Advice for complete novice

Hi there....brand new to the forum (and photography in general). Have just purchased my first digi SLR - Pentax K100D with 18-55 mm lens. Am starting to get to grips with it but still have lots to learn - may be brave enough to show you my first attempts soon. Anyway - thinking about investing in a telephoto lens. Looking at the Pentax smc DA 50-200 mm lens. What I'm after is somerhing to give me the capability for some wildlife shots - live in Norfolk and often see deer, foxes etc but never get close enough shots. Any thoughts on this lens - or any alternative suggestions. It's as high as my budget allows at £170 though - and also don't want anything to big/heavy. Many thanks.

I have the 50-200 on my K100D and its a really good value lens. Sure, it may not be perfect but i paid only £80 for mine (which happens to be the Samsung equivilent) and that is a true bargain!

Look out for the samsung version... its the same but cheaper!

I say go for it, no better value option i don't believe.

Dave

The Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6 APO Macro DG is another one to look out for - they're £155 new at warehouseexpress.

It's bulkier than the Pentax 50-200 but has a number of advantages:

1) It has a 1:2 macro capability at the long end - it's not as sharp as a proper macro lens but it's definitely useable
2) It goes to 300mm instead of 200mm - it's not at it's sharpest between 200mm and 300mm but you can still get good shots and it's better than not having it at all
3) At 200mm it'll be slightly faster than the Pentax lens as well

My experience is also that the Sigma is a better performer optically where their ranges overlap.

In the days you could pick up the Pentax or Samsung equivalent for under £100 then I think it was a good buy, however given it's usually more expensive than the Sigma then, unless you want to stick with the Pentax brand or size is important to you, I think the Sigma is the better option especially given it's cheaper.

Note that there is also a cheaper Sigma 70-300 available (£96 a warehouse express) - I've no experience with it however it's supposed to be of lesser optical quality.

I'm very happy with the Pentax 50-200, it is a cracking lens and not much bigger than the 18-55 - recommended
Ken

---

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 -

I think you'll be dissapointed in the 50-200 for wildlife. I am.

You can't get close to wildlife by walking up to it, so any shots are at a distance, the 50-200 doesn't cut it for me. For example, i have a bird table 10m from my back door, to get a good shot of the birds I have to seriously crop the photo. Unless you are a just a few feet away you can't get a frame filling image.

I'm saving my pennies for a longer lens, don't know what but probably 300-400.

here's an example:





not the best shot but nice and big, but this a heavy crop from the image below.




I was only 5 or 6 metres away when I took this. It looked a tad bigger in the viewfinder.

---

Please call me aj,

I use a Pentax K10D, on a MacBook with LightRoom (vers 1.3 + beta 2)

http://www.ba-joseph.co.uk/gallery

I have the Sigma 70-300mm MAcro APO DG as well and I'd also recommend it for wildlife if you want the dual purpose of being able to take macro (-ish) shots as niblue explains.

You might also want to look at picking up a Pentax 80-320mm off ebay which can be had within your budget (though the price of the lens seems to be steadily rising). As that will give you the extra mm you need for capturing wildlife.

I'd be very careful of the "new cheapo" long range lenses from the USA/Hong Kong that you see on ebay, as you're likely to be unhappy with the quality.

With the 300mm+ zooms mentioned, you might also want to get a tripod (or at least a monopod) to use them on at the long end of 300mm as they can exaggerate any shaking with the trombone sticking out.

---

Jonathan

Macro & Wildlife Photography

It seems to me that 160th is a tad optimisitic to get a shake free shot with a 200mm lens

---

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 -

That will depend on whether SR is off or on.

G

---

Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

I've shot at 1/15s hand held at 200mm with SR and got a pin-sharp image
The biggest problem I find is getting the subject to stay still long enough... perhaps nailing them to the perch would help??
Matt

---

http://www.mattmatic.co.uk
(For gallery, tips and links)

Welcome Janeyb.

I would also recommend the Sigma 70-300 APO EX DG, but another option (and it is much lighter) is the Pentax 75-300 FAJ (Sorry, I don't know the current going rate). I have both and take the Pentax when I want light weight kit and the Sigma if I feel I might need the macro facility.

---

Tim the Ammonyte
--------------
K10D & sundry toys
http://www.ammonyte.com/photos.html

A man after my own heart Matt, if nailing don't work, shoot 'em and stuff 'em works everytime

Tim, you're in a muddle..... There is no such thing as a Sigma 70-300 APO EX DG....Sigma options are very limited, to 70-300 APO DG and 70-300 DG Macro..... the APO version is more expensive, but worth it...

I have 70-200 EX and 100-300 EX Sigmas, the EX being better than lesser versions, as well as faster and more expensive. They are rare as Sigma don't appear to be making any in Pentax fit at the moment...

Tamron, since no-one has mentioned, does a good 70-300 Di Macro lens...

beauty of both lenses they are compatible with film as well as digital...

I do hear the FA 80-320 is appreciated, and also the SMC-F 70-210.... but I have neither

Peter

It was, the viewfinder shows only 95% of the captured image.

---

Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream

Another vote for the Sigma 70 -300 DG APO. Good for animals, macro good for dragonflies etc (with tripod), but still not long enough for birds unless you are really close. I have a Tamron 2X converter, but not used it enough yet to be convinced, partly because you have to crank up the ISO and/or use the lens at its fastest aperture, together with manual focus - birds move all the time. Worse than insects who do settle for a while at times. The Sigma is a good, light lens. Just don't expect to fill the viewfinder with the local robin, unless he's tame.
Stuart

I sit, corrected.

---

Tim the Ammonyte
--------------
K10D & sundry toys
http://www.ammonyte.com/photos.html