An informal comparison, three x-300mm zooms

Wolfeye · 01-13-2015, 08:31 AM

I now have three Pentax mount x-300mm lenses, thanks to an unexpected Christmas gift. So, a couple days ago, I decided to do a quick, informal test. A few miles away from me is a water tower and as the light was fine, I decided to shoot the tower with all three lenses. I also made a similar shot with a Canon 7D and the original 100-400mm L lens for comparison. It seems to me that the Canon is the best image maker (although I am unsure of this!), as befits its $1000+ price tag, but the smallness of difference between it and the "runner-up" the Pentax 55-300mm are less than you might think. For those of you (me included) who got the 55-300 for the excellent price the Pentax web store sold it for (around $270) last Christmas, you got, quite simply, the steal of the year.

I present them, in order of worst to best image quality. All were shot with a K-3 ISO 100 and f8, handheld, IS turned on. The Pentax shots are a bit under exposed, traditional for the K-3

Tamron AF 70-300mm

Tamron AF 28-300mm

HD PENTAX-DA 55-300mm

Canon 100-400mm L

Rimfiredude · 01-13-2015, 08:50 AM

I took the Canon and Pentax image into PhotoShop. Did an auto levels on both. Canon on the left and Pentax on the right. Although they are entirely different colors, which is actually sharper? To my eye, the Canon shot is over exposed with blown out highlights and the Pentax may be a little sharper.

Wolfeye · 01-13-2015, 08:55 AM

Originally posted by Rimfiredude

I took the Canon and Pentax image into PhotoShop. Did an auto levels on both. Canon on the left and Pentax on the right. Although they are entirely different colors, which is actually sharper? To my eye, the Canon shot is over exposed with blown out highlights and the Pentax may be a little sharper.

I don't disagree, but doing such an informal test, I gave the slight nod to the much more expensive Canon. It has to be better right?

RMabo · 01-13-2015, 08:56 AM

Pentax is the sharper one, look at the trees in the back they are more blurred on the Canon image.

johnmflores · 01-13-2015, 09:12 AM

I just got the 55-300 HD WR and have been pleasantly surprised, particularly at 300mm.

nomadkng · 01-13-2015, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by RMabo

Pentax is the sharper one, look at the trees in the back they are more blurred on the Canon image.

Handheld with enough environmental distortion to be noticeable, although a quick informal test, is not going to be the definitive end all be all.

There's still many variables unaccounted for in this sample, including cross system testing and lens to body calibration.

Yes, I'll agree the 55-300 is a lens that produces a great bang for it's buck, but there is a difference that is noticeable in every shot, under every condition for those of us that require critical IQ.
For many of us that have owned the 55-300 and now own (have moved on to) higher end glass, we found the 55-300 shortcomings in IQ and speed to be too much. Whether its compared to the DA* 60-250/300 or a Sigma 100-300 f4, the DA 55-300 is good but definitely NOT AS GOOD.

I'm not ready to proclaim it the David that slew the Goliath of L glass or any other high end tele lenses.

I don't begrudge anyone who owns a 55-300. Enjoy the lens, it's a good lens. If you are happy with it, great. If it satisfies your needs, great. But this is like thread #1062 of "this lens is ALMOST as good as this lens" so why are you fools spending all the extra money. The simple answer is because the extra IQ is worth the extra money to us. The bottom line is the DA 55-300 is empirically inferior, whether its an everyday use or a star chart, whether you use MTF data or just the eye test. Like the bumper sticker says, "My Shiba Inu is smarter than your Honor Student!"

**sergysergy** · 01-13-2015, 11:02 AM

Originally posted by nomadkng

For many of us that have owned the 55-300 and now own (have moved on to) higher end glass, we found the 55-300 shortcomings in IQ and speed to be too much. Whether its compared to the DA* 60-250/300 or a Sigma 100-300 f4, the DA 55-300 is good but definitely NOT AS GOOD.

Agree 100%. Funny thing is that I have sold the 60-250 and I have the 100-300 for sale but I am keeping the DAL 55-300

(smaller for traveling)

johnmflores · 01-13-2015, 11:47 AM

Originally posted by nomadkng

I don't begrudge anyone who owns a 55-300.

Actually, it appears that you do, since you're sole contribution to this thread is "my lens is better than yours." Thanks for putting us in our place.

emalvick · 01-13-2015, 12:15 PM

As usual, quality is in the eye of the beholder. For the OP's images, I think the Pentax image is sharper across the board, but there is so much more than sharpness. The exposure seems better on the Canon image, but then there is an influence of the body.

Then the aperture of the shot, the sensor, etc... There is just too many variables. For the images shown, we get one result. Have someone else take their own shots, and they get something else. Comparisons are fun, but I find it more useful to make the comparisons more general on broader terms. Let me review the quality of the lens as used by multiple people under multiple conditions (or more importantly, the conditions I want a lens for) and then compare it to whatever other lenses I'm comparing. Sometimes, I can't tell anything, but it does make me more comfortable with whatever lenses I own.

johnmflores · 01-13-2015, 02:11 PM

Originally posted by emalvick

As usual, quality is in the eye of the beholder. For the OP's images, I think the Pentax image is sharper across the board, but there is so much more than sharpness. The exposure seems better on the Canon image, but then there is an influence of the body.

Then the aperture of the shot, the sensor, etc... There is just too many variables. For the images shown, we get one result. Have someone else take their own shots, and they get something else. Comparisons are fun, but I find it more useful to make the comparisons more general on broader terms. Let me review the quality of the lens as used by multiple people under multiple conditions (or more importantly, the conditions I want a lens for) and then compare it to whatever other lenses I'm comparing. Sometimes, I can't tell anything, but it does make me more comfortable with whatever lenses I own.

I think the Lens Reviews section is one of the most valuable sections of this forum for this very reason.

**Madaboutpix** · 01-13-2015, 02:49 PM - **1 Like**

Boy, it's really easy to get some of you started over nothing. The OP offered a quick-and-dirty, in no way thorough IQ comparison of several lenses. It was supposed to be fun, which it is when taken with a pinch of salt, and came without the least pretension of being the last word on those lenses.

I happen to own an smc DA 55-300mm lens, for which I paid hardly more than 300 euros back in 2011. Considering the price - hey, it's a consumer lens, remember? - it's been perfectly doing its job for me for the last three years. Its images are pretty contrasty, maybe not insanely sharp, but sharp enough for many uses, as long as you're not too picky about the corners. It has a long end that is fairly usable. It performs reasonably well even on the 24MP K-3, which squeezes the last bit out of that lens. Most importantly, it has given me a host of cherished images. Some of which have printed nicely in A3-format calendars (29.7 x 42.0cm) I had done of them.

Would I upgrade if I could spend a 1,000+ on a single lens? Probably yes, although I would be missing the 300mm on the DA* 60-250mm, and therefore likely go for the somewhat less costly and less heavy-weight DA* 300mm. Which are both pro-grade lenses. Of course they are better than a consumer lens, as can be gleaned from various reviews and comparisons on this site and elsewhere. Would be kind of disappointing if they weren't, actually. Has anybody in this thread argued against it? How about enjoying all those lenses for what they are? Every tool has it's purpose ...

**boriscleto** · 01-13-2015, 03:02 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

I think the Lens Reviews section is one of the most valuable sections of this forum for this very reason.

And the Sample Archive...

Rimfiredude · 01-13-2015, 04:41 PM - **1 Like**

Gee guys I didn't intend to stir up a hornet's nest or offend anyone with their $1,000 lens. I just thought it was interesting.

johnmflores · 01-13-2015, 10:05 PM - **1 Like**

Anyways...my cat approves of my new DA 55-300 HD WR

And it'll do double duty on my Q7

I'm looking forward to using it this summer on motorcycle assignments.

**UncleVanya** · 01-13-2015, 10:06 PM

It is and I appreciated it for what it is. I have the DA 55-300, but I only recently acquired it. My short range shots with it have looked fantastic at 300mm, but the longer range shots have been a touch soft but these were handheld with moving subjects so I don't have a lot of data yet. My retired father is buying a 60-250 and the hd tc so I will get to see both in action.

I suspect the 60-250 Will eat the 55-300 for lunch. But I will likely still love my 55-300 for weight, and cost.

01-13-2015, 08:50 AM	#2
Rimfiredude Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Washington Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,176	I took the Canon and Pentax image into PhotoShop. Did an auto levels on both. Canon on the left and Pentax on the right. Although they are entirely different colors, which is actually sharper? To my eye, the Canon shot is over exposed with blown out highlights and the Pentax may be a little sharper. Attached Images

01-13-2015, 10:52 AM	#6
nomadkng Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 1,448	Originally posted by RMabo Pentax is the sharper one, look at the trees in the back they are more blurred on the Canon image. Handheld with enough environmental distortion to be noticeable, although a quick informal test, is not going to be the definitive end all be all. There's still many variables unaccounted for in this sample, including cross system testing and lens to body calibration. Yes, I'll agree the 55-300 is a lens that produces a great bang for it's buck, but there is a difference that is noticeable in every shot, under every condition for those of us that require critical IQ. For many of us that have owned the 55-300 and now own (have moved on to) higher end glass, we found the 55-300 shortcomings in IQ and speed to be too much. Whether its compared to the DA* 60-250/300 or a Sigma 100-300 f4, the DA 55-300 is good but definitely NOT AS GOOD. I'm not ready to proclaim it the David that slew the Goliath of L glass or any other high end tele lenses. I don't begrudge anyone who owns a 55-300. Enjoy the lens, it's a good lens. If you are happy with it, great. If it satisfies your needs, great. But this is like thread #1062 of "this lens is ALMOST as good as this lens" so why are you fools spending all the extra money. The simple answer is because the extra IQ is worth the extra money to us. The bottom line is the DA 55-300 is empirically inferior, whether its an everyday use or a star chart, whether you use MTF data or just the eye test. Like the bumper sticker says, "My Shiba Inu is smarter than your Honor Student!" Last edited by nomadkng; 01-13-2015 at 11:01 AM.

01-13-2015, 02:49 PM - 1 Like	#11
Madaboutpix Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Rhine-Westphalia Posts: 1,440	Boy, it's really easy to get some of you started over nothing. The OP offered a quick-and-dirty, in no way thorough IQ comparison of several lenses. It was supposed to be fun, which it is when taken with a pinch of salt, and came without the least pretension of being the last word on those lenses. I happen to own an smc DA 55-300mm lens, for which I paid hardly more than 300 euros back in 2011. Considering the price - hey, it's a consumer lens, remember? - it's been perfectly doing its job for me for the last three years. Its images are pretty contrasty, maybe not insanely sharp, but sharp enough for many uses, as long as you're not too picky about the corners. It has a long end that is fairly usable. It performs reasonably well even on the 24MP K-3, which squeezes the last bit out of that lens. Most importantly, it has given me a host of cherished images. Some of which have printed nicely in A3-format calendars (29.7 x 42.0cm) I had done of them. Would I upgrade if I could spend a 1,000+ on a single lens? Probably yes, although I would be missing the 300mm on the DA* 60-250mm, and therefore likely go for the somewhat less costly and less heavy-weight DA* 300mm. Which are both pro-grade lenses. Of course they are better than a consumer lens, as can be gleaned from various reviews and comparisons on this site and elsewhere. Would be kind of disappointing if they weren't, actually. Has anybody in this thread argued against it? How about enjoying all those lenses for what they are? Every tool has it's purpose ... Last edited by Madaboutpix; 01-13-2015 at 03:29 PM. Reason: rephrased, corrected typo

01-13-2015, 10:05 PM - 1 Like	#14
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Anyways...my cat approves of my new DA 55-300 HD WR And it'll do double duty on my Q7 I'm looking forward to using it this summer on motorcycle assignments. Last edited by johnmflores; 01-13-2015 at 10:09 PM. Reason: Added photo

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Black & White Focus - An Informal Portrait	Sailor	Post Your Photos!	14	10-11-2012 12:26 PM
Where are the Pentax users: An Informal Survey	dmfw	Pentax DSLR Discussion	5	04-02-2011 07:05 PM
Quick comparison: Pentax consumer tele zooms	creampuff	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	07-28-2010 04:26 PM
Asked to shoot an informal wedding	palmor	Photographic Technique	34	08-20-2009 02:43 PM
For Sale - Sold: Three Budget Zooms: Sigma 18-50mm, Sigma 70-210mm, Quantaray 100-300mm	mikeSF	Sold Items	3	02-21-2009 08:34 AM

01-13-2015, 08:31 AM	#1
Wolfeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 782	An informal comparison, three x-300mm zooms I now have three Pentax mount x-300mm lenses, thanks to an unexpected Christmas gift. So, a couple days ago, I decided to do a quick, informal test. A few miles away from me is a water tower and as the light was fine, I decided to shoot the tower with all three lenses. I also made a similar shot with a Canon 7D and the original 100-400mm L lens for comparison. It seems to me that the Canon is the best image maker (although I am unsure of this!), as befits its $1000+ price tag, but the smallness of difference between it and the "runner-up" the Pentax 55-300mm are less than you might think. For those of you (me included) who got the 55-300 for the excellent price the Pentax web store sold it for (around $270) last Christmas, you got, quite simply, the steal of the year. I present them, in order of worst to best image quality. All were shot with a K-3 ISO 100 and f8, handheld, IS turned on. The Pentax shots are a bit under exposed, traditional for the K-3 Tamron AF 70-300mm Tamron AF 28-300mm HD PENTAX-DA 55-300mm Canon 100-400mm L

01-13-2015, 08:55 AM	#3
Wolfeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 782 Original Poster	Originally posted by Rimfiredude I took the Canon and Pentax image into PhotoShop. Did an auto levels on both. Canon on the left and Pentax on the right. Although they are entirely different colors, which is actually sharper? To my eye, the Canon shot is over exposed with blown out highlights and the Pentax may be a little sharper. I don't disagree, but doing such an informal test, I gave the slight nod to the much more expensive Canon. It has to be better right?

01-13-2015, 08:56 AM	#4
RMabo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 845	Pentax is the sharper one, look at the trees in the back they are more blurred on the Canon image.

01-13-2015, 09:12 AM	#5
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	I just got the 55-300 HD WR and have been pleasantly surprised, particularly at 300mm.

01-13-2015, 11:02 AM	#7
sergysergy Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,170	Originally posted by nomadkng For many of us that have owned the 55-300 and now own (have moved on to) higher end glass, we found the 55-300 shortcomings in IQ and speed to be too much. Whether its compared to the DA* 60-250/300 or a Sigma 100-300 f4, the DA 55-300 is good but definitely NOT AS GOOD. Agree 100%. Funny thing is that I have sold the 60-250 and I have the 100-300 for sale but I am keeping the DAL 55-300 (smaller for traveling)

01-13-2015, 11:47 AM	#8
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by nomadkng I don't begrudge anyone who owns a 55-300. Actually, it appears that you do, since you're sole contribution to this thread is "my lens is better than yours." Thanks for putting us in our place.

01-13-2015, 12:15 PM	#9
emalvick Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Davis, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,642	As usual, quality is in the eye of the beholder. For the OP's images, I think the Pentax image is sharper across the board, but there is so much more than sharpness. The exposure seems better on the Canon image, but then there is an influence of the body. Then the aperture of the shot, the sensor, etc... There is just too many variables. For the images shown, we get one result. Have someone else take their own shots, and they get something else. Comparisons are fun, but I find it more useful to make the comparisons more general on broader terms. Let me review the quality of the lens as used by multiple people under multiple conditions (or more importantly, the conditions I want a lens for) and then compare it to whatever other lenses I'm comparing. Sometimes, I can't tell anything, but it does make me more comfortable with whatever lenses I own.

01-13-2015, 02:11 PM	#10
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by emalvick As usual, quality is in the eye of the beholder. For the OP's images, I think the Pentax image is sharper across the board, but there is so much more than sharpness. The exposure seems better on the Canon image, but then there is an influence of the body. Then the aperture of the shot, the sensor, etc... There is just too many variables. For the images shown, we get one result. Have someone else take their own shots, and they get something else. Comparisons are fun, but I find it more useful to make the comparisons more general on broader terms. Let me review the quality of the lens as used by multiple people under multiple conditions (or more importantly, the conditions I want a lens for) and then compare it to whatever other lenses I'm comparing. Sometimes, I can't tell anything, but it does make me more comfortable with whatever lenses I own. I think the Lens Reviews section is one of the most valuable sections of this forum for this very reason.

01-13-2015, 03:02 PM	#12
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by johnmflores I think the Lens Reviews section is one of the most valuable sections of this forum for this very reason. And the Sample Archive...

01-13-2015, 04:41 PM - 1 Like	#13
Rimfiredude Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Washington Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,176	Gee guys I didn't intend to stir up a hornet's nest or offend anyone with their $1,000 lens. I just thought it was interesting.

01-13-2015, 10:06 PM	#15
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	It is and I appreciated it for what it is. I have the DA 55-300, but I only recently acquired it. My short range shots with it have looked fantastic at 300mm, but the longer range shots have been a touch soft but these were handheld with moving subjects so I don't have a lot of data yet. My retired father is buying a 60-250 and the hd tc so I will get to see both in action. I suspect the 60-250 Will eat the 55-300 for lunch. But I will likely still love my 55-300 for weight, and cost.