advice on longer lens, please

oldie at photography..newbee at dslr. I have several lens up to 200ml. Looking to extend this to 300ml or so. Would you reccomend that I look to used, say 70 or 80 to 300 or look to the recent Pentax releases. Cost is an issue but the right choice is a bigger issue. Can you good guys give me some advice, please.

I don't own one, but I have tried it extensively, and the DA* 300mm is probably the most incredible lens I have ever tried. If I was interested in wildlife, sports, or anything that needed that focal length, I would buy it with no doubt.

I have heard that the 55-300mm is very good, but IQ is probably not comparable to the DA*.

Hope this helps.

I am wondering if you are aware that when using less than a 'full frame' sized digital sensor, the lens circle is cropped and thus the lens view becomes longer...In the case of the current Pentax dslr's your 200 mm lenses will become 300 in effect. Maybe you don't need a new lens
Get the camera and try them out (presuming they are Pentax fitting !

cheers
Pete

Hi Transit.. I have the 18-55 and 35-105 DA 100ml macro.plus 50ml.1.7 plus takumar 135. 2.5 plus. 28.2.8 standard plus Sigma 135..4.5 prime plus 200ml f4 plus 35 to 105 3.5 macro. This covers most of the range but sods law has it that I have the wrong lens when needed. My main interest is macro and I am well served with the 100ml. I now wish to take close ups of wildlife. Yes I do know of the 200ml increase in focal length which I use, but a 300ml will give me increase scope. Do I go for an older Pentax 70/80 to 300 of which there are plenty s/h or are there benefits in looking at the recent DA range. Available is a 80 to 260 lens(not pentax). Does anyone know of this? Wangani is a lovely spot and such a range of shots to take there..envious of you, mate regards Ron

Rhayles,

I am sorry for this, but I just need to correct your writing...

ml, as you write in your post, stands for Millilitre -
"ml = millilitre (also spelled milliliter), a thousandth of a litre in the metric system. Abbreviation also spelled "mL" or "mℓ".

The abbreviation you are looking for is instead "mm", MILLIMETRES (Thanks George ) the unit of length equal to one thousandth of a metre, used to describe a lens' focal length.

(If I hadn't said it, someone else would have... this is a very grammatically aware forum... )



- The recent DA range has Auto Focus, and SDM. One of the other pentax lenses in that range with autofocus is the FA 75-300mm, which is rubbish, unfortunately.
I therefore stand by my suggestion to go for the DA* 300mm prime; and if not that, perhaps wait for the new DA* 60-250mm, which promises to be an excellent lens.
I have never tried it, but many around this forum have been very happy with the 80-320mm, but I can't comment on that.
I can otherwise look at Tamron or Sigma lenses. The new 70-200mm f2.8 seem to be very high standards.

Unless you wish to have a long manual focus lens, I think you shouldn't look at other brands, or older lenses.

Hope this helps,

said in a lighthearted way..my mum told me never to correct your elders. I hold my hand up and claim that my dotage makes my memory fuzzy and to us elders, metric is a foreign concept. Lets get back to feet and inches, is my motto. I get excited that I can manage to even put something on a web page, but you get what I tried to convey, at least. A 300mm prime lens would be way out of my bracket, unless someone has one for under a hundred pounds. A zoom lens would enable me to carry this with me and take most of the pics I wanted rather than carry several lens. If it went up to 3000mm or longer would be a bonus. It would push my distance up to 400mm and beyond. I know that some of the earlier Pentax zooms were not rated and would hope someone would point in the right direction. Being on an Island brings its drawbacks as there is not one quality photo shop here. We will order it for you, is the usual reply! I appreciate your interest and reply and hope that you can guide me further...regards Ron.

First thing I would ask is what is your max budget?

Sorry, I am european, and this comes with some package...

I didn't understand that your budget was under £100, in which case i wouldn't have written that post!

I think your best option is the £210 , 55-300mm.
Under £100 I am not sure.

Under £100 for a good second hand 75-300mm FAJ would be an option.

Like this one: clicky

under £100 you have 3 options

Tamron 70-300

Second hand FA80-320

FAJ 75-300

Pentax fan though I am, I would rate them in that order. The Tamron has more CA than the Pentax FA, but is far sharper at 300mm than the 80-320. I have not used the FAJ but have been told it isn't as good as the 80-320.

Thanks for your responses. In reality, there is no upper price limit, but at my age s/h is the more sensible option. Have been advised that the Tamron 70/210 F3.5 19ah model cf is the very best but this is only one opinion. Concerned lest I should pick up a lens that is known to be less than OK. Still prefer to go to 300/310. There is one on EBay that is 70/260 but know nothing of its pedigree. I need a little hand hold here , please. regards Ron.

no matter how good the lens is there is no point buying the 70-210mm Tamron if you are wanting 300mm (and it is a cracking lens).
Personally I would go for either the Pentax DA 55-300mm or if you can run to it then the DA*300mm.

Totally agree with Mike!

Extending your range by only 10mm seems daft, no matter how good the lens is. it might replace one or two of your lenses but doesn't achieve your goal of longer reach. The SMCP-DA 55-300mm is a very good lens and it'll extend your effective range to 450mm (300 X 1.5 crop factor = 450). ( to Nathan)

The best Pentax lens at 300mm is the DA* 300mm as others have said. If it's in budget, go for it, you'll not be disappointed.