K5 Tele lens options...

[Paratom]

My longest lens is 50-135.
I wondered if anybody here has experience/an idea how the 200/2.8 and 300/4.0 compare IQ wise with the 70-250/4.0 when used on the K5?
I have seen some very nice images from the 200mm in the K5 image thread but not so much from the 70-250 (apart from some Jono posting longer time ago).
If I could asume that the zoom IQ is anyway close I would probably prefer the flexibility of the zoom.

 

[Knorp]

My longest lens is 50-135.
I wondered if anybody here has experience/an idea how the 200/2.8 and 300/4.0 compare IQ wise with the 70-250/4.0 when used on the K5?
I have seen some very nice images from the 200mm in the K5 image thread but not so much from the 70-250 (apart from some Jono posting longer time ago).
If I could asume that the zoom IQ is anyway close I would probably prefer the flexibility of the zoom.

Hi Thomas,
I do know that Jono found the 60-250 not very strong between 200-250 or so, but then he's rather picky.
Perhaps he will chime in and show us some samples and explain a little more about what he regards as the weak spot(s) of this lens.

Kind regards.

 

[jonoslack]

HI Chaps
I still have it, and I like it, it's a good lens. It has the normal slightly slow (but silent) focusing we're familiar with, it does lose sharpness slightly at the long end, but it's thoroughly acceptable all the way through - even wide open.

I don't use it too much as it's quite big, and I don't really use telephotos that much anyway, but I don't have any complaints with it.

all the best

 

[Paratom]

Thanks Jono.
I wonder how it would hold up to the 200 prime.

 

[Knorp]

HI Chaps
I still have it, and I like it, it's a good lens. It has the normal slightly slow (but silent) focusing we're familiar with, it does lose sharpness slightly at the long end, but it's thoroughly acceptable all the way through - even wide open.

I don't use it too much as it's quite big, and I don't really use telephotos that much anyway, but I don't have any complaints with it.

all the best

Thank you Jono, I'll take it then that the lens is big and probably heavy too, but its performance is pretty decent.
Frankly, I don't find it too bad if it loses sharpness slightly.
If it were only in the corners I could happily live with that, but losing sharpness in the centre ...

How it compares to the 200/2.8 remains a bit of a mystery for now, unless some one with both lenses joins the party.
Though too me it would be only a comparison in terms of IQ as handling (weight/size) and usability (zoom/prime) are subjective to one's personal taste.

Kind regards.