50-135 vs 60-250

Hi! I can not decide between 50-135 and 60-250 (star*)
what are the +/- without taking into account just focal length?
Is 50-135's f2.8 is worth it?

I can't give you a comparison... but the DA*50-135 is probably my absolutely favourite lens! Fairly small, easily usable hand held, astonishingly sharp even at f/2.8, and such a beautiful rendering. I use it for landscapes, city scapes, portraits, and low-light work (theatre & music).

The 60-250 is pretty heavy (about 1kg without the tripod collar, and about 1.2kg with). The 50-135 is 765g. I am sure the DA*60-250 is another lovely lens though!!
(I would like the opportunity to compare against the 50-135 )

Matt

The 50/135 is a suberb lens,beautiful colour reproduction and sharp as sharp can be!...the 60/250 while being an excellent lens ,is a monster.

can't compare with 60-250, but here are some pluses of 50-135 that are relevant for me:
- 2.8
- internal focusing and internal zooming - the lens doesn't extend when zooming
- relatively compact and lightweight

The DA* 50-135 like everyone has stated is sharp with beautiful rendering and don't forget the weather sealing, if you need it. In my opinion the thing that makes the lDA* 50 135 so great is its versatility, it just covers so many situations and has enough reach when you need the extra focal length. I have noticed the price has come down a little since i purchased mine, so really is worth a look, and you really won't be disappointed with this lens.

If I had the money I would love to buy a DA* 60-250. However, although I would sometimes like the additional focal length, I currently rarely find myself needing it, but when I do, I wish I did have a DA* 60-250. I may be wrong but I think the DA* 50 135 has slightly better IQ out of the two lenses (but check the web for specific lens reviews tests)

They are both great lenses, if you think you will need and use the extra focal length, the DA* 60-250 would be a wise choice as it is f/2.8, If focal length is important, have you looked at the DA* 300? The downsides I guess are it starts at f/4 and its focal length is fixed, trade of of needs I guess!

Gareth

The DA* 60-250mm is also a constant f4 throughout its zoom range. I am selling an "as new" one at the moment.

So why did I sell my 50-135? I hardly ever used it. It is a lovely lens and it deserved to be used so it went to a good home.
I have the 60-250 and it was easy to decide to keep that. It too, being a *lens is weatherproof of course.
Yes it is heavy, yes it is expensive, yes it starts at F4, but I love it and use it, a lot. It is the perfect partner for my DA17-70.

It all depends on what you want to shoot with the lens, as both have different applications.

The 50-135 is perfect for Portraits and event photography and general telephoto work.

The 60-250 is perfect for more nature photography (albeit could be a bit longer at times), sport, and "county show" stuff, Plus general long reach images.

So, decide what style of images you take, and pick which one which is suitable, and then save up for the other one.

Hope this helps

This is a major consideration - what is your photographic style and what sort of images are you hoping to make with the lens you choose?

Given that both lenses are equally excellent in practical terms, the choice is down to other factors. Do size and weight matter? Does the reach of the lens matter? Does the maximum aperture matter? These things will sway the decision one way or another.

If it helps visualise the effects of both lenses, the 50-135mm is similar to what we would expect a 70-200mm lens to be like on film. The 60-250mm lens is similar to what would have been a 90-375mm lens on film.

I have both lenses and use the 60-250mm much more than the 50-135mm.

If you are shooting in low light conditions, the 50-135mm is the better choice, but for an all-rounder tele-zoom, the 60-250mm is far more useful.

The one stop max aperture difference between them is more than compensated for by the high ISO capabilities of the modern Pentax DSLR's.

The only real negative point I would have to mention is that any Pentax DSLR body, with a grip and full compliment of batteries, and a 60-250mm attached is a heavy lump of kit to hang around your neck all day.

My most used lenses are the DA*16-50mm, and the DA* 60-250mm. To date, I've not missed the 10mm gap between them. I can usually get a little closer, or a little further away, depending on which lens I have mounted on the cacmera at the time.

I have the 50-135mm and to be honest I find I can crop images taken with it very harshly with little loss of quality. I've taken a shot of a cat from about 5m or so where the engraving on the animal's collar was clearly legible when zoomed in. Shots of a small bird from a similar distance with the lens set to 135mm could be cropped to see individual feathers.

thanks for all the views, my final decision is 50-135..

I stand corrected John you are right the DA* 60-250mm is f/4 not f/2.8 as I stated! wishful thinking that it was 2.8.

Gareth

I have a 50-135 and am very impressed with it - a wonderfully sharp lens. I think it's a good choice and you will be pleased with it.
I shall probably get the 60-250 next, but as another user has commented you can crop images taken with this quite heavily, so I don't miss the extra range too much.

)))) 50-135 has arrived today! thanks SRS!