|
|
|
SMC Pentax-FA J 75-300mm F4.5-5.8 AL
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
Average Rating
|
|
100% of reviewers
|
$149.57
|
7.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
supersize
|
|
Description:
|
This zoom lens offers slightly slower speed than the FA 80-320mm.
| Weight | Length | Filter Diameter | Min. Focus | Max. Magnification | | 385 g | 11.6 cm | 58 mm | 130 cm | 0.3x | | Diagonal FOV (APS-C) | Horizontal FOV (APS-C) | Max. Aperture | Min. Aperture | Optical Construction | | 22-5.5 degrees | 18-4.6 degrees | f/4-5.8 | f/32-38 | 12 elements, 10 groups, 6 blades | | Diagonal FOV (24x36) | Horizontal FOV (24x36) | | | | | 32-8.2 degrees | 27-6.9 degrees | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
Author
|
|
wpw
New Member
Registered: December 2006
Location: Bedminster NJ
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Sun January 7, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, fast manual zoom
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft focus at large aperture and extreme telephoto
|
|
My primary walk-around birding and long-reach lens. Very light unit, mostly plastic construction. Soft focus at large end of aperture range, some vignetting at extreme telephoto. Oversize grip allows for good zoom control in overhead tracking. Despite use of plastic almost everywhere the lens has done quite well for me for nearly two years now.
Note that Nikon and Canon also have variations of this lens (one Canon reviewer calls it the "plastic piston" which is quite appropriate). One other benefit - it is comparatively inexpensive for long-reach glass.
|
|
|
|
|
arbutusq
Pentaxian
Registered: September 2006
Location: Vancouver BC canada
Posts: 380
|
|
Review Date: Thu February 22, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $145.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Compact, cheap and good quality
|
|
Cons:
|
less sharp at wide apertures, some CA
|
|
I bought this lens with low expectations. I own a Tamron 70-300 DI for Nikon and had a (much more expensive Nikkor 70-300 ED lens. I was expecting performance similar to the Tamron, that is pretty poor (High CA, poor contrast, very soft focus) but I was pleasantly surprised. The lens was reasonably sharp wide open and much better at f8-11. Contrast was pretty good and CA was far less evident than I expected, although still a bit of an issue. This lens matches the Nikon 70-300ED in every way at less than half the price. A great deal.
|
|
|
|
|
Bramela
Site Supporter
Registered: January 2007
Location: Newcastle Australia
Posts: 2976
|
|
Review Date: Wed July 4, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good walk about lens. Light plastic construction.Sharp at low and middle range.
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft at longer end of range.
|
|
I have used this lens for about 5 months. I have found it usuable at the lower range (75-200). Above that have found focus to be rather soft. For birding, wildlife etc. I think most enthusiasts would find this lens wanting.Some vignetting at the long reach.
In the lower ranges the results are quite satisfactory, sharp and good contrast.
I like the large rubberised grip. Price is a favourable point being fairly low priced for a lens of this range.
I am not unhappy with this as an everyday lens.
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Roberts
Pentaxian
Registered: September 2006
Location: Bertram Texas
Posts: 584
|
|
Review Date: Sun September 23, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $199.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, compact, nice rubberized grip, smooth zoom
|
|
Cons:
|
Rotating front element, a little soft at 300mm, no aperture ring, can hunt a little on the focus
|
|
Just got this lens at Wolf Camera, and being a name brand Pentax, it's pretty darn good for the price. Only reals drawbacks are that the front element rotates when focusing, and the softness near 300mm.
|
|
|
|
|
Nick1946
Pentaxian
Registered: March 2007
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 130
|
|
Review Date: Wed October 31, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $125.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Pentax glass,lightweight,low cost
|
|
Cons:
|
Front element rotates,some softness at 300mm,searches some at long end
|
|
I purchased this lens from Abe's of Maine to give me more reach than my DA 50-200 as the price was right. I think it is a very good lens for the price, it is lightweight and although the front element rotates-I will get used to it. I will most likely use manual focus when I can as the lens tends to search at the long end, but no regrets on the purchase so far. There are many good examples of what this lens can do in the Pentax Photo Gallery site.
|
|
|
|
|
jsherman999
Pentaxian
Registered: December 2007
Posts: 3719
|
|
Review Date: Wed January 2, 2008
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $149.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, good sharpness up to 250mm
|
|
Cons:
|
Cheap feel
|
|
For the money, this is a great lens - it's capable of beautiful shots in good lighting.
I like the AF speed (speed to lock on) - in most situations it beats my new Tamron 18-250 at lock-on speed.
It works better than my Tamron with a 1.4x converter - AF seems to work further down the aperture range, and the 75-300 can pop into manual when the AF stops working with the converter on (usually at f5.6). The Tamron can't do that, which is why I'm keeping the 75-300. It's also a bit faster at the long end than the Tamron, which gets down to f/6.3 vs. f/5.8 for the 75-300.
Very happy with the image quality in general - comparable in my opinion to the DA 50-200.
It's a fun lens to own, doesn't cost much, and about the only real negative as far as I'm concerned is it's plastic construction and cheap feel - The optics, however - no complaints, top notch for this price level.
|
|
|
|
|
fastoys2nv
Senior Member
Registered: October 2007
Location: GTA Ontario Canada (Tottenham Area)
Posts: 138
|
|
Review Date: Sat January 19, 2008
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
light weight, Inexpensive, Long Reach
|
|
Cons:
|
Focus searches at 300, Rotating front element
|
|
I got my example in a kit with the MZ-M and 35-80. I wanted the Pentax bag and 75-300 so I sold the body and 35-80.
The 75-300 give a wide coverage range in a fairly small lens. Shots in the 75-200 ish range are fairly sharp and good contrast. At 300 I run into searching focus in less then idea light. The images at 300 are also a little soft.
The rotating front element is a pain with a PL filter or flower type hood.
My cost for the lens is based on what I paid for the whole kit 90.00 subtract what I sold the other items for 60.00 = 30.00 for the 75-300 lens.
My example is silver
Overall a good preforming lens for the investment.
|
|
|
|
|
Mechan1k
Pentaxian
Registered: June 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2556
|
|
Review Date: Sat March 15, 2008
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Cost for reach, crisp when stopped down, versatility
|
|
Cons:
|
CA/fringing evident in high contrast situations, AF speed/hunting, low-light performance, a little soft at 300.
|
|
Hard for me to compare with other lenses as I ahve haven't used similar lenses from other brands.
I got this as part of my kit instead of the 50-200mm (hence I can't remember the price).
I guess you pay for what you get ... it is a budget lens for the reach ... but it's not exactly crap either. For what it is built for and meant to do ... it does it better than I was expecting (as I had low expectations after reading poor reviews everywhere).
It can be pushed to produce pronounced CA/fringing when deliberately shooting high-contrast shots (although a lot of lenses can anyway).
Low light performance isn't the best ... as it is rather slow ... and getting AF Lock is difficult at time when light is poor. This is to be expected for it's aperture range (especially the long end).
AF hunting can be a bit of a bain of this lens as well ... if not in a hurry ... it's not too bad though if you have time on your side.
Can be a tad soft at 300mm ... I find hand-hold difficult at these lengths ... support is needed for sharper shots.
All in all though ... once stopped down a little bit through-out most of the zoom range .. it is quite crisp ... and colour rendition isn't bad at all.
|
|
|
|
|
K200D
Member
Registered: April 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 85
|
|
Review Date: Thu September 11, 2008
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $190.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Light weight, inexpensive, attractive silver exterior
|
|
Cons:
|
Softness wide open at 300mm
|
|
I believe this lens is a decent compromise on optical quality and price. And as always, even though it is made of plastic, it has a Pentax quality feel to it. Being made of plastic means that it is also light and easy to travel with. But wide open at 300mm can produce somewhat soft images. Images that I could live with when I took it to the Montreal Gran Prix this summer!
 Click on the image to view it in a larger size |
|
|
|
|
Chr1st0ph3r
New Member
Registered: September 2008
Location: Detroit
Posts: 14
|
|
Review Date: Sun September 13, 2009
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $139.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Wonderful Bokeh, Great starter zoom!
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft wide open at 300mm.
|
|
This is a lens that will make you appreciate prime and constant f/stop zooms once you get your hands on one. Prior to that awakening you will enjoy this lens. It can "paint" a pretty picture in low light situations, if you are patient!
I have taken portrait photos, outdoors, and the bokeh is simply creamy. Almost as if I had a background hanging behind my subject in the middle of the park. I really have no gripes, why, in photography you get what you pay for, this is worth its price and has and will teach many aspiring photographers, new to the world of Pentax, how to utilize 300mm without spending $300-$6000 dollars.
|
|
|
|
|
opfor
Member
Registered: December 2008
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 92
|
|
Review Date: Tue December 15, 2009
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $100.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good lens for the money
|
|
Cons:
|
Can be soft when pushed, can hunt on AF
|
|
I've owned this one for about a year. As others have said, it can be soft when pushed and it has a tendency to hunt on AF on older cameras. From my experience it is almost useless on AF on my DL, but works much better on a K10 or K20 with almost no hunting at all.
Good everyday lens at a reasonable price.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:24 AM.
|
