Canon 70-200 Vs Pentax 60-250mm - DPChallenge Forums

09/27/2007 09:07:17 PM · #1

Would U go for the canon 70-200mm f2.8 or hold out for the soon to be released pentax 60-250mm f4?

I have a Canon 350 and Pentax k100d.

I would already have the benefit of I.S. on the pentax but i cant afford the 70-200mm f2.8 with I.S.

09/27/2007 09:14:19 PM · #2

I would find it very hard to believe that a Pentax would come even close to the quality of a Canon 70-200 4.0L let alone the 2.8L lens.

With 2.8, unless you shoot a lot of static very low light images, you will find you don't use the IS that much. I have the 70-200 2.8L IS and the 100-400 4.5/5.6L IS and I do shoot low light level a lot and I still shoot without the IS more than I shoot with it.

Mike

09/27/2007 09:29:48 PM · #3

So u think the canon glass is that much better?

09/27/2007 09:41:21 PM · #4

Oh deffinently. At least the Canon L glass used in their zooms is. Not only is the glass sharper and crisper, it's this way across the whole zoom range and fstop range. That's where other lenses fall short. They might have a area within their range that can rival the L glass, but usually, once you get out of that sweet spot, the image starts to degrade.

Of course how well you can see the degradation (which looks like soft fuzzy images, even if they are in focus) depends on other factors as well. And money always plays a factor. A cheaper lens is sometimes better than no lens. But a non-IS Canon lens is better than a lens that doesn't have the same quality. :D

Mike

09/27/2007 10:00:27 PM · #5

I guess wat I'm really asking u is How do u know what kind of glass pentax uses in their new top of the line lens? Is'nt "L" glass just a relative label given to the canon top of the line glass? I mean its not like its kryptonite glass or anything. And I'm not knocking u, Its just that u said L glass as if its some special glass that no other manufacturer can rival. Like its crystal or something.

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

09/27/2007 10:33:43 PM · #6

Glass can be made a lot of different ways. It all depends on the ingrediants, the melting, the polising, the glueing and all the rest that goes into a lens that makes it a cheap lens or a very expensive but good quality lens. The process of putting together a lens so that light is bent and focused at an exact spot, so that the color stays true and doesn't change, so that distortion is at a minimum and do this over the whole range of the zoom and fstop, does not come cheap.

I don't know how Pentax makes their lenses (or even if they make them themself or have someone else make them under their name) and they could have very good lenses. I'm willing to bet though that they aren't made as well as the Canon lenses. Besides the glass, the L lenses are sealed against dust and mosture, they focus faster and they have better motors, which all add up to their cost.

Keep in mind that you will probably change camera bodies a number of times. But when you buy quality lenses, you will keep those. Since I started buying L glass I've gone through a EOS 3, D30, 10D and I'm now on the 1DMKII. I still have my first 70-200 4.0L that I used on my EOS 3 and D30 and also have the 70-200 2.8L IS, 24-70 2.8L, 17-40 4.0L and 100-400 4.5/5.6L IS. If and when I move up to the next camera, unless it's resolution is even beyound the current family of L glass, I will sell the body and keep using the lenses.

Once you use a L lens, you will never want to buy anything else... which, if you don't have the money, might not be a good thing to get started. :D

If you get a chance, try shooting with both lenses and compare them. And see what you think.

Mike

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

09/27/2007 10:40:14 PM · #7

@ MikeJ:
Yes, the Canon L lenses are good. But you have positively no idea how long Pentax has been making lenses, and how good many of them are. If you did, you'd never have posted your opinion, which is just that, an unsupported opinion.
Honestly, another option is the Canon 70-200 f/4 L IS. About the same price as the f/2.8 non-IS, optically as good (some say slightly better) and of course lighter.
My preference is certainly biased, but that bias is based on the fact that Canon has one of the widest arrays of available lenses out there, and will even accept some older, manual non-Canon glass (like Pentax). You might want to consider starting to migrate to one of the "big two" (Canon & Nikon) as these two are the lowest risk and provide the widest array of options. Yes, a biased opinion, but one supported with data.

09/27/2007 10:46:57 PM · #8

Understood! I'm more inclined to wait for the pentax to come out and see how they compare. I did'nt know the canon was sealed against dust and moisture, that was my biggest concern spending so much $$$ on a lens to have to keep sending it back for cleaning. The pentax is weather sealed also. But i think I'm more inclined to make the shift toward canon for several reasons. I may have to suck it up and settle for the canon at f4 with I.S.
After seeing IS really work on the pentax i refuse to do without it. Thanks a lot!

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

09/27/2007 10:51:53 PM · #9

Thanks kirbic!
I already started that road with the canon 350. I suspect pentax will get there one day but I've run out of patience. Although I'll never give up the pentax. I eventually want to go full frame sensor so it may as well be canon.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

09/27/2007 10:58:28 PM · #10

Originally posted by dmadden:

I eventually want to go full frame sensor so it may as well be canon.

Hee hee, well, Nikon's D3 is looking to be one mean machine, but it's twice the 5D's cost, and isn't on the street yet.

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

09/27/2007 11:00:02 PM · #11

Originally posted by kirbic:

Humm, speaking of not knowing how I based my opinion... you have no idea how long I've been in photography and what kinds of cameras I've shot over the years. As a matter of fact, I shot with Pentax lenses back in the 70's on my Mamyia Sekor 500 and 1000DTL cameras. And I have shot with the K1000 and Pentax lenses back in the 90's. And yes, it is only my opinion, but I base it on all of the shooting I have done using Canon lenses and knowing that their L glass is the best out there and very few regular lenses come even close.

So yes, I base my information on personal experience and facts. So before you decide just how much I know or don't know, you might ask first.

Mike

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

09/27/2007 11:05:37 PM · #12

Mike, in your original post you stated that you didn't even know if Pentax made their own lenses... you also assumed that the lens referenced was not weather sealed. What level of knowledge was I to assume?
FWIW, the opinion that a Canon L lens in a particular category is by default the best out there is really not true. There are some L lenses, particularly in the WA zoom category, that are not necessarily the best in class, and there are other L lenses that have very stiff competition.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

09/27/2007 11:24:53 PM · #13

I don't know where or who makes the Pentax lenses (I could google it if I was really interested). I know a lot of lens brands are not made by the company that sells them. So that's why I said I didn't know.

I also know that the Pentax lenses I used in the early 70's and shot with in the 90's are probably no where near what is made today. Computers have made a lot of things easier and making lens designs is one of them.

In my original post I also said I couldn't believe that the Pentax was as good as the Canon. I honestly do not believe that it can be. If I knew for sure that it wasn't, I would have said that.

You are right, not all Canon lenses are created equal or as good as many of us have come to expect of those clasified as an "L" lens. But what is good is very good. That's why I've spent so many thousands on "L" glass. And the statement that it is the best out there is going to be more true, more often, than not. And I can absolutely positivelly say I that I believe that about the 70-200 2.8L IS and the 70-200 2.8L and the 70-200 4.0L. I have shot thousands of images with the 2.8L IS and 4.0L version. So when I say it's is crisp, sharp, fast focusing, well made, minimal distortion, etc., across it's whole range, I'm speaking from first hand knowleage and experience. I can also speak the same for the other Canon "L" glass I own. I can't speak for the Canon lenses that aren't as good as they should be... I don't own any of them.

You are right about something else, it is just my opinion. And I'm sure, just as positive as I can be that it's the best, there are others out there that can be just as positive that it isn't. That's why I suggested if he could that he get one of each and shoot with them so he could do his own comparison. That's really the final answer for him. If he's not satisfied with how they perform, it doesn't matter how many of us out here say different.

Mike

Message edited by author 2007-09-27 23:25:20.

option

Nikon D200

09/28/2007 01:14:33 AM · #14

Facts about the Pentax DA* 60-250 4.0 SDM:

-in lens motor (ie USM)
-weather sealed
-originally set for release in December
-NOT co-developed with Tokina. This one is all Pentax.
-APS-H image circle (apparently)
-90-375mm FF equiv
-stabilized (in body SR)

Heres my personal take on it.

The two DA* lenses already released, the 16-50 and 50-135 2.8s, have been getting mixed reviews, with the 50-135 being by far the better of the two lenses. That is promising for the 60-250. The optical formula of the 60-250 is a pure Pentax undertaking, so hopefully that means none of Tokinas trademark CA's.

The lens is fully weather sealed, like the K10D, and Ive seen examples of people shooting from behind waterfalls with a K10D / DA* 16-50. The lens also features the new Pentax SDM AF drive, which is their equivalent of USM / AF-S.

All in all, this lens looks promising. Unfortunately, it wont be coming out any time soon: the first two SDM lenses were almost a year behind schedule, and the two tele primes that were supposed to be released in Sept are nowhere to be seen. The 60-250 wont be available for AT LEAST 8 months, I'll wager.

Some of the older Pentax * lenses, namely the A* primes, are some of the very best lenses ever made - the A* 85 1.4 clobbers the Canon 85 1.2 L for across the frame sharpness at wide apertures. Theres a test out there somewhere, google it. The Pentax FA Limiteds, the 31, 43 and 77, are also regarded as some of the best autofocus lenses of all time, rivaling (if not trumping) the sharpest that the likes of Zeiss has to offer.

Pentax has made some of the very best glass of all time... but there are also some utter dogs out there. I for one hope the 60-250 falls into the "legendary" category.

Not that it really matters... barring some Pentax miracle in the next few months, I'm (reluctantly) switching to Nikon. I need a quality 2.8 tele for sports, and I don't really want to pay $2000 for a used FA* 80-200 2.8 when the Nikon equivalent goes for half that new (and I cant stand the ergonomics of Canon DSLRs).

Whew. Long post. If anyone has any other questions, I'm happy to answer them as best I can. In the meantime, I have a hockey game to coach...

Message edited by author 2007-09-28 11:39:33.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

09/28/2007 01:19:30 AM · #15

It's true, what option says. Some of the best Pentax glass is "legendary". I knew pros who used a Pentax body in addition to their Nikons just to mount some of their glass. If the world had shaped up differently, Pentax would be right up there with Nikon/Canon as a pro camera; but their marketing/corporate decisions were not good, and they dropped the ball in a big way.

R.

Message edited by author 2007-09-28 01:21:05.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

09/28/2007 01:24:18 AM · #16

yup! they really are taking a while to roll out. I love my pentax but I'm much more comfortable now with 2 different brands of camera. 60-250 f4 is a big umff compared to 70-200, specially if may end up around $1000.

option

Nikon D200

09/28/2007 12:40:52 PM · #17

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

If money was less of a concern, you would never see me get rid of my Pentax.

I too know pros who shoot with a K10D just so they can continue to use the Limited primes... These are guys with serious, serious Canon and Nikon kits, yet they still turn to lenses like the 31 and 77 Ltd's whenever they can.

If anyone is skeptical, the next time youre in a well stocked camera store, ask if they have any Pentax Limiteds in stock you can have a look at. The quality and attention to detail put into them is something I wish we saw more of in lensmaking these days (and that applies to other Pentax lenses, too!)