like both, but they have limitations that you need to compensate for while shooting. If you need reach and a great range with decent IQ and small size you cannot beat the DA 55-300mm. I love mine. However, for now I won't give up the Sigma either because it is cheap , has the cool macro feature and honesly is hard to beat for the good light portrait. Just my two cents.

Cant' give you any direct comparison of the 55-300 but this will give you some idea of what price point get you
Three lens in the different target classes

sigma 100-300 DL (kit same as Sigma 70-300DL , Pentax 50-200 or the cannon 55-200 is)
Sigma 70- 300 APO (prosumer same as Pentax 55-300 etc)
Penatx DA*300 (pro)
Sizes are interesting





Sigma 100-300





Sigma APO 70-300





DA* 300





Some interesting thing here look at the bokeh, Colours and resolution.

Then look at the shutter speeds the apertures have allowed , Interesting here the camera has kept the same shutter for the 5.6 and 6.7 Sigmas resulting in the 100-300 clearly being half a stop less exposed than the 70-300

dpnaiba said:

Was looking to replace my old non-WR 50-200, or supplement it.

Would like a little more reach for airshows But what should I get? Reviews praise the 55-300, but is there maybe a Sigma / Tamron that I could get instead, for similar money and no decrease in performance?

Click to expand...

Then prices
Sigma 100-300 DL I paid less than £10
Sigma 70-300 APO £150
Pentax DA* £900

Thats what known as the law of diminishing returns

--
My PPG
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/andrewwaldram
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
1x.com
http://1x.com/artist/awaldram/wall

I had a Tamron 70 - 300 and replaced with the Pentax DA 55 - 300mm.

The Pentax is sharp and has almost unnoticeable CA. If you get the more expenisve model, you can manually over-ride the auto focus, which frankly is a good thing because on my KR, the lens sometimes hunts back and forth across the full range before finding focus and this is noisy, believe me and does not endear one to fellow birdwatchers in a hide with their silent Nikons!

It is a seriously good lens, for the price, and some folk think it is the best 55 - 300mm for the money. But that focus hunting is a nuisance and since I now have one of those silent Nikons with lenses with silent built in focus motors, the difference in use favours lenses with focus motors.

My first one developed an internal fault after 4 days and locked up the focus mechanism. Amazon replaced with without demurring and I'm now a happy, but noisy, user.
--
jamesza