Da 55-300 wr?

Biro · 11-23-2013, 10:32 AM

I see only one review of the DA 55-300 WR in the lens database so far. Has anyone else tried this lens with the new HD coating? I have the old DA 55-300 with the smc coating. But I'm thinking about selling my DA* 16-50 and 50-135 because they're big and heavy, and I just don't use them much anymore. On the other hand, I like WR in my zooms, which is why I bought the 18-135. I'm thinking about paring it with the new 55-300 WR. I have plenty of DA Limited primes and the D FA 100 WR macro for targeted, fancy work.

GaryH · 11-23-2013, 11:47 AM

I have it and find it to be much of the same lens as the older model. About the same in terms of noise and IQ . If WR is of value to you then it is a good deal. It weighed about 1/2 oz more

tibbitts · 11-23-2013, 04:07 PM

I only have the older DA version, but am considering trying the new WR version. On the one hand WR would be nice; on the other hand, I've used my non-WR lenses in relatively heavy rain - probably as hard rain as I'd be likely to photograph in - and never had an issue with water. I've gotten water under the top lcd of my K100 (it dried, seemingly harmlessly), but the lenses on the camera at the time never had any issues. I also find it easier to use a plastic bag to protect a lens vs. a lens+body - the shape is much easier to cover.

The main issue with the multiple copies of the DAs that I've tried has been centering throughout the zoom range, especially at the extremes of the range. If the HD doesn't have better quality control, you may have to experiment with a lot of copies to find one that's at least close to correct. You can get the center 2/3rds or so of the frames so they're ok; it's the extreme outside edges/corners that are the issue, more so than with any other lens models I've tested. At least by my standards, these lenses can be very sharp in parts of the frame; Pentax just can't seem to get all the corners and edges to cooperate.

**Eagle94VT** · 12-07-2013, 09:05 AM

I hope to use the lens a bunch in the next few weeks and I'll post some photos. I use the 16-50 and 50-135 but wanted something lighter and with a longer zoom to take backcountry & mountain biking. I just got the lens late at night and took a few shots. This foto isn't informative on its sharpness, but I was curious as to how it blurs the background. I never had the original 55-300 but the lens is light and feels solid.

11-23-2013, 10:32 AM	#1
Biro Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 1,200	Da 55-300 wr? I see only one review of the DA 55-300 WR in the lens database so far. Has anyone else tried this lens with the new HD coating? I have the old DA 55-300 with the smc coating. But I'm thinking about selling my DA* 16-50 and 50-135 because they're big and heavy, and I just don't use them much anymore. On the other hand, I like WR in my zooms, which is why I bought the 18-135. I'm thinking about paring it with the new 55-300 WR. I have plenty of DA Limited primes and the D FA 100 WR macro for targeted, fancy work.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: WR set DA 18-55 WR and DA 50-200 WR	missile	Sold Items	6	11-23-2013 05:21 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA 18-55 WR, DAL 55-300, and DA 18-135 WR lenses	Elliot	Sold Items	4	11-07-2013 02:46 AM
For Sale - Sold: K-30, DA 18-135 WR, DA 55-300 (giving up on DSLR )	wullemaha	Sold Items	15	09-04-2013 11:46 PM
For Sale - Sold: K-5, DA12-24, DA 18-55II, DA 55-300, FA 77, DFA 100 WR, More	GhoSStrider	Sold Items	24	12-03-2012 01:57 PM
outdoor soccer: DA 55-300 or 50-200mm WR?	borysr	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	12-09-2011 05:11 PM

11-23-2013, 11:47 AM	#2
GaryH Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Philadelphia, Pa Photos: Gallery Posts: 764	I have it and find it to be much of the same lens as the older model. About the same in terms of noise and IQ . If WR is of value to you then it is a good deal. It weighed about 1/2 oz more

11-23-2013, 04:07 PM	#3
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,193	I only have the older DA version, but am considering trying the new WR version. On the one hand WR would be nice; on the other hand, I've used my non-WR lenses in relatively heavy rain - probably as hard rain as I'd be likely to photograph in - and never had an issue with water. I've gotten water under the top lcd of my K100 (it dried, seemingly harmlessly), but the lenses on the camera at the time never had any issues. I also find it easier to use a plastic bag to protect a lens vs. a lens+body - the shape is much easier to cover. The main issue with the multiple copies of the DAs that I've tried has been centering throughout the zoom range, especially at the extremes of the range. If the HD doesn't have better quality control, you may have to experiment with a lot of copies to find one that's at least close to correct. You can get the center 2/3rds or so of the frames so they're ok; it's the extreme outside edges/corners that are the issue, more so than with any other lens models I've tested. At least by my standards, these lenses can be very sharp in parts of the frame; Pentax just can't seem to get all the corners and edges to cooperate.

12-07-2013, 09:05 AM	#4
Eagle94VT Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 291	I hope to use the lens a bunch in the next few weeks and I'll post some photos. I use the 16-50 and 50-135 but wanted something lighter and with a longer zoom to take backcountry & mountain biking. I just got the lens late at night and took a few shots. This foto isn't informative on its sharpness, but I was curious as to how it blurs the background. I never had the original 55-300 but the lens is light and feels solid.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search