|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/30/2007 09:00:18 PM · #1 |
As we so often do.
I have the 18-55 kit lens and the Pentax 50mm f/1.4. The quality of the 50 is so much higher that it has become my walkaround lens, despite the fact that it's a prime, and is frankly a touch long for a walkaround. But it's a joy to use.
Now I'm starting to think about a long zoom, something I can take some bird pics with, say. The good news is I have a lot of options; the bad news is I've got a lot of options.
Money is a factor, but as you'll see in a moment I'm willing to spend if it's the right thing to do.
Pentax DA 50-200mm f/4-5.6 - $230. Light, small, decent zoom range, inexpensive. Slow, slow, slow, and lower build quality.
Pentax DA* 50-135 f/2.8 - $999. Fast, fast, fast, professional quality optics and build. Expensive, more limited zoom, bulky.
Bigma - $999. More length than I'll ever need. Slow, expensive.
I don't have a lot of experience with long lenses, so I'm not sure what I need - I do some concert photography, but small venues, so the 50/1.4 can cover that; obviously the bigma would be useless there anyway. I worry the 50-200 and the bigma are going to be too slow for anything but blazing sunshine; especially when I need faster shutter speeds. But I worry the 50-135 is too short for birds - not really sure about that. I could add a teleconverter to that, I suppose, but that's adding another $200.  Option has nailed some pretty amazing pictures with the 50-200.
I'd rather spent $1000 and love it then spend $230 and hate it. But I don't have any way of judging. Help! |
|
|
|
08/30/2007 11:46:07 PM · #2 |
| No one? Doesn't have to be Pentax specific - the overall question cuts across platforms, I would think. |
|
|
|
08/30/2007 11:59:57 PM · #3 |
Well, I guess the best walk around lens I have is the sigma 28-105 mm. It's pretty awesome! My fave lens is my newest, canon 70-200 mm L lens tho it's short comings are way apparent for closer range shots. Its so sharp and fast tho, it makes up for it.
I dont particularly like switching lenses while I'm out shooting tho I have been known to do this every now & then, especially with my new canon L lens.
GOod luck with whatever you choose.
|
|
|
|
08/31/2007 12:10:26 AM · #4 |
I'll try -
I have a cheap 75-300 zoom (not good optics). The thing I have noticed using it for wildlife etc - is that it is nearly always used at full zoom. I have looked at the 70-200 f4 L and the 70-300 (f3.6-5.6 I think). Although I would really like the L glass (better construction etc)I'm leaning towards the 70-300 for the extra reach. Although the construction is not as good - the optics are suppose to be of a very high standard (near L quality some say). The extra reach is the deciding factor. This one also has IS but I think you have that built into the camera (am I right?)Therefore you can shoot slightly lower speed (if its not moving)
So to answer your question - if you are looking to shot wildlife - you will want the extra reach. You COULD use a teleconverter - I,ve had no experience with them - but it strikes me that its just another piece you have to fiddle with changing lenses.
As far as speed goes - yes, the faster the better- but the faster lenses always come at a very big price.
I don't know what the Pentax is like but with the changable ISO ratings on the digital cameras it is amazing how much you can increase speed and have good shots. This can help for a slower lens. You have probably found that out with your concert shots (even with the f1.4).
I must admit though - the 50-135 f2.8 lens would be an arwsome lens for concerts.
Don't know if this helps - but my thoughts anyway. In short - if it is wildlife you are after - go for the extra reach (as long as it isn't a bazooka)
Message edited by author 2007-08-31 06:18:57. |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 06:19:01 AM · #5 |
My experiences with my two lenses that I use. Mind you, this is Nikon but as you said, it really is platform independent.
18-70 f/3.5-4.5
This lens is great for most situations outside (if there is some light) and with my hot shoe mounted flash, pretty darn good indoors. I can totally see how you can use your 50 for small venue concert shooting and a fast prime is probably the way to go for this anyway. Sometimes I wish this were faster (say f/2.8) but for its size and weight, I think I'm happy. I'll probably add fast primes to compliment here as I do want faster glass, but I want REALLY fast glass and that gets expensive for zooms.
70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR
I specifically bought this lens for wildlife on an Alaskan Cruise my wife and I were taking. It's somewhat of a compromise as it's not the fastest -- but the VR does allow me to slow down my shutter speed a slight bit which helps a little. Also, I didn't want the weight of the 70-200 f/2.8 as my wife and I do a lot of backpacking / hiking. The final deciding factor was that it has the same filter size as the 18-70 and compliments it quite nicely. That said, I do find that it could be faster.
Anyway, as far as wildlife shooting goes, I really think that you never can have quite enough reach. Even with the 300mm, I still found myself wishing I had another 100mm. Plus, the 70-300 does tend to get a little soft out at full reach so that doesn't help either. I really don't think anything under 200 will give you good results for birds. With the crop factor on my 70-300, I'm actually getting close to 450mm.
With regard to sunlight, I do find that the slower 70-300 performs pretty good. Most nature shots are when there is at least some light so that's really not been a huge issue for me. Shooting in the shade can be a problem as can shooting at dawn or dusk. But to get long enough glass that's fast enough, you're talking some serious $$$. It's all a compromise unless you're willing to just go all out.
Hope this helps. Good luck! |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 06:58:25 AM · #6 |
Musing about the title "Thinking about lenses..." Does anyone ever not think about lenses? There's always one more. :)
On my lenses, I have an 18-55 kit, and I bought the Sigma 70-200, f2.8. I haven't really used it a lot in low light. I find myself being overly cautious about the aperture, and always stopping it down a bit to get sharpness, which is kind of pointless. Anyway, I'm afraid my knowledge only goes to other lenses you can't use - Canons. As far as 3rd party lenses go, you have the Bigma (50-500), and you have the Sigma 70-200 f2.8. The 2.8 is a good fast portrait/sports lens, and the Bigma is great for anything still, or in good light, and has the extra reach. You'll need a good tripod though. :)
There's also the Sigma 70-300 APO which has a very good reputation for a lightweight standard budget zoom.
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 12/30/2025 05:30:46 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/30/2025 05:30:46 PM EST.
|
