It's more of a comparison prime vs zoom then anything else.
I'm looking for something in between the range of the DA40 and the DFA100.

My first thought was the DA*55 for his speed and the range is quite suited for portrait and stage photography (if I'm correct).
Now I'm also considering the DA*50-135, the zoom range seem very pratical to me and f/2.8 is relatively fast. I need to up the ISO maybe a bit but compared to the DA*55 but if I can make better shots because of the zoom, it's a price I'm willing to pay.

It's quite a hard one right.
I simply want your view on the matter and what your choice would be, if you could please do that it might help me a bit to make a decision.

Thank you for reading.

Here just to ease your mind a bit link
If you've the DA*55 there isn't much reason in terms of image quality to get the FA43 also.

Do you have focus problems btw with the DA*55 on the K10D, it seems to be a problem

It's good we think a like then Bob and don't worry about my name

Pentax trully have some wonderfull primes so why a Sigma indeed?

I myself am still struggling to find a lens to fill the gap between the DA40 and the DFA100, I was thinking of the DA*55 but maybe I'll opt for the FA77 or DA*50-135 instead... maybe.

It's so hard to pick the right lens you know, I wonder how those with another system do it. Sometimes they got multiple lenses in the same range, it's just crazy.

Welcome to the forum Adrian,

The DA40 is so sharp because it's a prime lens, it only need to preform at that one range, zooms, certainly super zooms like the 18-250 needs to pay for the price of that focal range.

Althose lenses you name are sharper then the 18-250 beacuse those lenses are far more specialize for that range. If you want sharpness get a prime lens if you want more convenience get a zoom.

The 18-250 does preform pretty wel though in the middle of his range around the 50 to 150 is my guess, you do gaine quality in that range from other lenses but far less then you will gain from the far ends of the lens so concider what you use the most.

You already have a Limited so why not try to expand that range and buy a DA21 and later the DA70 for example?
If you want to photograph wildlife, I've seen some great shots from the DA* 300. Certainly something to save some money for, if that's your interest.

wonderfull shots Martin, with some postproceesing you can come close to Tel photo so keep trying.
The noise can be easly remove by a noise reduction program, Neat Image and Topaz are the big boys in that I believe.

For your lens problem, why don't you use the 2x teleconverter it will make a 100mm lens. Extension tubes will only make you able to focus closer, something you don't want I believe.

I took the freedom of photoshoping your image a bit, I hope you don't mind or else I will delete it.
[IMG]http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk244/Anvh/IMGP88851-edit.jpg[/IMG]
I've sharpend it, use a softlight layer and played with the levels to get this result.

I also don't have a lot of knowledge in this but so far as I know they wont work like a TC they simply able you to focus closer, they don't change the focal length.

You can see it a bit like moving a beamer further away from the screen, you see the image getting bigger. The extension tubes also relies on this so they work in almost in the same way, to simplefy it.

If you want to have 1:1 with a normal 50mm you need extension tubes with the same length so also 50mm. Since the 50mm already can focus 1:1 and you ad the same length you can have 1:2. I'm not 100% sure on this but this how I believe it works.

You already have a 2x teleconverter, if I understood it correctly the focus distance stays the same but you double your focal length so you will get also a 1:2 magnification.

I don't really see the purpose in your case to get extension tubes. Maybe if you even want to have a greater magnification you can use both of course but why would you, what do you want to archive with the extension tubes?

ps. if you read your link carefully you will see that they mean somthing else with the part I quoted from you.

A 50 mm macro lens that focuses unaided to ×0.5 covers the range ×0.5 to ×1.0 when used with a 25 mm extension tube; a 52.5 mm extension tube performs the same function for a 105 mm macro lens.
They simply show that if your focal length is twice as long you need twice as long extension tubes.

Congratz to everyone really, some amazing photos their and Martin for spending so much time on judging and commenting on every photo, you did a great job like always!
Prieni hopefully you come up with an interesting subject since I finally have some real time at hand to go out and shoot.

I'm with David, it's a superb and refreshing shot that stimulate the fantasy.
The only thing I hate about is that I didn't make it, but I'm glad you did though so be proud of it.

I wonder who the winner will be, luckely Martin has a lot of experience with judging. I wouldn't want to stand in his shoe with this kind of diversity.

Sorry I didn't upload one, I just got some time now for the photos I shot yesterday. Better luck next time

Good luck with judging.

Thank you all.
It's too bad, they quite look the same and I really thought it was a Pentax S.
Better luck next time