Which Telephoto Zoom to get?


cnotsniw96

New Member
Jun 22, 2012
80
0
0
singapore
#1
Hi everyone, need advise on which telephoto zoom to get? The Sigma seems to be half the price (based on Amazon pricing/havent had chance to check local prices) of the Pentax and looks tempting. Appreciate any comments and advice. Thank you.

Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG Macro

or

SMC Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED
 

PhilipKr35

Senior Member
Jul 17, 2011
1,628
16
38
Yew Tee
#2
Hi everyone, need advise on which telephoto zoom to get? The Sigma seems to be half the price (based on Amazon pricing/havent had chance to check local prices) of the Pentax and looks tempting. Appreciate any comments and advice. Thank you. Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG Macro or SMC Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED
Pentax is better, I had the sigma , it was not sharp.
 

sunnycamera

Senior Member
Dec 8, 2010
2,116
5
38
SG
#3
55-300 is better, there are three version of it, Dal, Da, Da WR.

2nd hand is around, 200, 300, 500 for each.
 

trowa77

New Member
May 3, 2011
165
1
0
#4
Pentax is better, I had the sigma , it was not sharp.
I have to agree Pentax glass is sharper. U will need to experiment to see it for yourself.
If you have a large budget a Pentax prime tele-photo lens will go a long way
 

sunnycamera

Senior Member
Dec 8, 2010
2,116
5
38
SG
#5
I also had both, pentax is lighter and smaller, while sigma is full frame lens, and heavier
 

cnotsniw96

New Member
Jun 22, 2012
80
0
0
singapore
#6
Thanks everyone for your comments.

I am also contemplating whether I should jump straight into the super zoom lens 'Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG HSM APO' since I already have a 18-135mm.
 

darrrrrrrrrr

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2006
3,209
5
38
30
Singapore
#7
Thanks everyone for your comments.

I am also contemplating whether I should jump straight into the super zoom lens 'Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG HSM APO' since I already have a 18-135mm.
Wah thats a much larger and heavier lens.. Also the sigma 50-500 is better rated iirc?
 

darrrrrrrrrr

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2006
3,209
5
38
30
Singapore
#9
Sounds good, and a whole lot more expensive too :D

Keep the suggestions/comments coming. Thank you.
What exactly do you shoot/want to shoot? Your preferences will determine what type of lens suits you best.

Events? Concerts? Sports? Wildlife? Birding? Zoo shots? Landscapes? Portraits?

If you really just need a "general purpose telezoom lens" then maybe just go straight for the pentax 55-300.
 

darrrrrrrrrr

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2006
3,209
5
38
30
Singapore
#10
Btw I've had the sigma and tamron 70-300 lenses.. They are cheap and not too bad. Tamron has serious purple fringing but supposedly sharper than sigma.

Made the jump to tamron and sigma 70-200 f2.8 lenses, while bigger and more expensive they are much better optically and expand the range of possibilities in low light, shallow DOF, etc.

But the original manufacturer lenses (pentax 50-135, nikon 70-200) are even better in build quality than the third party lenses, so that's my final preference.

Tamron and sigma may have improved their build quality in recent years though?
 

cnotsniw96

New Member
Jun 22, 2012
80
0
0
singapore
#11
What exactly do you shoot/want to shoot? Your preferences will determine what type of lens suits you best.

Events? Concerts? Sports? Wildlife? Birding? Zoo shots? Landscapes? Portraits?

If you really just need a "general purpose telezoom lens" then maybe just go straight for the pentax 55-300.
I'm thinking more of wildlife & fauna - safari, zoo, parks.

The 55-300 seems to be a good option, if i get the lowest price band one, but the longer reach seems so tempting. :bsmilie:
 

darrrrrrrrrr

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2006
3,209
5
38
30
Singapore
#12
I'm thinking more of wildlife & fauna - safari, zoo, parks.

The 55-300 seems to be a good option, if i get the lowest price band one, but the longer reach seems so tempting. :bsmilie:
Unless you plan to print big big to exhibit and sell, I think cropping is a perfectly valid way to keep cost and weight low, if your photos are mostly for screen display or small prints.

But if you can afford the big glass, then go ahead! Why not the FA* 250-600mm? LOL
 

GSiGuy

Senior Member
Sep 14, 2010
1,143
0
36
#13
My vote too goes to the Pentax 55-300.

I have been continually amazed by the IQ of the DAL 55-300 that had come along with my K-x as a "kit" lens. The K-x and 18-55 is now long gone, but the 55-300 is still with me.
F5.8 300mm
$8170094412_eccc54a7f6_z.jpg
f11 300mm
$8185154109_cbf1d012d5_z.jpg
 

GSiGuy

Senior Member
Sep 14, 2010
1,143
0
36
#14
Unless you plan to print big big to exhibit and sell, I think cropping is a perfectly valid way to keep cost and weight low, if your photos are mostly for screen display or small prints.

But if you can afford the big glass, then go ahead! Why not the FA* 250-600mm? LOL
Darren, are those beauteous FA* yours??!! Wow!
 

trowa77

New Member
May 3, 2011
165
1
0
#16
I'm thinking more of wildlife & fauna - safari, zoo, parks.

The 55-300 seems to be a good option, if i get the lowest price band one, but the longer reach seems so tempting. :bsmilie:
things to take note when going long range
Sigma 150-500 DG OS HMS is about SGD1k to 1.2k from ebay
Sigma 50-500 DG OS HMS is about SGD 1.5k also from ebay

of the 2 the 50-500 is the heavier and both will have zoom creep issue to the the weight of the front element.
The the F-stop is 6.3 at 500mm u will need a higher ISO setting when in low light.

As for cropping u will never go wrong with Pentax glass with TC.
DA*300, FA*300 and F*300 all are sharp lens that can be use with TC and u can still crop after that.

If u have a really big budget Sigma 500mm F4.5 and DA560 will be the top choice lol
 

Last edited:

oceanpriest

Senior Member
Apr 24, 2010
3,455
24
38
Ghim Moh
#17
I'm thinking more of wildlife & fauna - safari, zoo, parks.

The 55-300 seems to be a good option, if i get the lowest price band one, but the longer reach seems so tempting. :bsmilie:
for safari/zoo/park, i think 50-135 will be good option, can use it to shoot events also

once u go birding then get another > 400mm
 

pinholecam

Moderator
Staff member
Jul 23, 2007
10,954
90
48
#18
Zoo only for animals that don't move about that much, the Q7 with a good long lens is really good.
But you do get what you pay for wrt using a good long lens on it.


IMGP2279-1 by jenkwang, on Flickr


IMGP1899-1 by jenkwang, on Flickr


No cropping done to get to these 2 shots.
Taken with FA*80-200 IIRC
 

Last edited:

sunnycamera

Senior Member
Dec 8, 2010
2,116
5
38
SG
#19
it is always the battle between Image Quality + Reach vs Weight,

to get Big Reach:
- Big sensor -> Big image quality -> Big Body -> Big Lens -> Big weight
- Smaller sensor -> Less image quality -> Smaller Body -> Smaller Lens -> Smaller weight

For 800mm equiv.
- full frame means 800mm lens, super heavy
- crop snesor, 500mm lens, manageable heavy
- micro 4/3, currently, the longest micro 4/3 lens is 300mm, that is equiv. 600mm reach, so micro 4/3 doesn't have a suitable solution here.
- 1 inch sensor, only nikon 1 system, with cx 70-300mm, eqvui. 800mm reach, so portable solution with acceptable-ok image quality result.
- 1/1.7 inch sensor, pentax Q system now only have a 200mm equiv reach with native AF lens.

unless Q has a equvi 600mm or 800mm lens coming out, nikon 1 system still have the best weight/reach balance for now
 

Top Bottom