70-200/210 which to buy?


redbusa99

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 10:44
looking to find out which of the older 70-200 or 70-210 would be the best to buy or would the DA50-200 be better than all of them? will just be a stand in lens until i can afford something better but would still like some reasonable iq quality.
K3 II and the odd lens or 2

Flickr

LennyBloke

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 10:51
If you want AF then the F series 70-210 is noisy but has excellent IQ - it's not always easy to find at a good price nowadays and you have to watch out for lens separation between the front elements.

The DA 50-200 is pretty good (IMO not as good as the F 70-210) and can be had for quite low prices.

If you want Manual focus then the A series 70-210 f4 is superb quality and fixed aperture throughout the range. These often sell for under £50 - which I think is top value

Hope that helps
LennyBloke

Gamka

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 10:58
I have an old A series 70-210 f4 and a DA50-200. The DA50-200 has hardly ever been used. I prefer the A70-210

If you do not need autofocus you can often pick up the A70-210 for a reasonable price whereas the later F70-210 can be expensive.

You should be able to get a non-WR DA50-200 at a reasonable price too.

johnwhit

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 11:26
LennyBloke wrote:
If you want AF then the F series 70-210 is noisy but has excellent IQ - it's not always easy to find at a good price nowadays and you have to watch out for lens separation between the front elements.

The DA 50-200 is pretty good (IMO not as good as the F 70-210) and can be had for quite low prices.

If you want Manual focus then the A series 70-210 f4 is superb quality and fixed aperture throughout the range. These often sell for under £50 - which I think is top value

Hope that helps

+1

John
PPG link

In LBA hiatus.

johnriley

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 11:29
The DA 50-200mm has the advantage of WR, but to be honest I've always ended up using my non-WR 55-300mm, so it may well be that the range is more important.

The older lenses can be pretty good, but they are quite a bit heavier and bulkier.
Best regards, John

Gamka

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 11:55
johnriley wrote:
The DA 50-200mm has the advantage of WR,

The DA50-200 is NOT a WR lens.

You are confusing the original lens with the later DA50-200WR.

dougf8

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 12:00
The Tamron and Sigma 70-300mm lenses aren't too shoddy and you gain a half decent macro option too.
Lurking is shirking.!

redbusa99

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 12:01
thanks for all the replies, the concensus seems to be that the older lens iq is better than 50-200. manual focus might not be too bad as CIF can be used if neccessary i suppose and at the price point is probably worth a go.
K3 II and the odd lens or 2

Flickr

johnwhit

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 12:13
I'd be tempted by the Tamron 70-300 LD Di as well, mine is as sharp as the F 70-210 up to 200mm and beyond and has a useful 1:2 Macro setting beyond 180mm. You can pick them up new for £89 or second hand for about £50

http://www.srsmicrosystems.co.uk/283/Tamron-70-300mm-F4-5-6-Di-LD-Macro---Pentax...


John
PPG link

In LBA hiatus.

JonSchick

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 14:13
If you expect to use 200mm regularly, I'd also suggest buying a XX-300 lens, as you'll probably get better performance from one of those in the middle of its range than from a shorter zoom fully extended.

The 55-300 is a great option if you can afford it, but the Tamron 70-300 (which has the advantage also of being FF compatible and having an aperture ring so usable on film bodies too) is stupidly good value for money. Very long warrantee too. I have the Tamron as I don't need telephoto very often and it's good enough when I do. Compared to the 55-300, there is less vignetting and centre resolution is higher. But the DA lens has better borders at longer lengths, better contrast, and less fringing/CAs.

redbusa99

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 16:00
"lennybloke" pointed me to a Pentax A f4 which i think will do the job. it is to fill a gap between 70 and 170, i have Sigma 170-500 if i need to go longer. i did look at the Tamron and Sigma 70-300 but the reviews were so mixed decided against it, these were both review/tests as well as actual user reports and 300 was not a must anyway. not sure 200 is, this will give me the chance to see and whether i go for a dearer lens in that range in the future. again thanks for all the comments/help
K3 II and the odd lens or 2

Flickr
Last Edited by redbusa99 on 07/01/2014 - 16:04

gartmore

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 16:25
I have the F 70-210 and the DA 50-200 and the the F is never used
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -

stevejcoe

Link Posted 07/01/2014 - 16:31
I had a 70-210 F4 available in the classifieds. It is still available.

Here is the link, https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/fs-pentax-smc-a-70---210mm-f4-zoom-lens-4... .

Send me a PM if you are interested

Regards - Steve
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.