Privet!


davidstorm

Link Posted 22/02/2012 - 22:38
Aleks1298 wrote:
But as DA sells close to DA-L then I prefer the DA, as they are WR and knowing some people around me, it's a good feature to have.

Aleks, beware, most of the DA lenses are not WR. You have to buy special WR versions to get weather resistance. If it does not say 'WR' in the lens description it is not weather resistant.

On this basis, if cost is the primary concern, DA L may be better for you.

Regards
David
My Website http://imagesbydavidstorm.foliopic.com

Flickr

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs

PeterKR

Link Posted 22/02/2012 - 22:53
Aleks1298 wrote:
okay, as I understand that it will be a good idea to invest the extra 40 into the A lens rather than M. I still gotta think about the primes, I think will wait til the new 50mm comes out to see what that has to offer.

However I still don't understand how comes the DA 50-200mm f/4-5.6 is slow but TOKINA SD MC 70-210MM F4-5.6 is fine? The 75-150 sounds very very interesting, but above mentioned metering issues are putting me away from it.

I gotta admit the 70-210MM for 30-40 sounds very appealing, but does it outperform the DA 50-200 as DA is newer and they shifts around 70 which my budget can tolerate for an AF lens, hence my current inclination towards DA.
I generally try to shoot in manual or one of the program modes so I'm not afraid of little fiddle.

The lens I have now is DA-L and it's nice, when I actually learn to use the camera . But as DA sells close to DA-L then I prefer the DA, as they are WR and knowing some people around me, it's a good feature to have.

PeterKR

Link Posted 22/02/2012 - 23:00
Hi Aleks - I am new to DSLR and bought the K-r with DAL 18-55 & 50-200 last Autumn.
I find both lenses give good results but wanting a bit more 'tele' I bought the DA 50-300 when it was half price on Amazon.
However, I'm finding that the extra weight and length of the 55-300 make holding the camera steady more difficult whereas the smaller and lighter 50-200 can be used all day as if it wasn't there !
I guess I will just need more practice using the longer lens (or use a tripod !) Which brings me to a question - when carry-around weight is an issue would anyone recommend a Monopod as an alternative ?
Peter

davidstorm

Link Posted 22/02/2012 - 23:10
PeterKR wrote:
when carry-around weight is an issue would anyone recommend a Monopod as an alternative ?
Peter

Yes, monopod is a good idea and is excellent for wildlife shots as it allows more flexible positioning.

Regards
David
My Website http://imagesbydavidstorm.foliopic.com

Flickr

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs

PeterKR

Link Posted 22/02/2012 - 23:13
davidstorm wrote:
PeterKR wrote:
when carry-around weight is an issue would anyone recommend a Monopod as an alternative ?
Peter

Yes, monopod is a good idea and is excellent for wildlife shots as it allows more flexible positioning.

Regards
David

Many thanks, David
Do you think any of the cheap 7DayShop ones would be suitable for a beginner like me or should I invest in something more expensive ?
Peter

davidstorm

Link Posted 23/02/2012 - 00:02
PeterKR wrote:
Many thanks, David
Do you think any of the cheap 7DayShop ones would be suitable for a beginner like me or should I invest in something more expensive ?
Peter

I'm not sure Peter, it depends how much use it will get, how heavy your kit is etc. You could give one a try for a tenner, but if this is for long-term use you will have to buy something of better quality.

Regards
David
My Website http://imagesbydavidstorm.foliopic.com

Flickr

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs

Aleks1298

Link Posted 23/02/2012 - 01:12
good point David, I just started noticing that most of them aren't. DA-L it is then, at some point. The weight of the 55-300 isn't scaring me away from it, as I'm not what anyone would call small. I think I will wait to see what will happen with the loft bundle lenses to see what happens at one or another focal length and then think further.

Following the filter question, by cheap filter, what price range are you thinking of? Aka HOYA filters for 30, are they good or not? (for 52mm barrel)

Aleks
Pentax K-5 and co.

darkskies

Link Posted 23/02/2012 - 09:21
I think the weight problem has been confused. You are saying that the DA-L 55-200 is light, but then someone has said the DA 55-300 is heavy. But I would suggest that the DA-L 55-300 isn't!

I have bought the DA 55-300 and it is a little heavy to keep steady. But when the light is poor I always use a tripod (or don't use the lens). When the light is good then as long as you use a reasonable shutter speed then it's no problem.

I took a while to get used to using such a long lens but when you have it sussed then this lens is brilliant. As with all lenses, it's practice which counts.

As an aside, when I bought the lens I was given a free UV filter to use with it. The filter made it impossible to focus at anything over 150mm so I ditched the filter and all was made clear.
This space deliberately left blank.

johnriley

Link Posted 23/02/2012 - 09:53
It's all relative. No photographer brought up using metal and glass telephoto lenses and zooms could find the 55-300mm heavy. Try comparing it with a Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm!
Best regards, John

Algernon

Link Posted 23/02/2012 - 10:34
All wimps on here John To think Ansell Adams used to
climb mountains with 8x10 cameras, glass plates and big wooden
tripods before breakfast
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi

johnriley

Link Posted 23/02/2012 - 10:40
Yes Algi, but the donkey carried most of it!
Best regards, John

Algernon

Link Posted 23/02/2012 - 11:01
Pentax will have to start breeding donkeys then
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi

davidstorm

Link Posted 23/02/2012 - 22:41
I would second what Darkskies says about the 55-300mm. I have the DA L 55-300mm and it is very light for what it is and can be used with very little effort for extended periods. It is not poorly made however, only the lack of 'quick shift' focus is any detriment when compared with the DA version. The plastic mount is not an issue at all and in fact helps keep the weight down. If you can afford one I would not hesitate.

Regards
David
My Website http://imagesbydavidstorm.foliopic.com

Flickr

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.