Looking for the right telephoto

Just about blown my mind on what to buy!

Been a Pentax user most of my life and used to subscribe to the mag many years ago but only just joined this site.
Have owned many a Pentax over the years and gave my Ist*Ds to my niece last year when I upgraded to a K20. I have since added a K5 and also have an Optio A30.

I have a bit of a dilemma in that I like taking shots of wildlife and I regularly take action shots for Stoke City Ladies using a Pentax 75-300mm. I would love to upgrade to a lens that the professionals use at footy matches but don't think I can justify a few thousand pounds so I've been looking at the Sigma 150-500mm (not sure I want to stretch to the 50-500mm unless it's sooo much better)

I'd appreciate some advice from the wealth of knowledge on here!
Cheers
Kilo

Professionals at football matches have their own priorities, and that may not suit what you need.

The 150-500mm should cover very well, although I have heard the 50-500mm is better. Add the Pentax 55-300mm to replace the 75-300mm and you'll have it just about right.

the 150-500mm may be to slow. 300mm f/4 is perfect though... not as good as a 2.8 but acceptable.

Thanks both, looking like I'm being guided towards the more expensive lens then
Not sure I'd want to go for the 55-300mm though John as that would make my 75-300mm redundant.
Kilo

As the 55-300mm is a better lens you could sell the 75-300mm. They go for reasonably good prices on eBay.

Look on Fleabay. I got my 170-500 dead cheap. Not the sort of lens you can just put on and shoot, but you need to work with it. Yet when you work with it, it nails the shot! Noisy though when it focuses, but when it was less than half the price of a new one, it is worth it.

Wow, thanks Offerton I had been looking at £1350 for the 50-500mm been now realise I can get it for £949 which looks like it's much more preferable to the 150-500mm.

I'll take a look on prices for the 75-300mm John although I have been quite pleased with the results from the lens.
Kilo

Hi Andy, I've just acquired the 50-500 from another forum member and have given it a good workout today at a wildlife reserve. First impressions are very favourable - I've posted a couple of images on the Gallery taken with it (see below).

Please bear in mind that both the 150-500 and the 50-500 are extremely heavy and only really suitable for using with a tripod or monopod, unless you have arms like Garth. The 55-300 is a great lens and really light, although clearly does not have the reach of the Sigma lenses. I think I'm going to love the 50-500, but it is definitely not a 'walkabout' lens due to the weight.







Best wishes
David

I don't see how a bigma or 170-500 is going to help shooting football though.

I would suggest one of the 70-200mm 2.8 lenses which gives you speed for the football and then a converter for the wildlife giving you a 400 5.6 for the wild life which I think will still be faster than the bigmas 6.3 aperture st the long end.

Thanks again guys,
The 75-300mm copes quite well for the footy if the light is good so as I won't be expecting anything great anyway on the days when it's chucking it down, I think I'll go for the 50-500mm (with monopod) for the sunny matches.
Hopefully it will get me some nice wildlife shots and as my Sister lives at the end of the runway at Cosford and has a BBQ every year for the airshow, maybe some nice close ups as long as we don't get the rubbish weather we had this year!
Kilo

The big Sigmas are great wildlife lenses. But im afraid they are far too big at the long end, too heavy and most importantly to slow for football. Will help if you have a high Iso model camera. Such as the K5. If you want professional style photos. You need to save the pennies and go for a 300mm f2.8 variant..

On the back of promising myself more time off to do more wildlife photography, I plumped for the 50-500mm and ordered yesterday. Amazingly it has already turned up and I don't have my camera with me as I'm playing 5-a-side football tonight.
Everyone was right about the weight though, it is a heavy bugger. Might take a few at Keele footy tournament at the weekend and then drop back to the 75-300mm
I just wanna go out and try it now!!!

yup the 150-500 is quite heavy. So I had a cunning plan to use a nylon toe strap from a bike. Attached to camera bag the loop can be quickly changed to get a good fit. So, camera strap around neck and the tripod mount on the Sigma looped into the toe strap and the weight is distributed through the bag straps. It works and leaves the camera always ready.

My vote is for the Sigma 150-500mm. It is quite heavy but I've got some great shots(in my humble opinion) of wildlife with it, nearly all hand held and I'm 62 and manage to carry it around ok. Sometimes in burst mode I've even got shots at a 1/60th sec although I aim for 1/250th minimum. Taken with K-r. Some here:-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dcweather/7463198778/in/set-72157618004801757/

Finally had chance to play with the new lens for an hour yesterday and although it is very heavy, it's not too bad to handle with the monopod.



Quite happy with this result so intend to try and get some more wildlife pics in the portfolio with it.