FA* 300 f/4.5 - Worth it?

**UncleVanya** · 01-11-2015, 09:58 AM

I found an FA* 300 f/4.5 without the original hood, the paint is peeling in places with black showing through the silver finish, the glass appears clean and optically it is supposed to be good. The question is, should I buy it for close to $700 including shopping?

My thinking is that I could pair it with a screw in black metal hood with a fit on cap. Ugly but very functional.

My reservations: resale value, lack of a tripod mount (supposedly a Canon fits and is cheap), possible import duties.

Advice appreciated.

CLARIFICATION: THIS IS THE f/4.5 version.

Last edited by Tom S.; 01-11-2015 at 10:50 AM.

**sergysergy** · 01-11-2015, 10:04 AM

If it works properly I think it is a fair price.

**UncleVanya** · 01-11-2015, 10:07 AM

Anyone know the likelihood I will have to pay customs import duties? Lens will be from Japan and shipped to USA.

Fl_Gulfer · 01-11-2015, 10:19 AM

For a 3000.00 + lens it looks like a steal. Are you sure it's a FA* 300?

**sergysergy** · 01-11-2015, 10:25 AM

I guess it is the 4.5, not the 2.8?

SMC Pentax-FA* 300mm F4.5 ED [IF] Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

**UncleVanya** · 01-11-2015, 10:30 AM

f/4.5 not not f/2.8

vonBaloney · 01-11-2015, 11:10 AM

They aren't that hard to come by. KEH has a couple of them right now:

https://www.keh.com/241143/pentax-300mm-f-4-5-smc-fa-ed-if-k-mount-autofocus-lens-67

**UncleVanya** · 01-11-2015, 11:21 AM

Originally posted by vonBaloney

They aren't that hard to come by. KEH has a couple of them right now:

https://www.keh.com/241143/pentax-300mm-f-4-5-smc-fa-ed-if-k-mount-autofocus-lens-67

I never thought it was hard to find them, just curious about the cost vs. condition and the lack of a hood.

**Pepe Guitarra** · 01-11-2015, 11:25 AM - **1 Like**

It is a very good lens. Although, I prefer the F300/4.5, it is smaller, same good quality and a great hood and tripod foot that works as a handle. Also, you can remove the tripod foot and put in your bag just like any other lens. Yes, that small!!

zmohie · 01-11-2015, 04:01 PM

I agree with Pepe. F version ìs better to have.

**UncleVanya** · 01-11-2015, 04:05 PM

Optically is there any advantage to the F version? It seems the tripod foot is the only difference besides color but I could be mistaken.

waterfall · 01-11-2015, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

I found an FA* 300 f/4.5 without the original hood, the paint is peeling in places with black showing through the silver finish, the glass appears clean and optically it is supposed to be good. The question is, should I buy it for close to $700 including shopping?

My thinking is that I could pair it with a screw in black metal hood with a fit on cap. Ugly but very functional.

My reservations: resale value, lack of a tripod mount (supposedly a Canon fits and is cheap), possible import duties.

Advice appreciated.

CLARIFICATION: THIS IS THE f/4.5 version.

I think for a slight up charge you could find the DA*300.

**UncleVanya** · 01-11-2015, 04:21 PM

Used DA 300's are over 950 right now most of the places I have checked. To be honest that thought has crossed my mind.

waterfall · 01-11-2015, 04:40 PM - **1 Like**

DA*300 is F4.0. If the difference is significant from 4.5 for you. I do not own either lens, BTW, but have the DA300 on my LBA list.

---------- Post added 01-11-15 at 05:48 PM ----------

Originally posted by UncleVanya

Used DA 300's are over 950 right now most of the places I have checked. To be honest that thought has crossed my mind.

100 grams greater weight for the DA300, in case you plan on hiking. No tripod mount on the FA300. So add a tripod mount and the weight may be identical or close. I would defer to Members whose use of a 300mm lens matches your needs on this weight issue.

**UncleVanya** · 08-20-2015, 08:44 AM

Originally posted by waterfall

DA*300 is F4.0. If the difference is significant from 4.5 for you. I do not own either lens, BTW, but have the DA300 on my LBA list.

---------- Post added 01-11-15 at 05:48 PM ----------

100 grams greater weight for the DA300, in case you plan on hiking. No tripod mount on the FA300. So add a tripod mount and the weight may be identical or close. I would defer to Members whose use of a 300mm lens matches your needs on this weight issue.

I went to look at this again. The FA* weighs 935g, the DA* weighs 1170g - so the difference is 235g which is about a 25% increase in weight from the FA*. To put it another way the DA* 200 which lacks a tripod foot also weighs 825g - so for a mere 110g you can carry a 300mm f/4.5.

The original lens discussed in the thread is of course no longer available but the weight comparison is of interest to me since i recently picked up an FA* 300 that I may resell or keep.

01-11-2015, 09:58 AM	#1
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398	*FA 300 f/4.5 - Worth it?** I found an FA* 300 f/4.5 without the original hood, the paint is peeling in places with black showing through the silver finish, the glass appears clean and optically it is supposed to be good. The question is, should I buy it for close to $700 including shopping? My thinking is that I could pair it with a screw in black metal hood with a fit on cap. Ugly but very functional. My reservations: resale value, lack of a tripod mount (supposedly a Canon fits and is cheap), possible import duties. Advice appreciated. CLARIFICATION: THIS IS THE f/4.5 version. Last edited by Tom S.; 01-11-2015 at 10:50 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DA300, FA300 or F*300?	jatrax	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	08-11-2013 08:58 AM
Keh - FA* 300 2.8 & FA* 300 4.5	stormtech	Pentax Price Watch	12	11-01-2012 05:42 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax FA 100-300, FA 70-200, M 28mm; Sigma EX 28-70, Apo 70-300; Tamron Di LD 70-300	stillnk	Sold Items	17	04-08-2012 11:39 AM
FA* 300/4.5 worth buying?	Deimo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	12-22-2009 03:48 AM
Is the Pentax DA 55-300 mm lens worth the $300+?...No	choubacca	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	44	04-14-2009 09:01 AM

01-11-2015, 10:04 AM	#2
sergysergy Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,170	If it works properly I think it is a fair price.

01-11-2015, 10:07 AM	#3
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398 Original Poster	Anyone know the likelihood I will have to pay customs import duties? Lens will be from Japan and shipped to USA.

01-11-2015, 10:19 AM	#4
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054	For a 3000.00 + lens it looks like a steal. Are you sure it's a FA* 300?

01-11-2015, 10:25 AM	#5
sergysergy Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,170	I guess it is the 4.5, not the 2.8? SMC Pentax-FA* 300mm F4.5 ED [IF] Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

01-11-2015, 10:30 AM	#6
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398 Original Poster	f/4.5 not not f/2.8

01-11-2015, 11:10 AM	#7
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	They aren't that hard to come by. KEH has a couple of them right now: https://www.keh.com/241143/pentax-300mm-f-4-5-smc-fa-ed-if-k-mount-autofocus-lens-67

01-11-2015, 11:21 AM	#8
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398 Original Poster	Originally posted by vonBaloney They aren't that hard to come by. KEH has a couple of them right now: https://www.keh.com/241143/pentax-300mm-f-4-5-smc-fa-ed-if-k-mount-autofocus-lens-67 I never thought it was hard to find them, just curious about the cost vs. condition and the lack of a hood.

01-11-2015, 11:25 AM - 1 Like	#9
Pepe Guitarra Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,223	It is a very good lens. Although, I prefer the F300/4.5, it is smaller, same good quality and a great hood and tripod foot that works as a handle. Also, you can remove the tripod foot and put in your bag just like any other lens. Yes, that small!!

01-11-2015, 04:01 PM	#10
zmohie Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: egypt Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 435	I agree with Pepe. F version ìs better to have.

01-11-2015, 04:05 PM	#11
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398 Original Poster	Optically is there any advantage to the F version? It seems the tripod foot is the only difference besides color but I could be mistaken.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-11-2015, 04:08 PM	#12
waterfall Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Northern Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by UncleVanya I found an FA* 300 f/4.5 without the original hood, the paint is peeling in places with black showing through the silver finish, the glass appears clean and optically it is supposed to be good. The question is, should I buy it for close to $700 including shopping? My thinking is that I could pair it with a screw in black metal hood with a fit on cap. Ugly but very functional. My reservations: resale value, lack of a tripod mount (supposedly a Canon fits and is cheap), possible import duties. Advice appreciated. CLARIFICATION: THIS IS THE f/4.5 version. I think for a slight up charge you could find the DA*300.

01-11-2015, 04:21 PM	#13
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398 Original Poster	Used DA 300's are over 950 right now most of the places I have checked. To be honest that thought has crossed my mind.

01-11-2015, 04:40 PM - 1 Like	#14
waterfall Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Northern Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,812	DA*300 is F4.0. If the difference is significant from 4.5 for you. I do not own either lens, BTW, but have the DA300 on my LBA list. ---------- Post added 01-11-15 at 05:48 PM ---------- Originally posted by UncleVanya Used DA 300's are over 950 right now most of the places I have checked. To be honest that thought has crossed my mind. 100 grams greater weight for the DA300, in case you plan on hiking. No tripod mount on the FA300. So add a tripod mount and the weight may be identical or close. I would defer to Members whose use of a 300mm lens matches your needs on this weight issue.

08-20-2015, 08:44 AM	#15
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398 Original Poster	Originally posted by waterfall DA300 is F4.0. If the difference is significant from 4.5 for you. I do not own either lens, BTW, but have the DA300 on my LBA list. ---------- Post added 01-11-15 at 05:48 PM ---------- 100 grams greater weight for the DA300, in case you plan on hiking. No tripod mount on the FA300. So add a tripod mount and the weight may be identical or close. I would defer to Members whose use of a 300mm lens matches your needs on this weight issue. I went to look at this again. The FA weighs 935g, the DA* weighs 1170g - so the difference is 235g which is about a 25% increase in weight from the FA. To put it another way the DA 200 which lacks a tripod foot also weighs 825g - so for a mere 110g you can carry a 300mm f/4.5. The original lens discussed in the thread is of course no longer available but the weight comparison is of interest to me since i recently picked up an FA* 300 that I may resell or keep.