Long Lenses

Like that one, describes it well.

Again, I don't think the 35mm format is to blame... The old 35mm Pentax 80-320mm is comparable to the 55-300mm. You're probably comparing a high quality f2.8 or f4 lens (with in built OS) to the Pentax's screw driven f5.6.

Now, how about a WR Penzilla? Cool name and nice reach - that ought to get attention of the birders out there, no?

There are also a number of second 400mm and 500mm lenses available.

I bought one to find out if I would use a large heavy lens before stumping up the cash for a modern af/ expensive equivalent - I am so pleased with it I have kept it and not pursued a new lens as yet.

Don't think that I am saying that an old mf lens will be as good as a newer af version (most if not all are not) it is all down to what quality you are happy with and at what price.

A Sigma 500mm f4.5 will cost thousands of pounds where as my NPS 400mm f5.9 cost around 40 quid - it is not as good as the sigma but the price is seriously lower - there is a set for this lens on my flickr page

Big lenses are awkward, cumbersome and more ofter than not require a tripod as well - I would strongly recommend trying one out by either hiring or buying a cheapy to play with prior to shelling out many pounds on something that spends most of it's life on a shelf.

Regards


Stu

p.s. I am currently fighting the urge to buy a da* 300mm as they are meant to be excellent and hand holdable - must fight it - must fight it or the missus may be unhappy

Maybe a random Sigma lense would be an Anyma

Pete

I've tried a 600mm mirror lens, & have got good results hand held with the K100d in good light. Not yet tried it with the K7, where the extra pixels will be a bit less forgiving (and allow more of a crop from my F300). Unfortunately the Bigma/Bigmos etc. are out of my price range.

There is also the option of connecting your camera to a spotting scope. My Tasco scope isn't really up to the job - It works out as a 1000-4000mm zoom with no aperture control (f16-f64 depending on zoom) but budget optics show (it was only £60) I should imaging a Pentax scope would be MUCH better!

Yea this is what I was seeing. and YES I believe that my 1st born would be the payment.

Thank you all for the responses.

Don't forget that with the really big lenses you will also need really good support for really sharp shots!

Being in the very fortunate position of owning one of the 250-600 lenses mentioned earlier, the support at current prices would cost me what I paid for the lens! (Pics in 'Gear' link in my sig below)

Should you ever do it though, you won't regret it!

I have the A* 300mm f2.8 and its a heavy beast at 3kg but unlike the 250-600mm quite manageable hand held or using a monopod. Nice thing about it is that you can stick a Pentax 1.7x TC on it and have 500mm f5.6 with no noticeable quality loss. I have even doubled up on converters and had very acceptable results.

Personally I am not interested in something like the 250-600mm as I can't be bothered to carry a normal tripod, never mind a beast of one plus the lens but I would buy an up to date Pentax AF 300mm f2.8 with a matched teleconverter in a heartbeat (not really interested in the Sigma). If Pentax don't do something soon though I can see me buying something for the Canon instead, which would be a shame.

Not up to scratch Mike?

I've been looking enviously at it

I do prefer Pentax lenses over Sigma, they are better built and seem to give a more pleasing image (to me anyway)

The exception seems to be:

The new 120-300mm f2.8 outperforms the 300mm 2.8 prime, has HSM, weather resistance, OS and takes the Sigma 1.4x with no quality loss. It also takes the 2x Sigma converter with very little problem and still has fast af on Canikon. It is also a zoom rather than a prime and sells for a touch over 2k. IMO is quite a bargain for what it is.

Not in Pentax mount.

Well hopefully if the new Pentax company don't make a 300mm f2.8, they can at least forge better relations with Sigma/ Tamron and get some more of their lenses out in the Pentax mount

Point taken about the 250-600 Mike it's not a hand holder, but certainly usable on a monopod!

To be fair it's one of those lenses where you sit and wait for the wildlife to come to you rather than going to find it, as such, as a 'one location' lens there is no issue as you tend to make plans for what to do with it and stick to it. Not only that, it's a lot easier when you consider the price I paid, would never have been able to afford what it's worth!

If Sigma get off their backside and release a Pentax version of the 120-300mm 2.8 though, then like Mike I'd be all over it. Would definately want that zoom range rather than the prime and it just has to focus faster than the DA* 60-250!

I'm too impatient for a 250-600mm, I can't sit around waiting for very long which is probably why I have never managed a Kingfisher picture

A 120-300mm 2.8 with a 2x converter would do me very nicely ... and I must admit I am close to selling my Pentax mount Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 and 100-300mm f4 so that I can put one on my 50D.

There is another name for the Sigma 200-500 that was banded around when it first came out, it's the one I prefer - the Bazookma....LOL