300mm zoom for *ist

mhjackson · Oct 18, 2003

I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my *istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

quattro88 · Oct 19, 2003

I suggest to stay away from super zooms like Tamron 28-200 or 28-300. They are great travel lens and work well on film cameras but their sharpness is not sufficient for DSLR. I tried my Tamron 28-200 XR (which is way better than the one they build for Pentax) on *istD and I was disappointed. I want to sell it and to buy a better quality long tele. I also have Tamron 75-300 Macro 1:2 and this cheap lens surprisingly works not that bad with *istD. I will use it for time being until Tamron comes out with Di series 75-300. I bought Tamron Di 28-75/2.8 and I am quite happy. Good, sharp and well built lens.
I also tried Pentax FA 80-320 on my *istD. It was OK but not more than that.
Efraim

mhjackson said:
I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and
have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am
looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my
*istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

Obe1010 · Oct 19, 2003

mhjackson said:
I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and
have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am
looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my
*istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

Obe1010 · Oct 19, 2003

Obe1010 said:
mhjackson said:

I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and
have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am
looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my
*istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

Click to expand...

Frank from AZ · Oct 19, 2003

My 80-200 2.8 great crisp shots but focused slowly on the *ist D. Anyone notice slow focusing on a similar type lens?

mhjackson said:
I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and
have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am
looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my
*istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

--
Frank from Phoenix
Pentax *ist D, Oly C5050, Tripper 15 Gb, Pentax MZ-S

Zipp · Oct 19, 2003

Havent tried the Ptx lens

Using the Sigma 70-200 ex F2.8 very sharp and focus is quite quick.
And has the resolving power to give sharp pics.

The main problem with most consumer lenses is that they are not designed
for Digital SLR's in mind.

Film has a huge amount of tolerance , so you can put any cra* y film lens
onto a film slr body and you will get a decent image

Use that same lens on a D* SLR and you'll wonder where it all went wrong

Thats why Pentax and other 3rd party Manufactors are starting to pump
out Digital Graded Lenses designed for Digital ---- but are also backwards
compatible and can be used on film SLR's

Only bad thing about this is the Cost $$$$$$$

Zipp

mhjackson · Oct 19, 2003

Thanks for the feedback Efraim. I tried the 28-300 XR at my local store in Victoria and found that it was good at mid and tele lengths but not at wide angle - too soft
I think I may go and try out the 28-75 Tamron.
Do you mean the TAMRON SP 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6? It seems pretty reasonable priced.

quattro88 said:
mhjackson said:

I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and
have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am
looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my
*istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

Click to expand...

Joey Valencia · Oct 19, 2003

so, would you say the tamron 75-300mm is much better than the FA 80-320? how is the contrast of your tamrons as compared to the pentax?

quattro88 wrote:
I want to sell it and to buy a

quattro88 said:
better quality long tele. I also have Tamron 75-300 Macro 1:2 and
this cheap lens surprisingly works not that bad with *istD. I will
use it for time being until Tamron comes out with Di series 75-300.
I bought Tamron Di 28-75/2.8 and I am quite happy. Good, sharp and
well built lens.
I also tried Pentax FA 80-320 on my *istD. It was OK but not more
than that.
Efraim

mhjackson said:

I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and
have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am
looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my
*istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

Click to expand...

quattro88 · Oct 20, 2003

mhjackson said:
Do you mean the TAMRON SP 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6? It seems pretty
reasonable priced.

Yes, it's Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 LD Macro 1:2 and it has 62mm filter size. I giving you all these details because there is also older Tamron 75-300 which does not have 1:2 macro and is not as good.
The lens is indeed very reasonably priced, I believe it's about US159.
Efraim

quattro88 · Oct 20, 2003

Joey Valencia said:
so, would you say the tamron 75-300mm is much better than the FA
80-320? how is the contrast of your tamrons as compared to the
pentax?

Joey,

Please note that I was talking about 70-300 Macro 1:2, not 75-300 which is cheaper and not as good. Although I tried both Pentax and Tamron on my *istD, I had Pentax lens only for two days and didn't have time to do a meaningful, side by side comparison. They are both average consumer lens and seem to be of equal quality.

I made a decision to get 70-200/2.8 for the best results. I hope Tamron will release XR Di 70-200/2.8 lens soon.
Efraim

mhjackson · Oct 21, 2003

Efraim,

did you get a chance to look at either of the two available sigma 70-300 lenses? They seem to have similar specs to the Tamron one, one is cheaper and one is more expensive (in Canada)...
TIA

quattro88 said:
quattro88 said:

Do you mean the TAMRON SP 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6? It seems pretty
reasonable priced.

Click to expand...

Yes, it's Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 LD Macro 1:2 and it has 62mm filter
size. I giving you all these details because there is also older
Tamron 75-300 which does not have 1:2 macro and is not as good.
The lens is indeed very reasonably priced, I believe it's about US159.
Efraim

Darren M · Oct 21, 2003

mhjackson said:
I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and
have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am
looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my
*istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

I am sure it is a more expensive option, but Sigma makes a 100-300mm constant f4 lens that is well regarded, and I am sure quite high quality. It might be worth considering. If you have something along the lines of a 28-70, it could be a good compliment too, the gap would not be prohibitive I think. Just a thought about a slightly higher end alternative. Having a constant aperture zoom is a great option to have, although it comes with a price.

mhjackson · Oct 21, 2003

Thanks, Darren. I checked out Sigma's site and see that they have the 100-300 f4 ($1600 CDN, a 100-300 f4.5-5.6 (inexpensive $200CDN) and a new 120-300 f2.8 $3400CDN. I am not quite ready to shell out that much for the lens, but it is definitely worth considering.

Darren M said:
mhjackson said:

I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and
have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am
looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my
*istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

Click to expand...

I am sure it is a more expensive option, but Sigma makes a
100-300mm constant f4 lens that is well regarded, and I am sure
quite high quality. It might be worth considering. If you have
something along the lines of a 28-70, it could be a good compliment
too, the gap would not be prohibitive I think. Just a thought
about a slightly higher end alternative. Having a constant
aperture zoom is a great option to have, although it comes with a
price.

mhjackson · Oct 21, 2003

I checked the 120-300 again and it is only available for Canon and Nikon. The price of the f4 may also be lower as I could only see the price of a Nikon or Canon lens with HSM...

mhjackson said:
Darren M said:

mhjackson said:

I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and
have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am
looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my
*istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

Click to expand...

I am sure it is a more expensive option, but Sigma makes a
100-300mm constant f4 lens that is well regarded, and I am sure
quite high quality. It might be worth considering. If you have
something along the lines of a 28-70, it could be a good compliment
too, the gap would not be prohibitive I think. Just a thought
about a slightly higher end alternative. Having a constant
aperture zoom is a great option to have, although it comes with a
price.

Click to expand...

Darren M · Oct 21, 2003

mhjackson said:
mhjackson said:

Darren M said:

mhjackson said:

I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and
have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am
looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my
*istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

Click to expand...

I am sure it is a more expensive option, but Sigma makes a
100-300mm constant f4 lens that is well regarded, and I am sure
quite high quality. It might be worth considering. If you have
something along the lines of a 28-70, it could be a good compliment
too, the gap would not be prohibitive I think. Just a thought
about a slightly higher end alternative. Having a constant
aperture zoom is a great option to have, although it comes with a
price.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Hi again,

I am pretty sure it will be the same price, adding a HSM motor adds nothing to the cost. Actually, the transmission seems to cost just as much. I looked on the bhphoto web page, and it is listed at $799. A little less than the Canadian price you have been given, but costs would get added on. I know it is a lot of money, no denying it, but it is a lens you would own for a long time. My personal opinion is that once the money is spent, it won't be long until you have forgotten the cost, but you won't forget how much you enjoy something really good. Anyways, good luck.

alex wetmore · Oct 21, 2003

The 100-300/4 is $799 at B&H photo.

It looks like a nice lens, but at this point I think I'd rather have the Pentax 300/f4.5 prime. It runs about the same price but is 30% lighter (2lbs vs 3lbs).

alex

mhjackson said:
mhjackson said:

Darren M said:

mhjackson said:

I have done some testing of my existing lenses with my *istD and
have discovered that my old 28-200 FA is not too good. So, I am
looking to get a better lens that will complement the quality of my
*istD.
I am curious about the following:

100-300 FA
100-300 FA*
80-320 FA
75-300 FAJ

I also wonder how the Tamron 28-300 XR stacks up against any of these.

Click to expand...

I am sure it is a more expensive option, but Sigma makes a
100-300mm constant f4 lens that is well regarded, and I am sure
quite high quality. It might be worth considering. If you have
something along the lines of a 28-70, it could be a good compliment
too, the gap would not be prohibitive I think. Just a thought
about a slightly higher end alternative. Having a constant
aperture zoom is a great option to have, although it comes with a
price.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

JohnMBailey · Oct 21, 2003

Zipp said:
Thats why Pentax and other 3rd party Manufactors are starting to pump
out Digital Graded Lenses designed for Digital ---- but are also
backwards compatible and can be used on film SLR's

Zipp,

... compatible with a lot of older (and not so older) Pentax cameras.
The FAJ lens f/stops can only be electronically controlled by the camera.
Wish it wasn't.
--
jb

James O'Neill · Oct 21, 2003

I want to disagree with this, but I'm not sure of my facts.

I thought if you tried to shoot a pattern of stripes on digital the maximum number you could get was pixels/4. Theory being if you go black stripe white stripe, black stripe white stripe, you could have alternate black and white pixels, but if the alignment is half a pixel off each pixel gets half a white and half a black so they are all uniform grey. pixels/4 gives black stripe grey strip white stripe grey stripe. etc. This means that a 3000 pixel wide image can only resolve 750 lines, on a 2/3 sensor that comes out to just over 30 lines per mm - which is pretty feeble in lens terms. Film will do better because it has more resolution and a bigger area (same lines per mm, more mm = more lines). Is this way of thinking about resolution wrong - do I need to think in resolution in terms of the smallest dot - i.e. one pixel not 4.

Zipp said:
Havent tried the Ptx lens

Using the Sigma 70-200 ex F2.8 very sharp and focus is quite quick.
And has the resolving power to give sharp pics.

The main problem with most consumer lenses is that they are not
designed
for Digital SLR's in mind.

Film has a huge amount of tolerance , so you can put any cra* y
film lens
onto a film slr body and you will get a decent image

Use that same lens on a D* SLR and you'll wonder where it all went
wrong

Thats why Pentax and other 3rd party Manufactors are starting to pump
out Digital Graded Lenses designed for Digital ---- but are also
backwards
compatible and can be used on film SLR's

Only bad thing about this is the Cost $$$$$$$

Zipp

Zipp · Oct 22, 2003

When Pentax and the other brands make Digital Graded lenses for these
Cameras . They do this beacuse they know that consumer lenses dont give
very clean images.

When I say clean I'm talking about the resolution of the final image.

DG Lenses have a cleaner convergance light path than normal lens,
So the Line or light path is straighter and gives less shadow to each Pixell

When using a consumer lens - what you see is a drop off in clarity and
also shadow on the pixel - the reason for this is the light path is not as
perpendicular to the ccd ( While a DG lens will bend the light better) and
Give More clarity and less shadow , which = a cleaner / sharper image

Hope this makes sense

Zipp

James O'Neill said:
Zipp said:

Havent tried the Ptx lens

Using the Sigma 70-200 ex F2.8 very sharp and focus is quite quick.
And has the resolving power to give sharp pics.

The main problem with most consumer lenses is that they are not
designed
for Digital SLR's in mind.

Film has a huge amount of tolerance , so you can put any cra* y
film lens
onto a film slr body and you will get a decent image

Use that same lens on a D* SLR and you'll wonder where it all went
wrong

Thats why Pentax and other 3rd party Manufactors are starting to pump
out Digital Graded Lenses designed for Digital ---- but are also
backwards
compatible and can be used on film SLR's

Only bad thing about this is the Cost $$$$$$$

Zipp

Click to expand...

Darren M · Oct 22, 2003

alex wetmore said:
The 100-300/4 is $799 at B&H photo.

It looks like a nice lens, but at this point I think I'd rather
have the Pentax 300/f4.5 prime. It runs about the same price but
is 30% lighter (2lbs vs 3lbs).

alex

Hi Alex. Just to chime in one more time, I would probably agree with you, as I have a 70-200f2.8, so I would not really miss the range the zoom offers. Likely the prime would be a little sharper, although slightly slower (f4.5 vs. f4). However, when I recommended the zoom, I was under the impression that it would be joined with one shorter zoom, something like a 28-70. If that is the case, I think the zoom gives better coverage and more flexibility. jumping from 70(or 85 maybe) to 300 leaves quite a gap. Obviously, what other lenses are in the bag is pretty important.

300mm zoom for *ist

Leading Member

Senior Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Keyboard shortcuts