Question on price: SMC Pentax-A* 300mm F2.8 ED [IF]

Syb · 10-16-2007, 11:34 AM

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

Originally posted by Ignitrous

I found one for sale that is brand new from japan today
NEW PENTAX SMC FA 300mm F2.8 ED [IF] Telephoto Lens - (eBay item 190159885003 end time Nov-03-07 18:15:31 PDT)
$4350. I dont know about that price for one that is brand new since my dads has some wear but operates and the glass is perfect.

Is that the lens your father is selling, are you sure? This is the AF-version (autofocus), until now we discussed the A version, which is manual focus.

Good luck!

Ignitrous · 10-18-2007, 01:54 PM

No you are right, I was just posting the link to that lens since it was the only one with the same features as my fathers (minus the Auto focus)The one my father is selling is the NONAuto focus.

I may just post it up for sale on this forum. Had some pictures taken of it yesterday so I will post them up later tonight and see what you all think.

I really would rather it go to a pentax enthusiast rather than Joe Blow off the street. My dad loves this lens and just doesn't have time to ever use it anymore.

**Marc Langille** · 10-18-2007, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by frank

Our KING (Jim King) snapped one FA*300/2.8 on eBay for something around $2800 several months back --- that's a steal!

Sounds like I did good then...

I paid $2889 (shipped) for my FA* 300/2.8 - beautiful condition!!!

Ignitrous · 10-18-2007, 05:50 PM

The glass is obviously the most important part of a lens and it is in perfect condition. I have looked at this very closely and the only beef I have with it is the wear marks on the edges of the body of the lens. So long as it takes amazing pictures what really does it matter if it looks like it has been used so long as the glass isn't muffed up?

Name: IMGP0458.JPG
Views: 857
Size: 115.0 KB

Name: IMGP0458.JPG
Views: 857
Size: 115.0 KB

Name: IMGP0463.JPG
Views: 513
Size: 114.1 KB

Name: IMGP0464.JPG
Views: 522
Size: 82.1 KB

Name: IMGP0455.JPG
Views: 526
Size: 93.0 KB

carpents · 10-19-2007, 06:35 AM

Originally posted by Ignitrous

The glass is obviously the most important part of a lens and it is in perfect condition. I have looked at this very closely and the only beef I have with it is the wear marks on the edges of the body of the lens. So long as it takes amazing pictures what really does it matter if it looks like it has been used so long as the glass isn't muffed up?

All the rubber bits look pretty messed up, either from heat or from wear. The focus ring has a bulge in it (which is not normal). And while I agree, especially with these big beasts, that some scratching is inevitable, it lowers the price accordingly. External blemishes are one thing, but the level and amount of defects could also produce internal problems like element separation or decentering that are not immediately obvious.

IMO you'll be lucky to get half of what you are expecting. Good luck.

**tranq78** · 10-19-2007, 08:13 AM

Originally posted by carpents

All the rubber bits look pretty messed up, either from heat or from wear. The focus ring has a bulge in it (which is not normal). And while I agree, especially with these big beasts, that some scratching is inevitable, it lowers the price accordingly. External blemishes are one thing, but the level and amount of defects could also produce internal problems like element separation or decentering that are not immediately obvious.

IMO you'll be lucky to get half of what you are expecting. Good luck.

The bulge is probably the rubber cover on the focus ring coming slightly loose. I've seen this before on other used A300/2.8 lenses, but it should not effect functionality. Obviously the best way to make sure is to try it out yourself.

I agree the external wear marks aren't a big deal unless you are a collector. This is a big heavy lens, especially compared to its younger sibling the A300/4. You need to use 2 hands to just pick it up. Despite the hard coating (better than the FA* coatings) just normal handling of the lens means some inevitable wear marks.

All the A* lenses are nice lenses.

Ignitrous · 10-19-2007, 08:42 AM

Originally posted by carpents

All the rubber bits look pretty messed up, either from heat or from wear. The focus ring has a bulge in it (which is not normal). And while I agree, especially with these big beasts, that some scratching is inevitable, it lowers the price accordingly. External blemishes are one thing, but the level and amount of defects could also produce internal problems like element separation or decentering that are not immediately obvious.

IMO you'll be lucky to get half of what you are expecting. Good luck.

After speaking with my dad about this he has told me he took that picture of the bulge to show that bulge. That rubber sleeve does not affect the focusing of the lens it just has a bulge from normal use. It has been stored in a closet in its case for years away from any heat and has never been in any water. The wear you see is not consistent with the type of use(or abuse if you see it like that) that would produce the internal problems you mentioned in the above post.
I spoke with my dad about taking some pictures with it this weekend so i can scan them in to show to anyone who would like to see its clarity. Of course there will be a newspaper to show that the date they were taken is true and not pictures he took with it 10+ years ago.

Last edited by Ignitrous; 10-19-2007 at 09:13 AM.

Syb · 10-19-2007, 02:29 PM

Originally posted by carpents

The focus ring has a bulge in it (which is not normal).

I do not second that. I have a similar lens, with the same bulge in the focus ring. Functionality is not harmed in any way.

About the other scratches: it looks like the lens was carried to rocky places... but hey! Haven't we seen on this forum amazing pictures made with a SMC A*300mm/F4 wich looked like the front lens had had a frontal collision with a comet? I remember great waterbird pictures made by that lens. This lens is said to be in great glass-condition.

I think I would like to see proof of that in the post.

And I cannot wait to see some test-pics!

Syb

Ignitrous · 10-21-2007, 04:12 PM

Here are 2 pictures taken with the lens. My dad had to go to a store to get a camera compatible with the lens since he sold his. These pictures are taken through glass since the kid at the store wouldn't let him walk 5 inches out the door. Sorry but i hope you "Get the picture" hehe
Name: IMGP0445.JPG
Views: 468
Size: 99.2 KB

Name: IMGP0445.JPG
Views: 468
Size: 99.2 KB

Name: IMGP0449.JPG
Views: 419
Size: 86.6 KB

**SCGushue** · 10-22-2007, 08:52 PM

Frank,

Yeah, I know. I was right behind him in the bidding.

Didn't need it... just wanted it!

Kinda regretted not pulling the trigger a little more.

Stephen

10-21-2007, 04:12 PM	#24
Ignitrous New Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 11 Original Poster	Here are 2 pictures taken with the lens. My dad had to go to a store to get a camera compatible with the lens since he sold his. These pictures are taken through glass since the kid at the store wouldn't let him walk 5 inches out the door. Sorry but i hope you "Get the picture" hehe Last edited by Ignitrous; 10-21-2007 at 08:22 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Price question on Pentax-A 50mm 1.7	chrisb3	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	06-24-2010 10:41 AM
pentax 55-300mm price increase at b+h	dcmsox2004	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	03-30-2009 01:33 AM
Question for people with SMC Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED	ChrisN	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	09-16-2008 10:10 AM
Pentax SMC 300mm F4 DA* and price in UK	offertonhatter	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	03-05-2008 11:54 AM
Price for a used SMC Pentax 1:4.5-5.6 100-300mm lens	Christoffel	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	01-28-2008 05:13 AM

10-16-2007, 11:34 AM	#16
Syb Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Near Utrecht, Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,221	Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here. Originally posted by Ignitrous I found one for sale that is brand new from japan today NEW PENTAX SMC FA 300mm F2.8 ED [IF] Telephoto Lens - (eBay item 190159885003 end time Nov-03-07 18:15:31 PDT) $4350. I dont know about that price for one that is brand new since my dads has some wear but operates and the glass is perfect. Is that the lens your father is selling, are you sure? This is the AF-version (autofocus), until now we discussed the A version, which is manual focus. Good luck!

10-18-2007, 01:54 PM	#17
Ignitrous New Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 11 Original Poster	No you are right, I was just posting the link to that lens since it was the only one with the same features as my fathers (minus the Auto focus)The one my father is selling is the NONAuto focus. I may just post it up for sale on this forum. Had some pictures taken of it yesterday so I will post them up later tonight and see what you all think. I really would rather it go to a pentax enthusiast rather than Joe Blow off the street. My dad loves this lens and just doesn't have time to ever use it anymore.

10-18-2007, 03:14 PM	#18
Marc Langille Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NW Arkansas, USA Posts: 4,710	Originally posted by frank Our KING (Jim King) snapped one FA300/2.8 on eBay for something around $2800 several months back --- that's a steal! Sounds like I did good then... I paid $2889 (shipped) for my FA 300/2.8 - beautiful condition!!!

10-18-2007, 05:50 PM	#19
Ignitrous New Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 11 Original Poster	The glass is obviously the most important part of a lens and it is in perfect condition. I have looked at this very closely and the only beef I have with it is the wear marks on the edges of the body of the lens. So long as it takes amazing pictures what really does it matter if it looks like it has been used so long as the glass isn't muffed up?

10-19-2007, 06:35 AM	#20
carpents Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: West Chester, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,420	Originally posted by Ignitrous The glass is obviously the most important part of a lens and it is in perfect condition. I have looked at this very closely and the only beef I have with it is the wear marks on the edges of the body of the lens. So long as it takes amazing pictures what really does it matter if it looks like it has been used so long as the glass isn't muffed up? All the rubber bits look pretty messed up, either from heat or from wear. The focus ring has a bulge in it (which is not normal). And while I agree, especially with these big beasts, that some scratching is inevitable, it lowers the price accordingly. External blemishes are one thing, but the level and amount of defects could also produce internal problems like element separation or decentering that are not immediately obvious. IMO you'll be lucky to get half of what you are expecting. Good luck.

10-19-2007, 08:13 AM	#21
tranq78 Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,005	Originally posted by carpents All the rubber bits look pretty messed up, either from heat or from wear. The focus ring has a bulge in it (which is not normal). And while I agree, especially with these big beasts, that some scratching is inevitable, it lowers the price accordingly. External blemishes are one thing, but the level and amount of defects could also produce internal problems like element separation or decentering that are not immediately obvious. IMO you'll be lucky to get half of what you are expecting. Good luck. The bulge is probably the rubber cover on the focus ring coming slightly loose. I've seen this before on other used A300/2.8 lenses, but it should not effect functionality. Obviously the best way to make sure is to try it out yourself. I agree the external wear marks aren't a big deal unless you are a collector. This is a big heavy lens, especially compared to its younger sibling the A300/4. You need to use 2 hands to just pick it up. Despite the hard coating (better than the FA* coatings) just normal handling of the lens means some inevitable wear marks. All the A* lenses are nice lenses.

10-19-2007, 08:42 AM	#22
Ignitrous New Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 11 Original Poster	Originally posted by carpents All the rubber bits look pretty messed up, either from heat or from wear. The focus ring has a bulge in it (which is not normal). And while I agree, especially with these big beasts, that some scratching is inevitable, it lowers the price accordingly. External blemishes are one thing, but the level and amount of defects could also produce internal problems like element separation or decentering that are not immediately obvious. IMO you'll be lucky to get half of what you are expecting. Good luck. After speaking with my dad about this he has told me he took that picture of the bulge to show that bulge. That rubber sleeve does not affect the focusing of the lens it just has a bulge from normal use. It has been stored in a closet in its case for years away from any heat and has never been in any water. The wear you see is not consistent with the type of use(or abuse if you see it like that) that would produce the internal problems you mentioned in the above post. I spoke with my dad about taking some pictures with it this weekend so i can scan them in to show to anyone who would like to see its clarity. Of course there will be a newspaper to show that the date they were taken is true and not pictures he took with it 10+ years ago. Last edited by Ignitrous; 10-19-2007 at 09:13 AM.

10-19-2007, 02:29 PM	#23
Syb Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Near Utrecht, Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,221	Originally posted by carpents The focus ring has a bulge in it (which is not normal). I do not second that. I have a similar lens, with the same bulge in the focus ring. Functionality is not harmed in any way. About the other scratches: it looks like the lens was carried to rocky places... but hey! Haven't we seen on this forum amazing pictures made with a SMC A*300mm/F4 wich looked like the front lens had had a frontal collision with a comet? I remember great waterbird pictures made by that lens. This lens is said to be in great glass-condition. I think I would like to see proof of that in the post. And I cannot wait to see some test-pics! Syb

10-22-2007, 08:52 PM	#25
SCGushue Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Pennsylvania Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,449	Frank, Yeah, I know. I was right behind him in the bidding. Didn't need it... just wanted it! Kinda regretted not pulling the trigger a little more. Stephen