Telephoto Options Help

Firstly, apologies as I think this may have been discussed several times, which I guess is inevitable given the current Pentax telephoto line up, but I'm looking for some guidance on upgrades.

I mostly shoot motorsports, which can mean anything from club autotests and rallies, where I can be just a few feet away from the cars, to race circuits and Grand Prix where I'll be way back behind the safety fencing. I've been very happy with the DA16-45 and the DA55-300 for this, especially in good light. I now want to move up to something a bit better in terms of the telephoto.

Looking back through my track pictures with the 55-300 many seem to be shot between 150 - 250, although many are cropped slightly and there are some at 300. Therefore, I think the DA* 200, 300 and 60-250 are all contenders, albeit that the 60-250 is really outside my budget! I had briefly considered the 400 and 500 Sigma zooms but I have an old Tele-Takumar 400 which I have often taken to Grand Prix and usually find it too long (its also slow and cumbersome but I'd give it a go if I could see more chances to use it) Having said that I may reconsider one of the Sigmas if there is an irresistible deal somewhere.

I'm in a quandary because I like IQ potential of the primes and the DOF possibilities of the faster DA*200, but wonder if it will ultimately be a bit short most of the time and the DA 300 too restrictive for the shorter stuff.

So ultimately I'm thinking the 60-250 is going to offer the best compromise and from what I've read on here the IQ is up there with the primes. But as is usually the case with these things, it's the most expensive. I suppose I could then sell the 55-300 to soften the blow very slightly. I can see now why some people here end up with the full range

I'm hoping to have a good gander at Focus on Imaging and see if there are any deals going. Nice to see that Pentax will be there this year.

Anyway, comments and suggestions welcomed, especially from anyone shooting similar stuff.

Simon.

Sigma 120-400, 150-500 or 50-500?

As expected I will offer up the Sigma 100-300mm f4.

Really is a superb lens and a great match up with Sigmas own 1.4x teleconverter.

I think the Sigma 70-200mm HSM would be a good choice, I had the Sigma 100-300mm F4 but found the AF a bit slow for action shots.
Any of the Sigma HSM would probably be up to the job.
The DA*'s are superb quality optically but the AF can be a bit slow on these, I struggle in low light with my DA* 300mm when trying to take rugby shots, the 70-200mm Sigma is quicker.

Mille19 - you struggle in low light with the DA*300 on the K5 ?! I find that hard to believe - I was trying to shoot BIF today (they came out crap but that's another story) with the 55-300 on a K5 at ISO5,000 - 6,400 at 5.6 and 1/1,600. Surely you wouldn't need anything like those parameters for much slower humans !

I have a Sigma 135-400.

Up until 350 it is superb, but IQ falls off at 400. i.e 350 cropped is better than 400 non cropped.

That's it's only caveat

It was the lens auto focus speed I was talking about not the shutter speed.
The K5 is brilliant at high ISO settings but the DA* 300mm F4 struggles to focus fast enough in low light, the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 is faster at focussing in low light, probably due the the wider aperture.

For motorsport - Sigma 100-300 f4 or a TC'd 70-200 (non-HSM) - gave up both for what I thought was a better all-in-one option (the 60-250) and a Nikkor 70-200 for the D3. The AF is so slow on the DA*.

I did say this when you put them up for sale.

I was just looking at the 100-300 f4 today as an option to the 60-250. What's your opinion on the AF & IQ both at wide and especially tele ? I'm beginning to think I would really like a Sigma HSM lense because of the AF speed.

100-300mm is not HSM in Pentax mount.

Drat. Foiled again Muttley.

Why so, Dick D? I wouldn't describe the Siggy as being 'slothful' when it comes to focussing and I imagine it would out-pace the 55-300mm, which you seem to have been happy with apart from the IQ until now, with ease.


Prof. Pat Pending

Thanks for all the input guys. Sounds like I may need to look at the Sigma's again I take on board the slower AF performance of the DA's but I haven't found the even slower AF on my current lenses a big problem. Most of the stuff I shoot has fairly predictable movement so tracking focus, even manually, isn't too difficult, but I can see how it could be an issue with other sports though.

Well wouldn't say I was happy with the 55-300's AF - that and the fact it's a slow lense and I want even sharper shots are the reasons for the upgrade ! Can't fault the 55-300 for the money though.

Now where's Penelope gone