| Author: | | Showing Reviews 1-11 of 11 | | New Member Registered: April, 2011 Posts: 2
1 user found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: April 10, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $110.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Low cost, good build quality. | | Cons: | Noisy and slow AF. | |
I purchased this lens last year to get longer reach than my DA 50-200.
I have been pleasantly surprised with the images it produces on my K20. It can be used at 100mm as a long portrait lens and is sharp until around 270mm, there is some softness at the long end.
This lens would probably be too heavy for some although it suits me; be warned, however, that its length demands a large kit bag!
My copy was certainly good value at the price I paid (£69), I have seen some being sold at up to £150. I can recommend this lens as an economical alternative to the DA 55-300 if you don't mind the weight and the noisy AF.
| | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2010 Location: California Posts: 8
1 user found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: December 3, 2010 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $40.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | sharp, build quality, cheap | | Cons: | size, weight | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 7
Value: 10
| |
Build quality wise, the lens feels sturdy, and could probably be used to hit stuff with, although probably not hard stuff as that would probably misalign some of the lenses somehow. The focus ring turns pretty smoothly, and is far from the zoom ring almost 2" or 4cm, which makes it friendly for people who like to accidentally turn the focusing ring instead of the zoom ring. There is a display for focusing distance in ft and meters like on most older lenses which shows between 5 - 50ft (1.5 - 15m) and infinity. When turning the focus ring the filter ring rotates, which can be annoying when using polarizers, and the lens extends 1/2" or 0.7cm. There is no mount for a lens hood. There is an aperature ring as is also common on older lenses with settings for values from 4.5 to 32 and then Auto (camera based).
As this lens was designed for Film cameras, it supports full frame sensors, and thus likely doesn't cause vignetting on them.
On the K100D, the autofocus is slower than the pentax kit lenses such as the DAL 18-55 and 50-200.
There doesnt seem to be any zoom creep.
Also, as other people have stated it doesn't increase in size when zooming. This contributes largely to the problem of hiking, as the lens always protrudes from the camera by 6.5" or 17cm almost twice the length of lenses that extend making it more likely to knock against stuff. (The lens is ~7.2" 18cm when not connected to a camera)
This lens takes beautiful pictures, but due to its size and weight I'm not sure how useful it would be for hiking and such, as there are newer lenses out that weigh less as well as having greater ranges such as the pentax dal 55-300 425g, da 55-300 440g (both 4.4" long), or the sigma & tamron variants of the 70-300 (450-500g) (4.7" and 5.6" long respectively), although being more expensive as with the pentax lenses or worse image quality with the tamron/sigma variants.
Pictures from my other telephoto lens, the pentax dal 50-200, seem marginally less awesome than from the 100-300 but the 50-200 is much more portable and thus more easily brought for hiking. the 50-200mm isn't quite long enough for some bird shots though.
since pictures are worth a thousand words :S,
some pics taken with the F 100-300mm lens
(not working atm because of flickr free limit)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fralexa...7625380249709/ | | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2009 Location: Western Oregon Posts: 7
1 user found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: April 11, 2010 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $75.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Does not extend when zooming. Sharpness and clarity are good on my K20D | | Cons: | No lens hood. Af hunts under certain conditions | |
This is a great lens for the price. This is my lens of choice when shooting wildlife, my kid's sporting events, etc.
Although this lens is not water and dust resistant like my SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR lens, it's results have more clarity and sharpness at the long end.
Untill pentax comes out with the SMC Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED (WR), i will stick with this lens for it's reach.
As for the complaints of AF hunting in low light, that is not an issue with me. I manually focus about 1/3 of the time anyway.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: June, 2008 Location: Durham, NC Posts: 188
1 user found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: February 23, 2009 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: N/A
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | long, cheap, inernal zooming, not too soft | | Cons: | AF hunts a lot in low light, rotating front element, not enough damping on either focus or zoom ring, no included hood | |
This lens is probably the most economical Pentax 300mm AF lens. It's not too heavy, but build quality isn't bad (except for undamped zoom and focus rings).
Image quality is good for a low end lens. My main gripe has to be that it sucks at focusing in low light
| | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2008 Location: Québec Posts: 9
1 user found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: October 5, 2008 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $200.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Good sharp lens, useful focal lengths | | Cons: | A little slow | |
I have taken some shots of birds and was impressed. It’s compact build and 300mm are great. Works with the Tamron 1.4x TC. The images are sharp even at 300mm. Performance in low light is not spectacular but better than I expected.
So I am very pleased with this lens and would highly recommend it.
| | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2011 Posts: 9 | | Lens Review Date: September 28, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $150.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | good IQ, internal zooming, sturdy construction, fast AF | | Cons: | a bit soft at 300mm, no damping on focus and zoom rings, | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 7
Value: 9
| |
I use this lens as my main lens for wildlife. Not the best lens out there, but since I shoot mainly reptiles and amphibians, that means mostly in good light and during the day, for that this lens is just fine.
Sharpness is quite good up to about 250mm, but is still ok at 300mm. At 200mm it's considerably sharper compared to another budget zoom, the DA 50-200.
AF speed kinda surprised me, on K-7 is very snappy and fast, but it tends to hunt in low light (frankly, which zoom doesn't?).
There are some CA under certain conditions, but nothing serious or unrepairable with PP.
Some shots:
  
All-in-all, a very good low cost lens, tough and sturdy, with good IQ, and so far the best out of the budget zooms I've used so far (DA 50-200, Tamron 70-300, Sigma 18-200).
| | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2010 Location: bronx Posts: 6 | | Lens Review Date: December 17, 2010 | I can recommend this lens: No |
Price: $50.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | light weight, low cost | | Cons: | EXTREME PF | |
I purchase a cosmetically perfect copy of this lens on ebay.
The lens was immacualate. like new.
But the pf purple fringing was horrible.
I shot 50 pics at 300mm. None were very sharp.
I sold it the next day and bought the [FONT=Arial]DA L 55-300mm [/FONT] | | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2009 Location: Atlanta Posts: 10 | | Lens Review Date: June 8, 2009 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $60.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Long reach on Digital bodies. Very affordable for 300mm, AF is fast in bright light | | Cons: | Slow at longer ranges, not as useful a range as the DA 55-300, bulkier too | |
I bought this locally for very cheap. Has some large specs of dust inside, but otherwise works perfect. I wanted the DA55-300, but for less than 1/3 the price, I found this lens and I think it will do me just fine. Shots seem very sharp, even at 300mm (f8). Focus is very fast at shorter ranges, but sometimes takes a little longer at the longest zoom. Still fast enough for most uses though. Unless you are shooting in bright light, you will need to tripod this baby for the longer ranges. It is not fast enough.
Here is a hand held shot, full zoom, minimal PP.
 | | | | | Senior Member Registered: March, 2009 Location: Gouda, Netherlands Posts: 159 | | Lens Review Date: March 11, 2009 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $80.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Internal zoom, good build,easy zoom | | Cons: | rotating frontlens, much CA, hunting autofocus when low light. | |
I like this lens because I got much for less money. It's sharp from 100 to 300, but with a little bit higher aperture like 6.7-8.0. I think this lens is the best budget lens to get when a 300 1:4 is to expensive. Other aspects are mentioned above.
| | | | | New Member Registered: April, 2008 Location: London | | Lens Review Date: April 6, 2008 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $200.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | light weight, low cost | | Cons: | not very good quality wide open at 300mm, only f/5.6 at 300mm | |
I enjoyed using this lens around town, but on over cast days in London it was not fast enough when shooting above 200mm (this was before SR). The same problem went for Africa in the shade at 300mm.
If you are looking at a zoom with this range, this is probably a good one in this price range, but if you are going for image quality, you'll find a better option out there.
| | | | | | | | Lens Review Date: September 12, 2007 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $80.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Does not extend when zooming, reasonably sharp | | Cons: | Somewhat large, slow apertures. | |
I just changed my FA 100-300mm f4.7-5.8 rating to 7 because this is a better lens but still not a 9. Sturdier than the FA f4.7-5.8, with a better mechanical build quality, no zoom creep and a metal lens mount. This is a very decent lens in this focal length range. It does not have the complexity of the FA power zoom version and, although a little soft at the long end, it is a very competant lens. If my first set of images, using this lens on my *istDS, are any indication I will be using it for a long time to come.
I am enjoying the much smoother zoom action (more like my old MF lenses), there is no zoom creep (partly because this lens does not extend while zooming like the cheaper FA f4.7-5.8 lens). A small point is that this lens, although an F series, is styled just like my FA primes which gives a continuity to my currently active lens collection.
My wife now has the FA 100-300mm f4.7-5.8 because this F 100-300mm f4.5-5.6 is much more to my liking, only very slightly faster but better handling and with much more control over CA in high contrast images.
Ira
| | |
