28-300 Lense


Link Posted 03/07/2006 - 20:06
On my MZ6 I have a 28-90 standard lense plus a 100-300 lense. What i would like to do, to save me carrying two lenses is to combine the two into one so would it be feasable to ditch my two lenses and have just a 28-300. Or shall i just keep the 28-90 and get a bigger zoom lense as i wish to go bigger than 300mm . I've seen a Sigma hyper zoom ( whatever that means ) on E-Bay do you think it's worth doing. Your recomendations are very welcome.



Link Posted 03/07/2006 - 20:46
It depends how big you are going to print and what compromises have been built into a lens with such a wide zoom range. You don't get something for nothing, and quality is what suffers.

You might also find a very restricted maximum aperture, especially at the telephoto end, which will mean a struggle to avoid camera shake in all but the brightest light.

However, it will mean you don't need to change lenses and from that point of view will be more convenient.
Best regards, John


Link Posted 04/07/2006 - 09:46
The 28-300 isn't going to be the sharpest of lenses, particularily at the long end however, depending on what 100-300 you currently have, it might not be at all that much of a disadvantage.

I have a Pentax 28-200 that I used to use as a single "walkabout" lens with 35mm cameras. I didn't expect all that much from it quality wise but I was a little surprised to find that it outperformed both my powerzoom SMC-FA 28-80 and 100-300 lenses.

How much do you use the 300mm end of your zoom? If it's not all that frequent then going for a 28-200 instead of the 28-300 should save a fair bit of cash as the Pentax & Tamron 28-200 lenses are reasonable performers and cheap 2nd hand.

If you want to go longer than 300mm then the Sigma 170-500 and 50-500 lenses get pretty decent reviews although they are both still quite expensive. Tokina also have the ATX 80-400 which is also supposed to be a good lens.

ali studio one

Link Posted 04/07/2006 - 11:42
another option would be to carry a 28-200mm lens and a teleconverter which would give you a good selection

the sigam 28-300 or the tameron is another option it depends more on what you specailise in realy

the first option would give you a 28-200mm and a 56-400 with teleconverter but of course you must remember that you will lose two stops of light with the teleconverter


Link Posted 04/07/2006 - 19:42
the 100-300 is a pentax AF and idon't know if it's really needed. So i was thinking of keeping the 28-90 AF and getting a straight 400 or 500. I've been looking on E-Bay at a Tamron SP500 CF Telephoto Macro and a Hoya 400. It would be nice to have one lense that does everything but i realise it's not that easy. The 28-200 sounds a good option. As you've probably noticed i am bit of a novice and i really enjoy photography so i would welcome as much advice as possible.


ali studio one

Link Posted 04/07/2006 - 22:15
well that is the one thing that use of a teleconverters you can use them thay are relitivley inexpensive and when you are happy that you use a focal length a lot then you can buy a lens of that length

to be hounest i have a 300-400-500mm telephoto lenses thay are old makes elsionor etc but i dont use them that often i had a 135-600mm f6.7 SMC pentax lens which was as clear as cyristal and a stuning lens to use

BUT that was just it i didnt use it a had the lens four to five years and sold it on ebay this year as i just didnt use it

my advice to you would be to buy an inexpensive teleconverter and experiment with it

cheers ali


Link Posted 04/07/2006 - 22:24
sounds like a sensible idea can i get one that will work with my AF lenses


Link Posted 06/07/2006 - 06:20
There are numerous brands of converters available and you can even use manual ones (obviously not in AF mode), just make sure that the one you choose has the KA contacts in the mount!
Chances are that they'll all work fine with Pentax and third party lenses but to quarantee 100% compatability, see if you can find a Pentax F1.7x AF converter - superb
Die my dear doctor, that's the last thing I shall do!


Link Posted 06/07/2006 - 10:01
It sounds to me like a 28-200 might be the best option for you. There are plenty of cheap 2x tele-converters available in Pentax AF fit however most of them are 4-element ones and not all that great performers. If you find a 7-element one then usually they are significantly better.

I can't recall how well the AF works with a 2x TC on a 28-200 - I'll try and remember to give it a go tonight and let you know.


Link Posted 06/07/2006 - 21:53
niblue wrote:

I can't recall how well the AF works with a 2x TC on a 28-200 - I'll try and remember to give it a go tonight and let you know.

Tried the FA 28-200 & 2x TC on my Z1p and MZ5 tonight - approximately the same results with both of them. With a high-contrast subject both AF'd fine with the TC when in the 28-50mm range but above that it was hit and miss, with more miss than hit. Beyond 100mm AF never worked.


Link Posted 06/07/2006 - 23:19
Hi niblue,

I seem to remember that most AF TCs really only work accurately below f4, which would explain the problems at the longer zoom ranges.. unless you have a fixed app lens, in which case ignore that..



"Make your hands respond to what your mind demands." Jesse James

Best wide-angle lens? Two steps backward. Look for the 'ah-ha'. Ernst Haas


Link Posted 07/07/2006 - 18:12
I've seen Pentax, Tamron & Sigma 28-200mm AF lenses on E-Bay which one has the better spec


Link Posted 07/07/2006 - 18:48
depends on the year..the earlier tamrons were better than the sigma counterparts..esp at close focusing....the Pentax is made by tamron but has smc multicoating...therefore the pentax would be best for the discerning pentax fan, as color, contrasr, flare control, etc will fall more in line with what you get with other pentax lenses.
my sigma 400mm always needs sharpening, contrast, and color adjustments to get to where my pentax 28-200 performs.
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.


Link Posted 07/07/2006 - 20:44
Ratcatcher wrote:
I've seen Pentax, Tamron & Sigma 28-200mm AF lenses on E-Bay which one has the better spec

The Tamron and Pentax are more or less the same lens and both are better than the Sigma. The later Tamron models might perform slightly better than the Pentax (closer focus etc) but I doubt there will be much in it. The Tamron lenses are usually a fair bit cheaper than the Pentax as well, but the Pentax should retain its value better and be easier to sell.

I've got one of the Pentax lenses and it's not at all bad if you're expectations are reasonable. I've not seen any signs that it's any better than the equivalent Tamron for flare etc though.


Link Posted 07/07/2006 - 21:38
I think i'm beginning to understand but still not sure what to do
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.