Newby with a question about lenses for wildlife

I now have a Sigma 150-500 which is excellent value for money, before that I used a Pentax FA 80-320mm lens which I think is an excellent and very under rated lens. You should be able to find one around £100.

In my opinion teleconverters aren't worth the hassle unless you have fast lens to pair with and/or don't mind manual focus.

Thanks for all the advice guys think I'm going to go with a new lens. I've contacted the 2 classified adverts I also noticed this, would this lens be OK? http://m.preloved.co.uk/m/showadvert/107452994/300mm-f56-auto-tamron-prime-m42-l...

True, when you compare it to the field of view on a full frame, but equally you can say that the 70-300 compares to a 105-450 on full frame.
_

It sounds like it would fit with an M42 adapter, but the description says it has fungus, so I'd avoid it personally.

John.

I know nothing of this particular lens, but a prime lens will normally give better quality than a zoom - although modern zooms are much improved.
The advert says the lens has some fungus in it. Even though it is cheap, personally I would avoid it. There are plenty more cheap lenses out there. e.g. I bought an M42 mount 180mm lens not long ago just out of curiosity, and it cost me just £8.94.

If you fancy that Tamron 300 a much better bet would be to get one of the Tamron Adaptall2 SP 300mm 5.6 lenses. These are almost continuously available on ebay for about £70, are a nice high quality, reasonably light, manual lens and are a genuine macro lens as a plus.

You will need an adaptall pentax mount for it (unless the one you buy comes complete with pentax mount). These are cheap for the PK versions but hard to find and expensive for the much sought after PK/A adapters that provide more functionality.

My only reservation is that 300mm is only just long enough for birds and you will want more. If it is needed for wildlife a better option, still on the cheap, might be to get that Tamron 500mm mirror (even though it is no way as good as this 300) and then save up for the Pentax 55-300 later, which will give a very versatile but still not expensive outfit.

Was never very impressed with my own FA 80-320 - soft at the long end on 35mm, and the main barrels developed a lot of slop (well known issue with these lenses!) => is scrap now!

---------------------------
I'd definitely give that one a miss.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Agree generally but for a newbie the Tamron Sp 500mm is one hell of a learning curve from several aspects for wildlife. The manual focus is ultra critical and is best with catch-in-focus another new thing to learn. It is also more expensive used than a new Tamron 70-300 which is autofocus and dead easy to use. The DAL 55-300mm is only slightly more to buy used.
All I can add is I am a birder and wildlife photographer and did massive research and have been through most of the lenses mentioned - several Adaptalls, excellent Takumars etc and have come to the conclusion that from cheap to dear in sequence of purchase the best results from lenses have been:-
Tamron 70-300
Pentax 55-300
Sigma 150-500/ DA*300mm

In the end you just have to make a decision and learn from it but you certainly have plenty of advice!
Dave

The seller of the lens on Preloved does not give the model number and the photos of it are quite small and not very good. However, it looks to me like a model 670AU Adapt-a-matic which is identical to the one I own. This lens is beautifully made, a joy to focus and takes sharp images at F8 or above.

However, my copy is absolutely mint, no fungus, no damage of any kind, almost as new and cost £20. This one has fungus and looks in much poorer condition than mine is. I would avoid it unless you can buy it for a tenner.

Regards
David

Thanks guys think I'm going to be on the lookout for the tamron 70-300 on here and eBay! Just anotjer stupid question which has probably been answered but so many lenses mentioned I'm confused haha. Would I need an adapter for this lens? Also when I search I presume I'm looking for a Pentax fit? And is this one manual focus? Thanks

The Tamron 70-300 is an af lens and available in Pentax fit. As others have said, it's a great budget buy as it can be picked up cheaply second hand. It's main flaw is a tendency to purple fringing in some conditions - eg. sunlight on water. Other than that, it's a good place to start, and, bought sedcond hand, if you have funds for something longer/better later you should get most of your money back if you re-sell it.

Agree with the above, bargain, pick one up on Ebay for £70 ish.

John

The only problem with 300mm is will it be long enough for the OP. Only she knows.

Personally, I would want longer for birds, although 300mm is generally fine for mammals

If you are starting out in wildlife/bird photography (these lenses are fine to get you started and until you know that this long tele game is for you) and don't have a high budget then you have a few options :

Old Pentax K or M42 (with adaptor) 300mm prime. These can be had for some low prices and some are very sharp but do display a lot of Purple Fringing so avoid high contrast / backlit situations.

Tamron 500MM mirror - learning curve is very steep and you really really need to keep this very steady (better on a monopod). Not for newbies IMHO, despite those great pics from JonSchick above. Those are not easy to achieve !

Pentax 55-300 / Tamron 70-300 / Pentax 80-320 : The 55-300 is a clear winner here. The 80-320 has a lot of PF and is very soft at the long end. In all cases best sharpness is achieved by stopping down (ca. f8 ) and shooting at ca. 270mm not fully extended at 300/320mm where all these lenses are softer than shooting at 250-270mm and cropping.

I have had all of the above lenses and IMHO I'd go for the Pentax 55-300 if you can stretch that far, if not the Tamron 70-300 is a good substitute. If you are confident with your MF handling then take a 300mm prime over the 500mm mirror.

If you want to take my experience with long teles though (and this is a large part of my photography) start with the very best you can reasonably afford (the 55-300 in this scenario) because you will lose money as you move up the IQ ranks continually buying better lenses !