View Full Version : Cheap Small and Light 55-200 Lens

01-06-2010, 2:02pm
Looking for a cheapie to take with me while I save for a 70-200 2.8
Will be used on a K7 in addition to a Sigma 17-70. Emphasis on as small and light as possible.
However must be autofocus. 2nd hand ok.
So what lens should I look out for?

01-06-2010, 3:06pm
The Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 APO is not bad.

Ebay for around $300

01-06-2010, 5:17pm
I was keener for a 50/55-200 as it gave me a better FL to take the lens out by itself (or later on with a 32-35 limited :) )
I did abit of reseaching and found these lenses of interest.

SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR
Weight: 230g Length: 79.5mm
Is this a typo? I din't think the WR would be this light! This would be the best for the spec as I would use the WR in inclement conditions but probably most expensive of the list.

SMC Pentax-DA L 50-200mm F4-5.6 AL
Weight: 235g Length: 78.5mm
The favourite so far as most likely to be able to be found cheap as part of KX kit lenses. So possibly a few cheapies on ebay.

SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED
Weight: 255g Length: 70.8mm
Another good option but probaly not much less to buy than WR. However did see it on site sponser dirt cheap cameras for only $269 so still in the running.

Sigma 55-200mm F4-5.6 DC
Weight: 310g Length: 87.1mm
Due to size only in the running if very cheap.

02-06-2010, 3:26pm
The weight of the WR is incorrect! 10.1 oz (285g) without hood, 11.5 oz (325g) with hood
The 18-55 is 230 g

With your K-7 means that you won't be overly worried about the rain ;)

02-06-2010, 3:47pm
I'm having a serious look at the DA 55-300mm f4-5.8 ED. It gets very good reviews from it's users.

Have a look at this link:



02-06-2010, 7:07pm
Yes the 55-300 is tempting but eventually I REALLY want a 70-200 2.8 and the more saved means I get to this lens quicker! (however if I see it for a bargin......;) )
The otherthing is if I really want this lens it would be worth the extra if WR (makes sense as a long lens is seldom used inside anyway.

I looked at ebay last night and saw Sigma 55-200 for $1 no reserve!!!! Contrary to my findings there are more 50-200 DA available cheap than 55-200 DAL.

DA L still sounds like the goods but even at the corrected weight 50-200 WR still looks interesting. :Doh: I might try scouring Camera Marketplace for some prices.

Please let me know on your cheap small and light longish lenses!

02-06-2010, 7:13pm
I'm having a serious look at the DA 55-300mm f4-5.8 ED. It gets very good reviews from it's users.

Have a look at this link:



Be aware there are 2 versions, the L version apparently made a little cheaper and sold as a kit lens. I have looked to getting 1 myself as a lighter lens than my Sigma f4 100-300.

02-06-2010, 11:34pm
I have the WR, its not bad and i am happy with it. Just to throw a curve ball in, have you also thought about the DA* 60-250 f/4? Ok its a bit slower than what you want at f2.8 but is water proof. Only problem its twice the price of the tamron 70-200 f2.8 :(

As Kevin suggests maybe stay away from the L version (you want the ED glass) and then get whichever of the other 3 lenses on your list comes up for a good/lowest price on ebay and save for the f2.8 as I do find the WR a bit slow/dark.

03-06-2010, 6:53pm
Definitly looking at the Tamron 70-200 2.8 for the f stop particulary as I will probably grab a TC for it. I will be using it alot as me and my wife love visiting zoos and some enclosures get pretty dark aswell as plenty of hand help use so having a faster lens helps with this.....and its a bargin!

Still hedging between 50-200 DAL and 55-200 DA WR (even at proper weight) guess it will be down to price.

Does anyone have the Sigma 55-200?
How is it for size/weight as it seems to be cheap as.

The great thing is all the options weigh in less than my reference lens which is a SAL55200 which is a Sony lens which I found very light yet good quality.
(equivilent to Tamron 55-200 not avail in Pentax mount)

03-06-2010, 10:35pm
ebay has some zooms for auction at the moment in your preferred focal length range, but watch the prices, some listings are not much of a saving on new

the WR is good but its the same optically as the ED but better than the L

05-06-2010, 7:41pm
Tonto, there is a as new (used twice) 50-200mm ED WR on ebay at the moment in West Ryde

05-06-2010, 7:50pm
Thanks Tim, I'm watching it :)

06-06-2010, 8:15am
G'day all

Like the discussion...

Just a qwikkie ... ask the ebay seller "used twice, now for sale" why??? is it for sale after only 2 uses

Regards, Phil

06-06-2010, 10:07pm
Yeah was wondering that, if bad sample why not exchange under warrenty? I'm guessing 55-300 like most was better for them. I will ask sooner the end date.

Ozzi Paul
12-06-2010, 11:19am
When you can, why not get the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX DG HSM II. They have been updated now to the OS version but maybe still available. The HSM makes a big difference and even though the Tamron is supposed to have better IQ its not by a great amount.

15-06-2010, 10:48am
I'm going to see if any more Pentax DA 50-200 WR come up. Other wise will just grab a 55-300. Both seem to tick all the right boxes and will still be usefull once I get a 70-200 2.8

50-200 Light and weather resistant
55-300 Lighter than 70-200 and longer.

25-06-2010, 3:01pm
I'm looking at these two lenses as well.

Did you have any luck finding one?

25-06-2010, 8:35pm
Not yet- it is looking more and more like I will get the DA L 55-300 as I have used the camera on two wet days now and a non WR lens stands up well. I also miss the 18x zoom of my Olympus! :Doh:
Might grab one for a trip to the zoo next weekend :)

25-06-2010, 8:43pm
Super zooms are ok, but there is always a tradeoff in speed and IQ
No free lunches with good glass

03-10-2010, 7:05pm
As an update I have an old Pentax SMC A 70-200 f4, works great and giving me a feel for th 70-200 length for later on- have to admit it is a gem but can't handle ANY close focusing and I really need AF for walkaround, just fine for dedicated photowalks though. Pretty sure a 55-300 is still in the mix as it is nice and light and will fit in well with my NEW KX that I have just got for my wife, lol :party6:

06-10-2010, 2:46pm
ive been looking at the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 also the sigma 70-200 f2.8 apo 11 HSM.
the example images Ive seen so far are that the Tamron produces better contrast with improved saturated colours.
Ive also looked at the 60-250 Pentax f4 , even though its slower it does to my eye produce a better image in both contrast and saturation ,

IQ of all the lenses seem to be on par with each other....but id say Pentax has the edge, followed by the tamron then sigma....Pentax only problem is the price.

this is based on examples of images produced and not my own first hand experience .

07-10-2010, 8:58pm
just a note to all that are thinking of a sigma lens.

CR Kennedy the Aussie importers will match any grey market or import price of their lenses, they will also match the price of imported lens from the states...great for anyone wanting a aussie warranty and a local buy..just have to ring them up direct ...I did today:)