Ephotozine review of the 60-250mm

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-da--60-250mm-f-4-ed--if--sdm-lens-revie...

Sums up pretty much what I thought about it when I owned it, I really wish third party lenses were more available, more choice is good and it would give Ricoh a bit of a Gee Up on the lens refreshes...
This one and the 16-50 F2.8 are overdue a re do...
Just sayin...

I use my 60-250mm a lot and love it. I also have the Sigma 70-200mm EX F2.8 Macro but find I only use this for floodlit rugby matches now or wildlife when I know it is going to be dark and need F2.8. I just find the Pentax 60-250mm images more pleasing.

Interesting if you compare the ephotozine/pentaxuser review and the pentaxforums review you'd think they'd reviewed different lenses.

I agree!
I lusted after mine but when I got it, it was sort of meh, I't not bad but it has enough disappointments (mainly the Autofocus) involved in it to take the shine off the optics, and the build which I think are it's strongest points, and in my book it's a little better optically, than the review seems to suggest...
However I also tested a Tamron 70-300 VC USD (obviously not on Pentax!) and found it to be very nearly as good optically for less than £300!
Tamron are really hitting the mark with recent releases, I think they are currently selling some of them at margin in order to gain a bit of brand awareness and cadre.
Sadly, all the new Lenses are not available in Pentax...
Wonder just what it will take to get the brand supported by more third parties? (Probably getting Sony off the Board at Tamron!)

A friend shoots on Nikon with the Tamron SP 70-300 VC and the results are really impressive. Night and day with the budget A17 70-300 Tamron we Pentax users get. It's what you would hope the Pentax 55-300 would be. Decent optics mated to decent build with an excellent AF USM motor. I was ultra disappointed when Pentax refreshed the 55-300 and only added WR, then charged a bomb for it. Should have been fitted with the DC motor from the 18-135 for what they initially charged. The lens choice and comparetively higher prices are the only minor downside to Pentax ownership. Fortunately Sigma still look after us to a certain extent.

True, pentax users still have Sigma, good thing too really.
They at least seem to be stepping up with the newer Art Lenses in K mount too, obviously they are taking a little longer to come out than for the big three mounts but nonetheless they get there. It makes me wonder what the threshold point would be for Tamron and indeed Tokina to start making K mount again.
It's all a numbers game in the end...

From what others have said, Tamron will never produce the decent lenses for Pentax because they are part owned (or majority owned) by Sony.

Off topic a little, but Pentax really need to get their act together with the longer glass. The K3 is a superb camera, but is let down by the lack of fast longer glass. I am currently using an FA* 80 -200 which for me is about as good as it gets in that focal range. Pentax should make this lens in a DA* version and if they could make a DA* 300 f/2.8 I would be more than happy in relation to my needs.

I really like the colour rendition of the DA* 50-135 but its just a little too short and slow for my needs.

Not used the Tamron or Sigma 70-200 lenses, like the idea 0f 60-250, but f/4 is not fast enough for my needs.

I've never considered the 50-250mm but for those who have it and like it, fair go.

Not in my opinion or possibly others who have suffered lock ups and mirror slap.

Best regards

At the risk of derision from the devotees - am I alone in thinking my Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD [IF] is a superb lens that can deliver very pleasing results that (dare I say it) are up there with the legendary Pentax 60-250 for half the price?

Carl (taking cover behind a wall)

Love my Tamron nearly always on camera

the screwdriven Tamron is actually a super peice of glass, no need for the VC, a little update just with the USD and the new (Genuinely useful) lens coating would do Pentax users I'd say and it wouldn't be too hard for them to provide that, since it was smaller they could also push it at Sony users and some mirroless cameras, it would go nice on an OMD EM1 I'd bet! Oops Olympus, I swore, oops I did it again!
Anyway point is they needn't make it just for Pentax, if they are all struggling to make a buck (Not sure I believe it!), then surely they should at least try to push out some products with a little bit of effort rather than as Ricoh, with no effort at all...
A plakky red ring and a new lens coating that comes about mostly because the old one doesn't comply with all Regulations anymore doesn't count!

Thoughts appreciated re: size and walkaroundability

Am wondering the same thing: go for the Pentax 60 - 250 or a Tamron 70 - 200. I haven't yet handled the Pentax, but I had a go with the Tamron in a local store and this thing is huge! Don't owners find that somewhat limiting? - could I even use that in a walk around situation I see the Pentax is a bit shorter and lighter.

BTW, the Tamron is currently €517 here on Amazon.de a superb price. Pentax I'd be looking at about double I guess.

My initial DA* 60-250mm was slightly decentered so I sent it back. My current copy is a superb performer even wide open. On the K-3 it makes for a formidable setup. I did a head-to-head test against a D800 + 80-400mm and the Pentax K-3 + DA* 60-250mm provided nearly identical IQ 20"x30" comparison prints as the Nikon setup. I might add that not only is the Pentax kit significantly smaller, lighter, and offers constant aperture but it also is much more affordable. I have not enjoyed shooting with either Canon's nor Nikon's equivalent full-frame versions of these super-zoom lenses (i.e. 100-400mm Canon, 80-400mm Nikkor). The Pentax in contrast is a pleasure to use. I rate it very highly.




YMMV

Michael

Nice comparison shots, puts the size difference into perspective, I'd be willing to give the lens another go, it's borderline weight wise for me and I feel the copy I had could have been sub par. It did not match my experience with the three 50-135 and two 300 mm Lenses (Hopefully soon to be three too!), I have owned, 1/3 less weight is telling to me, and a huge advantage over the Nikon Boat anchor!
I never had any problems with the handling of the 60-250, it was a joy...
I also found the image quality of the K3 to be not far off the D800, part of what brought me back here to be honest. There is a difference but at the normal ISO's that I shoot at, it's just not significcant enough for me to justify a body costing three times that of a K3...

Logically the 35mm format D800 sensor is 2.33 times larger than the APS C so not far off three times. The 645Z is only 1.7 times larger than 35mm format but not 1.7 times more expensive.

It all comes down to perception.

Best regards