Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 18, 2011, 8:47 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

The 55-300 is not a fast focusing lens, there is not much you can do to get it faster. The motor in the k-r and k-x are not fast enough to drive it faster. If you want something not that expensive as the sig 70-200 you might want to check out the sig 18-125 with the HSM motor. The faster lens mounted motors are the only way to get the AF faster. Also do not us AF-c, the body motor with af-c and the 55-300 is a very slow combo.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2011, 9:28 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robbo View Post
I like taking pictures of sports, both daytime and evening.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbo View Post
I have the Pentax 55-300mm, kit lens (18-55mm), f/1.4 50mm autofocus, the Tamron 17-50mm and 18-200mm lenses.
None of those would be particularly good for what you want to do. If you're serious about that, I think you should start over somewhere else.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2011, 9:33 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Yes that is the other option, but with canon or nikon the body is part of the solution. The others are the lens, and that will get really expensive fast.

canon 70-200 2.8L is 1500 and the mk II is 1700. So to get started with a rebel body you are looking at 2100 dollars to start.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2011, 11:35 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Sigma's 70-200/2.8 HSM II is $949. That plus a rebel should get you going for as little as $1,500.

It would be a shame to lose the Tamron 17-50/2.8 on a stabilized body (The stabilized version for a Nikon or Canon body isn't as good.) so maybe you could keep the Pentax at least for that.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2011, 3:28 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

the canon none IS 2.8L non IS is shaper if you want to use a TC to get more reach then the sigma. And if you want OS with the sig is almost the same as the 2.8L IS MKI.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2011, 10:38 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 978
Default

It seems clear to me that I face a choice: stay with Pentax (K-r or K5) and maybe get a good third party 70-200mm lens or move to Canon or Nikonand get some good lenses after selling my Pentax gear . If I win the lottery, I will do the latter. In any case, it's good to know that I have some knowledgeable "big brothers" when it comes to photography.

Thanks.
robbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 18, 2011, 11:41 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
tacticdesigns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 998
Default

robbo,

Yeah. It's like how much money do you want to spend?

That's why originally I was only looking at spending about $600 or so to update myself from my Pentax K100d to a Pentax K-r. Maybe a bit more to get an autofocus lens that went up to 200mm that was faster than my superzoom to give the camera a chance to focus at that focal length in poor lighting.

The two things with my Pentax K100d are that I don't think it focuses fast enough to keep up with my daughter and it only goes to ISO3200.

I was looking to pinch my pennies and see what the cheapest camera I could get that I could squeak what I wanted out of it.

Which sounded like what you were looking for in your original post.

If you have a store close to you, it won't cost you anything to try your lenses on a K-r or K-5 to see if it focuses faster. Is it fast enough? I don't know. I was just about to find out, but then my wife came to me and said, it's time for you to get a new camera, here's a budget. I guess that's my winning the lottery. <grin>

Anyway, good luck on your camera hunting!

And happy shooting!

Take care, Glen
tacticdesigns 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 12:28 AM.