Genuine Lens Comparisons
Posted 10/09/2010 - 19:37 - Helpful Comment
Link
DC, it is indeed an interesting question, one that cannot be answered easily. The only way to answer the question is to compare each lens out in the field. Of course this is difficult, and reading other users blogs on the lens can you make an informed decision. But even then you might find that a lens that is not suitable for one person, might be the lens you have been looking for.
On the whole though, Primes are better than zooms at a given focal length, but this is getting closer (Nikonites might argue that the 14-24 and 24-70 nikkors are like a bunch of primes put together for instance, and indeed they are damn close!)
But as you have the 55-300mm zoom, which although great, is considered budget, you will probably find that the Tamron will be better at 300mm as regard to sharpness than the aformentioned 55-300mm. The downside is that, being an older lens it may suffer from CA. However unless you are shooting high contrast areas, you may not notice. In fact CA can be reduced if not eliminated post processing.
Hope this helps.
On the whole though, Primes are better than zooms at a given focal length, but this is getting closer (Nikonites might argue that the 14-24 and 24-70 nikkors are like a bunch of primes put together for instance, and indeed they are damn close!)
But as you have the 55-300mm zoom, which although great, is considered budget, you will probably find that the Tamron will be better at 300mm as regard to sharpness than the aformentioned 55-300mm. The downside is that, being an older lens it may suffer from CA. However unless you are shooting high contrast areas, you may not notice. In fact CA can be reduced if not eliminated post processing.
Hope this helps.
Some Cameras
Posted 10/09/2010 - 20:23 - Helpful Comment
Link
Hello
I have compared my Sigma 70-300 APO DG macro (whish I believe to be noticebly inferior to the Pentax 55-300 but have no proof of this) to my M42 mount Tokina 300mm f5.5 and whilst the sigma does suffer a loss of quality at the 300mm end up to 200mm is is very good.
The Tokina is far sharper at 300mm but suffers from the kind of CA that photoshop seems to be powerless to help with so I have to pick my subjects carefully.
My opinion (beware my opinions are not always factually correct) is that your zoom will probably bag you more shots that are sharp due to autofocus and will perform better in bright/ high contrast conditions than an older lens will but there is a certain satisfcation gained when focusing manually etc and obtaining a good sharp shot from something such as the Tamron or the Tokina I have. I cannot state how they may perform against the 55-300 as I don't have one.
There is no doubt that whilst I realy enjoy using my manual focus lenses they really do make me appreciate that new fangled autofocusmebobthingy
Cheers
Stu
I have compared my Sigma 70-300 APO DG macro (whish I believe to be noticebly inferior to the Pentax 55-300 but have no proof of this) to my M42 mount Tokina 300mm f5.5 and whilst the sigma does suffer a loss of quality at the 300mm end up to 200mm is is very good.
The Tokina is far sharper at 300mm but suffers from the kind of CA that photoshop seems to be powerless to help with so I have to pick my subjects carefully.
My opinion (beware my opinions are not always factually correct) is that your zoom will probably bag you more shots that are sharp due to autofocus and will perform better in bright/ high contrast conditions than an older lens will but there is a certain satisfcation gained when focusing manually etc and obtaining a good sharp shot from something such as the Tamron or the Tokina I have. I cannot state how they may perform against the 55-300 as I don't have one.
There is no doubt that whilst I realy enjoy using my manual focus lenses they really do make me appreciate that new fangled autofocusmebobthingy
Cheers
Stu
Posted 11/09/2010 - 00:16
Link
Thanks for the quick and useful replies. I think I will adopt the following tactics with the older lenses:- buy, try, keep/resell, until I can afford a more expensive prime. These older lenses will sell for the purchase price or more if I get a bargain so not much to lose and as you have alluded, fun to try. I have already some acceptable results with the Tamron 500mm mirror lens which I would not have thought possible.
Cheers, Dave.
Cheers, Dave.
Posted 11/09/2010 - 21:24
Link
Yes, they do kind of have that cuddly appeal don't they.
Posted 12/09/2010 - 15:39
Link
I've learned to calibrate the AF on the camera BEFORE making decisions about lenses
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Posted 12/09/2010 - 17:41
Link
dcweather wrote:
I guess there is an element with this that is similar to people always advocating the car they bought is "The best".
A lot of people do this to justify the expense. The trick is to find those you can trust, who are not afraid to call 'em as they see 'em. Certainly I have purchased lenses I have been unsatisfied with, though in my case I research like a demon and so am unlikely to fall into this trap. I do this because I am picky and will notice the difference between a mediocre and a good lens, or even a good versus excellent lens. Not everyone will, which is fine. We all have different expectations, not to mention budgets.I guess there is an element with this that is similar to people always advocating the car they bought is "The best".
dcweather wrote:
The problem I'm having is discerning whether a particular lens will give me noticably better results than my 55-300mm DAL on a Pentax K-x. This lens seems pretty good so will I only see clear improvements by spending mega bucks.
I believe you are right. Only incremental improvements on the DA55-300 can be made, and then only at a price (weight, loss of range, cost).The problem I'm having is discerning whether a particular lens will give me noticably better results than my 55-300mm DAL on a Pentax K-x. This lens seems pretty good so will I only see clear improvements by spending mega bucks.
Stuey wrote:
I have compared my Sigma 70-300 APO DG macro (whish I believe to be noticebly inferior to the Pentax 55-300 but have no proof of this) to my M42 mount Tokina 300mm f5.5 and whilst the sigma does suffer a loss of quality at the 300mm end up to 200mm is is very good.
This is the consensus view and I am part of the majority this time. I bought the Sigma and don't mind saying it was false economy. Replacing it with the Pentax I realised my initial mistake.
I have compared my Sigma 70-300 APO DG macro (whish I believe to be noticebly inferior to the Pentax 55-300 but have no proof of this) to my M42 mount Tokina 300mm f5.5 and whilst the sigma does suffer a loss of quality at the 300mm end up to 200mm is is very good.
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
1204 posts
16 years
Laindon,Essex
Dave