Pentax DA* 60-250mm owners ... ?

Any on here that also have the 50-135mm?
Do you still use the faster lens or now that you have the 60-250mm has the 50-135mm been consigned to that big kitbag in the sky?

I am wanting to buy a 50-135mm but if I do it will come out of my K-7 fund which means delaying the purchase for a few months.

Good question Mike!
I want to get the 60-250, but to do so will probably have to sell the 50-135. I too am curious if people still use both.

Mike, I was at a fiesta yesterday. I took the DA*16-50mm and the DA* 60-250mm. I wish I'd taken the DA* 50-135mm as well, certainly for night shots.

I found the short end of the 60-250mm just a tad too long at times.

I'm going back for day 2 of the fiesta this afternoon. I'll be taking the DA* 50-135mm as well this time on a K10D body.

Mike,
Good question, following this thread very carefully .
So far seems 1-0 to having both the lenses.

But I suspect Danny hasn't read this thread yet because I have the impression that he will square it off .

Come on owners of both these lenses, show your cards

I tend if I can to use the 50-135. I find I get better results.

I wonder about your 60-250mm as you have said a few times that you think both the 50-135mm and 300mm prime are a lot better.

It's what I would expect. A prime does not have the compromised optics of a zoom.

Also, the ratio or the size of front lens to the focal length is going to have a bearing on the quality of the picture, because it controls how much light gets in.

The 60-250 is a great lens, but it's never going to compete with other lenses which have such an advantage.

Well, as predicted, I will level the scores by saying 'what DA* 50-135?'

Seriously though, unless I plan, or think I will definately need the speed, the 50-135 just stays at home whenever we go out, or Fiona might have it in her bag.

Since having the Sigma 100-300 F4, then replacing it with the DA* 60-250, I genuinely cannot recall the last time I took it out with me. The reach has always been more important.

Surely it's all about your favourite style of photos? I played with the 60-250 at SRS on the K7 and I loved it, but with the type of photography I tend to do am not sure how much use I would get out of it, but I can see I would get quite a lot of use of a 50-135 complemented by my 16-50. Would I like em all? Sure

I have both the DA*50-135 and DA*60-250 and find its "different horse for different courses".

Paired with the DA*16-50 the DA*60-250 make a fabulous pair of lenses for general outdoor photography. (If I had to throw 16 of my 18 lens away it would be these I would keep)

But if moving indoors the the 250 is rather long so then the DA*50-135 replaces the DA*60-250 the extra stop is good in low light too.

I cannot see 250mm being used for much portraiture (other than candid) so again the DA*50-135 would be fit the bill indoors or outside.

The general nature of the shoot controls which equipment I take, and the specific nature of each shot (i.e. required field of view and required depth of field) controls which lens is used.

My own view is that if you are looking for a fast top quality combination for indoor work, portraiture and most general work that doesn't need the extra reach, then the obvious solution is the DA*16-50 plus the DA*50-135.

It is worth noting that at close focussing distances the DA*60-250 is nearer a 60-160mm (my Tamron 70-200 had a tighter FOV at close object distances), it only hits a true 250mm at near infinity distances.

If however you are mainly interested in outdoor work, then the DA*60-250 is an excellent lens (it's easily as good as the 50-135 at f4.0) and paired with the 16-50 makes a great combination, or the 17-70 if you prefer a lighter/smaller lens with an overlap. The range from 50 to 70mm is very useful for portraiture and avoids the need to lens swap for this focal length, plus the 60-250 is a bit intimidating when used for fairly close people shots!

It is also worth considering that the 50-135 is a fair bit lighter and doesn't extend when zoomed.

Personally, I would love a DA*15-60 f4.0 with the same level of performance as the 60-250, it would be a fabulous match , but I doubt if anything like that will be forthcoming in the near/mid future, so have settled for a DA 17-70 for now.

The DA 16-45mm is pretty darned close.

As the discussion is also about the quality of the DA*60-250 for portraits thought of putting up a couple taken with it a few weeks ago.
The range worked out pretty well on that occasions for an outdoor gathering




This next one I had to soften it during PP as all the bristles from the face were showing in the image

Again I softened during PP on this one too