Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 19, 2010, 2:21 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

LOL! You certainly have the luck - if you can afford to get both the Pentax and the Tamron do it. Then you have the whole range covered, plus having the weather sealing of the Pentax for when you need it.

I went for your all-new route, pre-ordering the 50-135 right before it shipped and then adding the two primes last summer, before the retail price went up. Don't regret it a bit.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 20, 2010, 2:12 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
guillermovilas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hasselt , Belgium
Posts: 794
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtngal View Post
LOL! You certainly have the luck - if you can afford to get both the Pentax and the Tamron do it. Then you have the whole range covered, plus having the weather sealing of the Pentax for when you need it.

I went for your all-new route, pre-ordering the 50-135 right before it shipped and then adding the two primes last summer, before the retail price went up. Don't regret it a bit.
I went to see the Tamron yesterday and it's in a stellar condition , what bothered me is that he didn't have The build-in tripod mount , he lost it , this thing is difficult to buy seperately , so could i work with this lens without it ?
Later this evening i'm going to see the guy who's selling the 50-135mm , hope it's in good condition then i can buy it.
If i buy the 50-135mm , it's maybe better to get a prime 200mm f/2.8 then the Tamron , it will perform better i think and will be much lighter.
__________________
PENTAX K3
Pentax 35mm f/2.4 AL SMC DA
Pentax 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 ED IF SMC P-DA Fish-Eye
guillermovilas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 20, 2010, 3:01 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
guillermovilas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hasselt , Belgium
Posts: 794
Default

Instead of getting a Pentax 200mm f/2.8 i could also get a Sigma 180mm f/3.5 EX APO Macro IF HSM , i would then have almost the same reach + a great makro lens.
It weights 965g which is 140g more then the Pentax and it's 5cm longer

These were taken with the Sigma :




__________________
PENTAX K3
Pentax 35mm f/2.4 AL SMC DA
Pentax 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 ED IF SMC P-DA Fish-Eye
guillermovilas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 20, 2010, 9:37 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
guillermovilas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hasselt , Belgium
Posts: 794
Default

Ok , my local Photostore let me try out the 60-250mm f/4 and the 200mm f/2.8 , both truly fantastic lenses but the biggy is indead quite bulky and heavy , i loved it but not sure i could manage using it has a walk around lens.
It's when i got the 200mm in hand that i understood that probably the best way to go would be 2 or 3 lenses covering similar focals , so i allready bought the 50-135mm f/2.8 and will probably complete it with the 200mm f/2.8 and if necessary add the 300mm f/4 too
__________________
PENTAX K3
Pentax 35mm f/2.4 AL SMC DA
Pentax 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 ED IF SMC P-DA Fish-Eye
guillermovilas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 20, 2010, 9:42 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
guillermovilas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hasselt , Belgium
Posts: 794
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtngal View Post
LOL! You certainly have the luck - if you can afford to get both the Pentax and the Tamron do it. Then you have the whole range covered, plus having the weather sealing of the Pentax for when you need it.

I went for your all-new route, pre-ordering the 50-135 right before it shipped and then adding the two primes last summer, before the retail price went up. Don't regret it a bit.

I'm going on the same route as you , i think you got the perfect combination : 50-135mm f/2.8 + 200mm f/2.8 + 300mm f/4
Thanks again for your help , it's when i tried the 200mm f/2.8 in my local store that i understood what you ment about this great lens
__________________
PENTAX K3
Pentax 35mm f/2.4 AL SMC DA
Pentax 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 ED IF SMC P-DA Fish-Eye
guillermovilas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2010, 3:29 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

I've never been quite able to explain what makes the 200 f2.8 so outstanding, processed pictures don't always give you that take-your-breath-away extra something you occasionally see with it when you look at the original picture. On the other hand, the Tamron 70-200 is a very nice lens, too, and does have the tripod mount, which the DA* 200 doesn't (though it doesn't need it). I think you'll be happy with either one.

Interesting that you also found the 60-250 possibly difficult, too. I sometime worry that I may unnecessarily lead people away from something like this because while a small, middle-aged female might have trouble with it, fit young guys might find it no big deal.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2010, 2:40 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
guillermovilas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hasselt , Belgium
Posts: 794
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtngal View Post
I've never been quite able to explain what makes the 200 f2.8 so outstanding, processed pictures don't always give you that take-your-breath-away extra something you occasionally see with it when you look at the original picture. On the other hand, the Tamron 70-200 is a very nice lens, too, and does have the tripod mount, which the DA* 200 doesn't (though it doesn't need it). I think you'll be happy with either one.

Interesting that you also found the 60-250 possibly difficult, too. I sometime worry that I may unnecessarily lead people away from something like this because while a small, middle-aged female might have trouble with it, fit young guys might find it no big deal.
It's allways a big deal when you're looking for a walkaround lens , something to carry with you hanging on your camera body all day long.
I remember doing this for a few hours with a Sigma 100-300mm f/4 and i ended up having back problems, that's why i sold it
__________________
PENTAX K3
Pentax 35mm f/2.4 AL SMC DA
Pentax 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 ED IF SMC P-DA Fish-Eye
guillermovilas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2010, 3:00 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
guillermovilas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hasselt , Belgium
Posts: 794
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtngal View Post
I've never been quite able to explain what makes the 200 f2.8 so outstanding, processed pictures don't always give you that take-your-breath-away extra something you occasionally see with it when you look at the original picture. On the other hand, the Tamron 70-200 is a very nice lens, too, and does have the tripod mount, which the DA* 200 doesn't (though it doesn't need it). I think you'll be happy with either one.

Interesting that you also found the 60-250 possibly difficult, too. I sometime worry that I may unnecessarily lead people away from something like this because while a small, middle-aged female might have trouble with it, fit young guys might find it no big deal.
By the way , which filter do you use on your 50-135 mm ?

I'm thinking of buying a Sigma or Hoya Multicoated UV
__________________
PENTAX K3
Pentax 35mm f/2.4 AL SMC DA
Pentax 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 ED IF SMC P-DA Fish-Eye
guillermovilas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2010, 9:44 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

I had used a Hoya on it briefly, but found that too often I was in lighting situations that created problems with the filter, so I took it off. I prefer not to use filters if I don't have to. For some reason my 50-135 gets beaten up more than any other lens I own - I've dropped it a number of times and occasionally forgotten to put the front cap on when I've put it back in my bag. There's a tiny, superficial scratch on the front element but it's never affected any of the pictures. The lens hood is definitely scratched up and once got knocked so hard it was off track and hard to remove (it was mounted backwards on the lens) so I know I'd never get much if I wanted to sell it. But that's OK, the image quality is still outstanding and it's the one lens I'd always want to hang on to. While it's not one of my favorite lenses, it's one of the ones I use the most, with consistently good results. Considering how hard I've been on it (I can be such a clutz!), it's got to be well made.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:38 PM.