Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-07-2011, 06:46 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Flushing NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 412
QuoteOriginally posted by boriscleto Quote
The DA L is the kit version of the lens. It has a plastic lens mount, does not have quick shift focusing, and does not come with a lens hood or soft case. Optically it is identical to the DA version.
Ah, I understand now. Thanks. I'm glad I got the DA -- the lens mount probably wouldn't be a problem for me, but quick shift would be the deal breaker.

11-07-2011, 06:47 PM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Flushing NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 412
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
"L" is for light (as in light weight).
That's surprising; the DA already seems very light to me. Are you sure the "L" isn't for "less"?
11-07-2011, 06:57 PM   #18
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,836
I don't think the L has any more meaning than the J in the FA J series had.
11-07-2011, 07:36 PM   #19
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: MT
Posts: 1,077
Now that video is also part of the equation, the old FA100-300 with power zoom is viable again. Not all Pentax bodies offer the power zoom function, but on those that do, it's pretty handy both for still and particularly for video zooming...OK so I have one for sale in the marketplace...is that so wrong?

11-07-2011, 08:05 PM   #20
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
I reviewed both the Tamron and the Pentax FA:

Laur's photo blog: Tamron 70-300/4-5.6 AF Di LD macro
Laur's photo blog: Pentax FA 100-300/4.7-5.8

I also compared them against each other and against a couple other options:

Laur's photo blog: Comments on budget 300mm lenses for Pentax

The FA is a great lens, but I like the Tamron a lot too - its macro mode is excellent. The nice thing is that you can get them both for less than the price of the DA.
11-07-2011, 08:24 PM   #21
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,836
QuoteOriginally posted by Ron Boggs Quote
Now that video is also part of the equation, the old FA100-300 with power zoom is viable again. Not all Pentax bodies offer the power zoom function, but on those that do, it's pretty handy both for still and particularly for video zooming...OK so I have one for sale in the marketplace...is that so wrong?
The FA100-300 f/4.5-5.6 had power zoom, the much better f/4.7-5.8 did not.
11-08-2011, 06:14 AM   #22
Pentaxian
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,798
the topic quickly diverged towards the DAL 55-300, but to answer your original question, the FA100-300 is superior to the Sigma 70-300. Less aberrations, better sharpness. I'd say the 55-300 is more convenient because of the range, but the 100-300 is really a great sleeper lens. Just read the reviews.
11-08-2011, 06:45 AM   #23
Veteran Member
mickey's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Japan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,074
QuoteOriginally posted by Matchete Quote
Is it so slow that Iwould miss, say, most of my moving birds/cars/planes... shots ?
I've got the Pentax 100-300.
I bought it used and it served me well, but unfortunately it broke earlier this year.
I am going to buy a replacement as I liked it so much.
I took mostly bird pics and some Keirin cycling.
Never took cars or planes so can't comment on that.
I've got a few pics taken with it in my PPG if you'd care to look.

I was too thinking of the DAL55-300, it comes highly recommended.
However, I will buy another 100-300 and save the extra cash to put towards something else.
Am considering the Sigma 170-500 to get the extra reach for birding...but that's another story.

11-08-2011, 09:16 PM   #24
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
My two longest AF zooms are the FA100-300/4.7-5.8 and tha Lil'Bigma DG 170-500/5-6.3. Despite the shorter reach and the 10x price difference, I use the FA100-300 *much* more. Maybe the weight difference (380g vs 1270g) has something to do with that?

I also have a Tamron 60-300/4-5.6 in KA mount (610g) that cost even 10x less than the Pentax. Its optics are good, but I just don't use MF zooms that much. And you want to shoot moving targets, so forget about cheap long MF zooms, eh?
11-09-2011, 02:13 PM   #25
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 94
Original Poster
Seems like MF only lenses are a no-no.

Anyway, a friend of mine is going to bring back a dirt cheap DA-L from NYC for me as I'm not regarding Quickshift as a vital feature, and especially as this lens will allow me to complete almost the whole focal range, as I aldready own a 16-45 and a 18-55.
01-04-2012, 08:45 PM   #26
New Member
Gobbo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: SA, Australia
Posts: 5
Is it correct that the FA lenses have an effective 1.6x longer reach (due to being FF-lenses) than the equivalent DA lenses on the K-r/5's APS-C sensor... making the range ~160mm-460mm?

Or am I just confusing myself here?

Last edited by Gobbo; 01-04-2012 at 08:50 PM.
01-04-2012, 08:58 PM   #27
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
QuoteOriginally posted by Gobbo Quote
Is it correct that the FA lenses have an effective 1.6x longer reach (due to being FF-lenses) than the equivalent DA lenses on the K-r/5's APS-C sensor... making the range ~160mm-460mm?

Or am I just confusing myself here?
Not true, you are confusing yourself
01-05-2012, 01:12 AM   #28
Senior Member
Drom's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 210
I love my FA100-300mm 4.7-5.8. It's easy to find in great condition and a really good value for the price.
01-05-2012, 01:32 AM   #29
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by Gobbo Quote
Is it correct that the FA lenses have an effective 1.6x longer reach (due to being FF-lenses) than the equivalent DA lenses on the K-r/5's APS-C sensor... making the range ~160mm-460mm?

Or am I just confusing myself here?
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
Not true, you are confusing yourself
Yet another victim of crap.factor confusion, alas! A lens does not stretch nor shorten because it's been moved to a different camera. A focal length is a focal length is a focal length. Different-size camera frames (film or digital) crop different amounts of the lens' projected image, is all. The CAMERA crops; the lens just sits there, whimpering.

Also, the Pentax crap.factor is closer to 1.5x than 1.6x.

When I put my FA100-300 on my ZX-M camera (135/FF) I see an AOV (angle of view) range from 24-8 degrees. When I put that lens on my K20D (APS-C), what I see is AS IF a 150-450mm lens were in the 135/FF camera, with an AOV range of 16-6 degrees. But all that's happened is that the smaller frame has chopped-off half the projected image.

If you're an old hand at 135/FF photography and you're just transitioning to APS-C, then the crap-factor is useful for comparing AOVs. Otherwise, forget you ever heard of it. It's just needless confusion. I'd like to find the marketing wonks who invented the crap.factor and equivalence terminology, and douse them with burning oil.
01-05-2012, 04:01 AM   #30
Senior Member
Drom's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 210
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
Yet another victim of crap.factor confusion, alas! A lens does not stretch nor shorten because it's been moved to a different camera. A focal length is a focal length is a focal length. Different-size camera frames (film or digital) crop different amounts of the lens' projected image, is all. The CAMERA crops; the lens just sits there, whimpering.

Thank you so much for explaining that. I always wondered why my lens was whimpering-I thought it was me.

Actually, I'm pretty sure it is me, but seriously, thank you for explaining that. I have to admit, I misunderstood the crap factor as well.

Last edited by Drom; 01-05-2012 at 04:08 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens, telezoom
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax FA 100-300mm f/4.7-5.8 or DA 55-300mm? ncrecordkeeper Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 08-25-2011 11:46 PM
sigma 100-300mm f4 or pentax 300mm f4? powdablu21 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 09-08-2010 05:14 AM
Sigma 100-300mm f/4 versus Pentax DA* 300mm f/4 Tbear Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 03-26-2008 07:24 PM
For Sale - Sold: FS: Sigma 100-300mm f/4.5-6.7 EX+ CHEAP inneyeseakay Sold Items 2 10-10-2007 09:39 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:23 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top