Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Larry Colen]

John Francis wrote:

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 11:41:08AM -0500, John Francis wrote:

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:08:46AM +, Steve Cottrell wrote:

On 17/12/16, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:


Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the
niche of my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but
will still fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton.
The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff.
Is there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?

Just being a fly in your ointment for a minute - why would you consider
a lens of such sweeping focal length? Surely with the K1 having such a
good sensor, using what can only ever be an inferior lens (with such a
large zoom range) is counter-productive?

That's not always the case - back when I was regularly shooting motorsports
(on film ...) I was used to seeing a lot of the full-time photographers
using the Canon L 35-350, which was an amazingly good lens.  But that was
the exception (and by now I suspect modern digital sensors would point out
flaws in that lens that we didn't see when limited by film resolution).


It turns out that I was gifted a 55-300 for the holidays.  One thing 
that I didn't notice last weekend is that it does vignette between about 
100 and 200mm.




FWIW - back in those film days I picked up an FA 80-320 as my long-reach
lightweight carry-around (replacing a 100-300 which I never really liked).
It still seems to be fairly well thought of.  Furthermore, it would be
available on the same terms as my heavyweight alternative (the 80-200/2.8);
I just came across the 80-320, which I hadn't seen for several years, when
we were going through a pile of boxes to find out just what was in them :-)


I'd certainly be willing to take it out for some exercise sometime.  :-)






--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[John Francis]

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 11:41:08AM -0500, John Francis wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:08:46AM +, Steve Cottrell wrote:
> > On 17/12/16, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:
> > 
> > >Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the
> > >niche of my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but
> > >will still fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton. 
> > >The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff.
> > >Is there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?
> > 
> > Just being a fly in your ointment for a minute - why would you consider
> > a lens of such sweeping focal length? Surely with the K1 having such a
> > good sensor, using what can only ever be an inferior lens (with such a
> > large zoom range) is counter-productive?
> 
> That's not always the case - back when I was regularly shooting motorsports
> (on film ...) I was used to seeing a lot of the full-time photographers
> using the Canon L 35-350, which was an amazingly good lens.  But that was
> the exception (and by now I suspect modern digital sensors would point out
> flaws in that lens that we didn't see when limited by film resolution).

FWIW - back in those film days I picked up an FA 80-320 as my long-reach
lightweight carry-around (replacing a 100-300 which I never really liked).
It still seems to be fairly well thought of.  Furthermore, it would be
available on the same terms as my heavyweight alternative (the 80-200/2.8);
I just came across the 80-320, which I hadn't seen for several years, when
we were going through a pile of boxes to find out just what was in them :-)

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Ken Waller]

It's one of my most used lenses, I've had it for 27 years with no issue other 
than the focusing barrel to which the filters are attached rotates on focusing, 
so I need to remember to set the polarizing filter after I focus


-Original Message-
>From: Chris Mitchell <chris.mitch...@which.net>
>Subject: Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens
>
>If you can live with manual focus, there's the good old 70-210 F4.
>I've seen them going for 30-50 GBP. So good value, reasonably fast and
>quite compact.
>
>Chris
>
>On 18 December 2016 at 20:14, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Steve Cottrell wrote:
>>>
>>> On 17/12/16, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:
>>>
>>>> Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the
>>>> niche of my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but
>>>> will still fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton.
>>>> The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff.
>>>> Is there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?
>>>
>>>
>>> Just being a fly in your ointment for a minute - why would you consider
>>> a lens of such sweeping focal length? Surely with the K1 having such a
>>> good sensor, using what can only ever be an inferior lens (with such a
>>> large zoom range) is counter-productive?
>>
>>
>> OK, I'm not looking for a full frame equivalent of the 18-250, in a sense I
>> already have one, the sigma 50-500.  For what it is, and especially what I
>> paid for it, it's an awesome lens, but it falls in the "way too big"
>> category.  It's reasonably sharp, but the bokeh is rather unpleasant, and
>> it's not WR. There are reasons I really want a 150-450 even if I can't
>> afford one.
>>
>> I still do have my 18-250, and when I go for a bike ride, I tend to put that
>> on the K-3II and that combination does a great job for an all in one camera,
>> except for the WR bit, and I don't tend to decide the rainy days are perfect
>> for a bike ride anyways.
>>
>> The 55-300 seems to pretty nicely fit the bill.  It's a reasonable size,
>> would be relatively easy to carry around, and it seems to be pretty sharp,
>> probably sharper than cropping my 28-105 down by a factor of three (which
>> would turn the K-1 into about a 4 MPix camera). I'll post pictures soon, it
>> seemed to do a decent job.
>>
>> There is also the 60-250, but that gives up in both size and cost, I wonder
>> how it compares with the 70-210/2.8 in those categories.
>>
>> So, I'm looking to extend my reach beyond 75 or 100 mm  to the 250 or 300 mm
>> range.  Plan A at the moment seems to be a used 55-300, but before I start
>> looking for one of those, I want to make sure that there isn't something
>> that I'd really rather have.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Chris Mitchell]

If you can live with manual focus, there's the good old 70-210 F4.
I've seen them going for 30-50 GBP. So good value, reasonably fast and
quite compact.

Chris

On 18 December 2016 at 20:14, Larry Colen  wrote:
>
>
> Steve Cottrell wrote:
>>
>> On 17/12/16, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:
>>
>>> Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the
>>> niche of my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but
>>> will still fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton.
>>> The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff.
>>> Is there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?
>>
>>
>> Just being a fly in your ointment for a minute - why would you consider
>> a lens of such sweeping focal length? Surely with the K1 having such a
>> good sensor, using what can only ever be an inferior lens (with such a
>> large zoom range) is counter-productive?
>
>
> OK, I'm not looking for a full frame equivalent of the 18-250, in a sense I
> already have one, the sigma 50-500.  For what it is, and especially what I
> paid for it, it's an awesome lens, but it falls in the "way too big"
> category.  It's reasonably sharp, but the bokeh is rather unpleasant, and
> it's not WR. There are reasons I really want a 150-450 even if I can't
> afford one.
>
> I still do have my 18-250, and when I go for a bike ride, I tend to put that
> on the K-3II and that combination does a great job for an all in one camera,
> except for the WR bit, and I don't tend to decide the rainy days are perfect
> for a bike ride anyways.
>
> The 55-300 seems to pretty nicely fit the bill.  It's a reasonable size,
> would be relatively easy to carry around, and it seems to be pretty sharp,
> probably sharper than cropping my 28-105 down by a factor of three (which
> would turn the K-1 into about a 4 MPix camera). I'll post pictures soon, it
> seemed to do a decent job.
>
> There is also the 60-250, but that gives up in both size and cost, I wonder
> how it compares with the 70-210/2.8 in those categories.
>
> So, I'm looking to extend my reach beyond 75 or 100 mm  to the 250 or 300 mm
> range.  Plan A at the moment seems to be a used 55-300, but before I start
> looking for one of those, I want to make sure that there isn't something
> that I'd really rather have.
>
>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Paul Stenquist]

I don't know. The 70/200 is obviously good and a stop faster than the 60-250,  
but I already have the latter. I may sell it and the 50-135 some day, but I'm 
not in a hurry.

Paul via phone

> On Dec 18, 2016, at 11:25 PM, Larry Colen  wrot
> 59-145
> 
> Paul Stenquist wrote:
>> The 60-260 vignettes a bit on full frame, but It's not enough to trouble me. 
>> It's been my go to lens for years now on aps-c and full frame. It's 
>> excellent.  The 150-450 is astounding. But it's much bigger and heavier. If 
>> you're serious about shooting critters, go for the 150-450 and a good 
>> tripod. But it's not a walk around lens. The 60-250/4 is
> 
> How does the 60-250 compare with the 70-200?
> 
> -- 
> Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Larry Colen]

Alan C wrote:

"Interesting. I've found that Nicole's 55-300 is quite pleasantly sharp."

I agree but at f8 the 100-300 is just as sharp.


Unfortunately, most of the time that I'd be using it would likely be 
doing things like photographing musicians, in which case I wouldn't want 
anything less than about 5.6, f/8 would really start leaning heavily on 
the sensor.  When I would be able to get away with f/8 would be 
outdoors, and half the year it gets really damp around here outdoors, in 
which case I want the WR.



--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Larry Colen]

Paul Stenquist wrote:

The 60-260 vignettes a bit on full frame, but It's not enough to trouble me. 
It's been my go to lens for years now on aps-c and full frame. It's excellent.  
The 150-450 is astounding. But it's much bigger and heavier. If you're serious 
about shooting critters, go for the 150-450 and a good tripod. But it's not a 
walk around lens. The 60-250/4 is


How does the 60-250 compare with the 70-200?

--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Alan C]

"Interesting.  I've found that Nicole's 55-300 is quite pleasantly sharp."

I agree but at f8 the 100-300 is just as sharp.

"There also seem to be three versions of that lens, the DA, the DA-L
and the WR."

Two versions of the HD WR.

Alan C

-Original Message- 
From: Larry Colen

Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 6:03 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens



Alan C wrote:

Having read this thread with interest, I would say the 60-250 is your
best bet but it is not cheap. You could add a 1.4x too! Paul had great
success with this combination. I have an FA 100-300 which I used before
I acquired an HD 55-300. Despite the glowing reviews for the 55-300, I
have found it no better than the under-rated 100-300 which can be had
for a song.


Interesting.  I've found that Nicole's 55-300 is quite pleasantly sharp.
 There also seem to be three versions of that lens, the DA, the DA-L
and the WR.

It has a huge advantage over the 60-250 in that it can easily be carried
in my camera bag without displacing multiple other lenses too. Also the
fact that I can find them for under $300 used versus $800-900 for the
60-250. Since I do have use of the 80-200/2.8 I don't think that the
60-250 is enough smaller than it to make a huge difference.

--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
follow the directions. 



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Paul Stenquist]

The 60-260 vignettes a bit on full frame, but It's not enough to trouble me. 
It's been my go to lens for years now on aps-c and full frame. It's excellent.  
The 150-450 is astounding. But it's much bigger and heavier. If you're serious 
about shooting critters, go for the 150-450 and a good tripod. But it's not a 
walk around lens. The 60-250/4 is

Paul via phone

> On Dec 18, 2016, at 10:23 PM, Alan C  wrote:
> 
> Having read this thread with interest, I would say the 60-250 is your best 
> bet but it is not cheap. You could add a 1.4x too! Paul had great success 
> with this combination. I have an FA 100-300 which I used before I acquired an 
> HD 55-300. Despite the glowing reviews for the 55-300, I have found it no 
> better than the under-rated 100-300 which can be had for a song.
> 
> Alan C
> 
> -Original Message- From: Larry Colen
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 4:33 AM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens
> 
> Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the niche of 
> my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but will still 
> fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton.
> The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff. Is 
> there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?
> -- 
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse any swypos.
> http://red4est.com/lrc
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions. 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Larry Colen]

Alan C wrote:

Having read this thread with interest, I would say the 60-250 is your
best bet but it is not cheap. You could add a 1.4x too! Paul had great
success with this combination. I have an FA 100-300 which I used before
I acquired an HD 55-300. Despite the glowing reviews for the 55-300, I
have found it no better than the under-rated 100-300 which can be had
for a song.


Interesting.  I've found that Nicole's 55-300 is quite pleasantly sharp. 
 There also seem to be three versions of that lens, the DA, the DA-L 
and the WR.


It has a huge advantage over the 60-250 in that it can easily be carried 
in my camera bag without displacing multiple other lenses too. Also the 
fact that I can find them for under $300 used versus $800-900 for the 
60-250. Since I do have use of the 80-200/2.8 I don't think that the 
60-250 is enough smaller than it to make a huge difference.


--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Alan C]

Read this (right down to the end).

https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/da--60-250-modification-for-full-frame-56581

Alan C

-Original Message- 
From: Bill

Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 5:50 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

On 12/18/2016 9:23 PM, Alan C wrote:

Having read this thread with interest, I would say the 60-250 is your
best bet but it is not cheap. You could add a 1.4x too! Paul had great
success with this combination. I have an FA 100-300 which I used before
I acquired an HD 55-300. Despite the glowing reviews for the 55-300, I
have found it no better than the under-rated 100-300 which can be had
for a song.


The 60-250 doesn't cover the full frame. It is possible it is baffled
down to APS-C, in which case there would be a rear hood that might be
removable. I sold mine, and I really don't recall what the back end
looked like.



Alan C

-Original Message- From: Larry Colen
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 4:33 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the
niche of my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but
will still fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton.
The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff.
Is there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
follow the directions. 



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Bill]

On 12/18/2016 9:42 PM, Zos Xavius wrote:

The 60-250. You can also modify it to cover FF perfectly. Seems like a
no brainer to me. The 60-250 crushes the 55-300.


Well, that answers my previous post on the subject.

A word to the wise about that lens. It is an SDM, my copy failed twice. 
I don't know if it was one of the ones with a bad reputation or not.

Optically, it is a superb lens, though it is big for an f/4 zoom.


On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Alan C  wrote:

Having read this thread with interest, I would say the 60-250 is your best
bet but it is not cheap. You could add a 1.4x too! Paul had great success
with this combination. I have an FA 100-300 which I used before I acquired
an HD 55-300. Despite the glowing reviews for the 55-300, I have found it no
better than the under-rated 100-300 which can be had for a song.

Alan C

-Original Message- From: Larry Colen
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 4:33 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens


Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the niche of
my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but will still
fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton.
The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff. Is
there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse any swypos.
http://red4est.com/lrc

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.





--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Bill]

On 12/18/2016 9:23 PM, Alan C wrote:

Having read this thread with interest, I would say the 60-250 is your
best bet but it is not cheap. You could add a 1.4x too! Paul had great
success with this combination. I have an FA 100-300 which I used before
I acquired an HD 55-300. Despite the glowing reviews for the 55-300, I
have found it no better than the under-rated 100-300 which can be had
for a song.


The 60-250 doesn't cover the full frame. It is possible it is baffled 
down to APS-C, in which case there would be a rear hood that might be 
removable. I sold mine, and I really don't recall what the back end 
looked like.




Alan C

-Original Message- From: Larry Colen
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 4:33 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the
niche of my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but
will still fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton.
The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff.
Is there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Zos Xavius]

The 60-250. You can also modify it to cover FF perfectly. Seems like a
no brainer to me. The 60-250 crushes the 55-300.

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Alan C  wrote:
> Having read this thread with interest, I would say the 60-250 is your best
> bet but it is not cheap. You could add a 1.4x too! Paul had great success
> with this combination. I have an FA 100-300 which I used before I acquired
> an HD 55-300. Despite the glowing reviews for the 55-300, I have found it no
> better than the under-rated 100-300 which can be had for a song.
>
> Alan C
>
> -Original Message- From: Larry Colen
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 4:33 AM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens
>
>
> Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the niche of
> my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but will still
> fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton.
> The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff. Is
> there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse any swypos.
> http://red4est.com/lrc
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Alan C]

Having read this thread with interest, I would say the 60-250 is your best 
bet but it is not cheap. You could add a 1.4x too! Paul had great success 
with this combination. I have an FA 100-300 which I used before I acquired 
an HD 55-300. Despite the glowing reviews for the 55-300, I have found it no 
better than the under-rated 100-300 which can be had for a song.


Alan C

-Original Message- 
From: Larry Colen

Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 4:33 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the niche of 
my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but will still 
fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton.
The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff. Is 
there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?

--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse any swypos.
http://red4est.com/lrc

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
follow the directions. 



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Larry Colen]

Steve Cottrell wrote:

On 17/12/16, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:


Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the
niche of my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but
will still fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton.
The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff.
Is there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?


Just being a fly in your ointment for a minute - why would you consider
a lens of such sweeping focal length? Surely with the K1 having such a
good sensor, using what can only ever be an inferior lens (with such a
large zoom range) is counter-productive?


OK, I'm not looking for a full frame equivalent of the 18-250, in a 
sense I already have one, the sigma 50-500.  For what it is, and 
especially what I paid for it, it's an awesome lens, but it falls in the 
"way too big" category.  It's reasonably sharp, but the bokeh is rather 
unpleasant, and it's not WR. There are reasons I really want a 150-450 
even if I can't afford one.


I still do have my 18-250, and when I go for a bike ride, I tend to put 
that on the K-3II and that combination does a great job for an all in 
one camera, except for the WR bit, and I don't tend to decide the rainy 
days are perfect for a bike ride anyways.


The 55-300 seems to pretty nicely fit the bill.  It's a reasonable size, 
would be relatively easy to carry around, and it seems to be pretty 
sharp, probably sharper than cropping my 28-105 down by a factor of 
three (which would turn the K-1 into about a 4 MPix camera). I'll post 
pictures soon, it seemed to do a decent job.


There is also the 60-250, but that gives up in both size and cost, I 
wonder how it compares with the 70-210/2.8 in those categories.


So, I'm looking to extend my reach beyond 75 or 100 mm  to the 250 or 
300 mm range.  Plan A at the moment seems to be a used 55-300, but 
before I start looking for one of those, I want to make sure that there 
isn't something that I'd really rather have.








--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[John]

On 12/17/2016 9:33 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

 Is there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?



No. You can have better or you can have not too expensive, but not both.

--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[P. J. Alling]

So you're effectively looking for something like  28mm to something 
between 300mm and 400mm.That's not too big...  Well unless someone 
has repealed the laws of physics that's not going to happen.I don't 
think that can be made compact or light weight.


There is the FAJ 75-300 f4.5~5.6, but AFAIK nobody actually liked it, 
and three different Pentax auto focus 100-300mm lenses, but I've never 
heard any one say anything good about them optically, or equivalent 
lenses from other systems and manufactures for that matter.   So if can 
find one they're probably going to be cheap.


There is a Sigma 70-300, that looks like the  70-210 that I was gifted 
with about a year ago.  If it's anything like the 70-210mm it's not 
horrible, not great either, it will be very light, and extremely 
inexpensive.  KEH.com had one for about $35-40 in like new condition not 
that long ago.


As to a longer max focal length, I've never heard of one.   You might 
start looking for a 400mm Catadioptric,  Kenko currently makes one.   
You won't find anything smaller or much lighter in that focal length, 
but of course manual focus.



On 12/17/2016 9:33 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the niche of my 
18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but will still fit in 
my camera bag and not weigh a ton.
The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff. Is 
there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[John Francis]

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:08:46AM +, Steve Cottrell wrote:
> On 17/12/16, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the
> >niche of my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but
> >will still fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton. 
> >The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff.
> >Is there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?
> 
> Just being a fly in your ointment for a minute - why would you consider
> a lens of such sweeping focal length? Surely with the K1 having such a
> good sensor, using what can only ever be an inferior lens (with such a
> large zoom range) is counter-productive?

That's not always the case - back when I was regularly shooting motorsports
(on film ...) I was used to seeing a lot of the full-time photographers
using the Canon L 35-350, which was an amazingly good lens.  But that was
the exception (and by now I suspect modern digital sensors would point out
flaws in that lens that we didn't see when limited by film resolution).


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Looking for an ready to carry long ff lens

[Steve Cottrell]

On 17/12/16, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Going to full frame, I no longer have a lens for the k1 to fill the
>niche of my 18-250, being reasonably long, if not particularly fast, but
>will still fit in my camera bag and not weigh a ton. 
>The da 55-300, despite nominally being an aps lens seems to do ok on ff.
>Is there anything even better, preferably not too expensive?

Just being a fly in your ointment for a minute - why would you consider
a lens of such sweeping focal length? Surely with the K1 having such a
good sensor, using what can only ever be an inferior lens (with such a
large zoom range) is counter-productive?


-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
||  (O)  |Web Video Production
--
_



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.