All Forum Comments
Comment by Toni posted on WTB Sigma 100-300mm F4 at 21/03/2014 - 17:56
I was thinking of going with just a DA 55-300 as they seem to be pretty good but since at times i might need more lenght and from this website and a few others i got the impression that these are not good with tc so this sigma was the only good zoom lens i could think of that could also be used with a tc for more lenght and give excellent sharpness and IQ..
150-500 is another good option but people have said that its not as good as the 100-300m even with a 2x tc.
150-500 is another good option but people have said that its not as good as the 100-300m even with a 2x tc.
Comment by Toni posted on WTB Sigma 100-300mm F4 at 21/03/2014 - 03:18
Offertonhatter wrote:
I can only comment on the lenses that I have, but I can say the following:-
Sigma 100-300 F4.5-6.7. Old lens, slow and full of CA on digital.
Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 Macro. Cheap and budget soft, unless you work with it. After a while it does not talk to the camera properly. Does have a useful Macro ability though. CA is not bad.
Sigma 170-500mm. Can be an excellent lens, then again, it can be a pain! Needs a lot of work to get to know it and work with it. Bokeh too fussy. At the end of the day if you work hard you can get great results with it. But on the other hand, it is not as good as the next lens.
Pentax DA55-300mm. A good lens, decent quality and sharpness. You don't have to work as hard as the Siggy's, but I would not say it is the ultimate.
The Ultimate:-
Pentax DA*300mm F4
Seriously, it is a case of you get what you pay for. This lens is sharp from wide open, has stunning bokeh, and the colours are excellent. If you can afford it, then seriously this is the only lens that you will need.
As for the extra reach of the Sigmas you mentioned at 500mm? Well I would say that a cropped shot from the DA*300 will have more detail than the siggys at 500mm. It is that good.
One final thing that will (maybe) help. Pentax have the 1.4x converter that is about to hit the shops. So, I would say, if you want the ultimate on a Pentax body, get the 300mm, and save up for the converter. Then you will have superb gear for long shots, no questions asked.
But if you cannot afford it, then the 55-300mm is a good alternative. But remember, you get what you pay for.
Hope this helps.
Thanks for the help..although you didn't mention anything about the 15-500mm APO DG is it closer to the 170-500 or the 55-300 in terms of IQ and the detail it can capture at its long end..I can only comment on the lenses that I have, but I can say the following:-
Sigma 100-300 F4.5-6.7. Old lens, slow and full of CA on digital.
Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 Macro. Cheap and budget soft, unless you work with it. After a while it does not talk to the camera properly. Does have a useful Macro ability though. CA is not bad.
Sigma 170-500mm. Can be an excellent lens, then again, it can be a pain! Needs a lot of work to get to know it and work with it. Bokeh too fussy. At the end of the day if you work hard you can get great results with it. But on the other hand, it is not as good as the next lens.
Pentax DA55-300mm. A good lens, decent quality and sharpness. You don't have to work as hard as the Siggy's, but I would not say it is the ultimate.
The Ultimate:-
Pentax DA*300mm F4
Seriously, it is a case of you get what you pay for. This lens is sharp from wide open, has stunning bokeh, and the colours are excellent. If you can afford it, then seriously this is the only lens that you will need.
As for the extra reach of the Sigmas you mentioned at 500mm? Well I would say that a cropped shot from the DA*300 will have more detail than the siggys at 500mm. It is that good.
One final thing that will (maybe) help. Pentax have the 1.4x converter that is about to hit the shops. So, I would say, if you want the ultimate on a Pentax body, get the 300mm, and save up for the converter. Then you will have superb gear for long shots, no questions asked.
But if you cannot afford it, then the 55-300mm is a good alternative. But remember, you get what you pay for.
Hope this helps.
Comment by Toni posted on Sharp Long lenses for my K-30 at 24/02/2014 - 22:07
So the Da* 300mm would be ALOT better IQ wise than the 55-300mm/150-500mm? (both of which it seems are similar in terms or IQ).. i mean enough to justify the £1000 price tag?
and how does the 55-300 + 1.7x TC compare to the 150-500 looking at sharpness and IQ? which one would u go for if u had to pick one.
and how does the 55-300 + 1.7x TC compare to the 150-500 looking at sharpness and IQ? which one would u go for if u had to pick one.
Comment by Toni posted on Sharp Long lenses for my K-30 at 04/02/2014 - 19:42
Mike-P wrote:
The absolute best for Pentax (excluding discontinued lenses and the 560mm) is a DA* 300mm f4 and a Pentax 1.7x adapter for 500mm. Nothing else comes close imo although I do use the Sigma 50-500mm os quite a bit because of the zoom.
but the pentax 1.7x adapter is nowhere to be found.. let alone finding a good used one for a good price.. do know of any for sale?The absolute best for Pentax (excluding discontinued lenses and the 560mm) is a DA* 300mm f4 and a Pentax 1.7x adapter for 500mm. Nothing else comes close imo although I do use the Sigma 50-500mm os quite a bit because of the zoom.
so guys, the 55-300mm and the 150-500 both produce similar IQ? and both are equally sharp at their respective long ends?
Comment by Toni posted on Sharp Long lenses for my K-30 at 02/02/2014 - 23:18
dpm wrote:
A lot will depend on what weight you want to be humping around IMHO. I've both the 55-300 and the 150-500. They're both superb. There's certainly a lot more reach with the big Siggy, it's darned sharp, and if you can afford the OS version very forgiving. But the downside is it's a heavy old lump.
What's the subject?
I would carry heavier lens for better images.. subjects would be some birds, animals, nature, and action that is some distance away.. and at the long range i want the image to stay sharp and vibrant.. otherwise that extra reach would be pointless for me.A lot will depend on what weight you want to be humping around IMHO. I've both the 55-300 and the 150-500. They're both superb. There's certainly a lot more reach with the big Siggy, it's darned sharp, and if you can afford the OS version very forgiving. But the downside is it's a heavy old lump.
What's the subject?
Comment by Toni posted on Sharp Long lenses for my K-30 at 02/02/2014 - 12:01
Smeggypants wrote:
Why the seemingly obsessive priority on sharpness?
While I appreciate a crisp image, IMO the emotional content of the image is far more important than pure sharpness.
And don't forget you can increase sharpness in post processing anyway.
The IQ Quality of a lens is far more than just sharpness. Of course is sharpness floats your bloat then it's not for me to dictate otherwise, but I would consider re-evaluating your approach to photography if sharpness features so heavily on your wish list.
If by sharpness you really mean detail then you can either get this from a high MP sensor or buy spending a ridiculous amount of money for a long range telephoto and stopping it down to it's sweet spot.
The other question is, do you want sharpness across the whole frame or just in the subject area. It's an important question as there's no need for ultra detail/sharpness to render bokeh as a back drop to the in focus "Sharp" subject.
Personally I think any of the lenses you list is not going to compromise your experience of viewing images taken with it on glass technical grounds.
It's probably worth weighing up your available funds with the offerings on focal range and aperture.
Why the seemingly obsessive priority on sharpness?
While I appreciate a crisp image, IMO the emotional content of the image is far more important than pure sharpness.
And don't forget you can increase sharpness in post processing anyway.
The IQ Quality of a lens is far more than just sharpness. Of course is sharpness floats your bloat then it's not for me to dictate otherwise, but I would consider re-evaluating your approach to photography if sharpness features so heavily on your wish list.
If by sharpness you really mean detail then you can either get this from a high MP sensor or buy spending a ridiculous amount of money for a long range telephoto and stopping it down to it's sweet spot.
The other question is, do you want sharpness across the whole frame or just in the subject area. It's an important question as there's no need for ultra detail/sharpness to render bokeh as a back drop to the in focus "Sharp" subject.
Personally I think any of the lenses you list is not going to compromise your experience of viewing images taken with it on glass technical grounds.
It's probably worth weighing up your available funds with the offerings on focal range and aperture.
Im just new so im not the best with using these terms.. yes by sharpness i mean the overall IQ, detail and that bit of pro(ish) looking vibrance.. i really like those things in an image.. i dont like those soft and dull images that some lens produce at their high end and manage to pick no details or bright and beautiful colors.
Comment by Toni posted on Sharp Long lenses for my K-30 at 02/02/2014 - 11:51
Im looking for some long range (300mm to 500mm) lenses for my k30 which I bought a few days ago with the 18-135mm WR lens.. I have no experience with dslr's before this one so i'd say this lens is reasonable sharp and well built. (but I have no other lens to compare it with so what do i know)
when looking for some long lenses my priority (even above reach) is sharpness.. i'd rather go for a sharper 300mm max focal length than a softer 500mm max. though reach remains the next priority. so when searching for lens as a newbie I looked from the cheapest to more pricier lens..
first i saw those samyang, welimax and opteka ones.. which i read are not sharp at all as they are so cheap. so with further search i made a list of these
DA 55-300 (either the WR with without)
Sigma 70-300 APO DG
Sigma 170-500 APO DG
Sigma 150-500 APO DG
[according to what i read it seems if i was to go with any of these sigmas i should pick the APO and DG ones as they produce better results.]
My questions are,
Which of these are the sharpest?
How big the difference is to the second sharpest in the list..
Would you like to add some more to the list?
i read that 150-500 beats the 170-500 at the long end and over all [if so]
150-500mm vs 55-300? is the DA sharper? if yes, how much? does the 150-500 lose any sharpness at the 450-500 range? and how is the 70-300mm compared to the DA 55-300 considering sharpness?
when looking for some long lenses my priority (even above reach) is sharpness.. i'd rather go for a sharper 300mm max focal length than a softer 500mm max. though reach remains the next priority. so when searching for lens as a newbie I looked from the cheapest to more pricier lens..
first i saw those samyang, welimax and opteka ones.. which i read are not sharp at all as they are so cheap. so with further search i made a list of these
DA 55-300 (either the WR with without)
Sigma 70-300 APO DG
Sigma 170-500 APO DG
Sigma 150-500 APO DG
[according to what i read it seems if i was to go with any of these sigmas i should pick the APO and DG ones as they produce better results.]
My questions are,
Which of these are the sharpest?
How big the difference is to the second sharpest in the list..
Would you like to add some more to the list?
i read that 150-500 beats the 170-500 at the long end and over all [if so]
150-500mm vs 55-300? is the DA sharper? if yes, how much? does the 150-500 lose any sharpness at the 450-500 range? and how is the 70-300mm compared to the DA 55-300 considering sharpness?
Comment by Toni posted on Sharp Long lenses for my K-30 at 02/02/2014 - 01:55
Thank you all for helping.. the way the seller replied I thought the basic well known K-mount wasn't going to fit k-30.. you cleared most my confusions.. thank you again!
Comment by Toni posted on K-30 mount confusion! is it not the 'K' mount? at 02/02/2014 - 01:39
I bought a K-30 few days ago and its my first Dslr.. while researching I read what a great thing it was that all Pentax K mount lenses will fit all Pentax K Dslr cameras... but now its getting confusing... I do know the the Q series is four thirds so it has its own lens.. and I also know the the older m42 screw mount is different from the 'K' mount so it'll need an adapter.. but I thought that [although some lens with some function restrictions] all K mount lenses should fit the K-30. but when i look up lens on ebay or other places some of the lens that say 'K fit' or 'PK mount' or 'pentax fit' and also say they are for k20d, k5 etc.. and when i e-mail the seller to confirm, they reply saying no it won't fit my k-30.... What? how come? isn't k5 also a K? if the lens is a K mount and the camera is K30 then what am i missing here?
Comment by Toni posted on K-30 mount confusion! is it not the 'K' mount? at 29/01/2014 - 21:39
The 150-500mm focuses better than a 100-300mm and 2x converter plus gives you the correct exif information. The Sigma 100-300mm is best used on it's own and cropping so if you want length and file size then go for either the 50-500mm OS or 150-500mm OS. Saying that, if you can put up with the hit and miss focus with the 100-300mm and 2x combo the IQ is very good.
If you really want a Sigma 100-300mm f4 and Sigma 2x converter then PM me as I am tempted to sell mine as I am looking to buy something else.