Pentax 55-300 lens

**csa** · 09-19-2015, 09:37 AM - **1 Like**

I'm gaining a new respect for my 55-300. These are handheld, and cropped.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

View Picture EXIF

Fauxton · 09-19-2015, 12:22 PM

I enjoyed looking. I have the 55-300 WR - for the money its a good choice and great value.

**csa** · 09-19-2015, 12:32 PM

Thanks, I wish mine was the WR!

**UncleVanya** · 09-19-2015, 12:55 PM - **1 Like**

While I have the 60-250 I also have the DA 55-300. I had listed it to sell but recently prices have dropped to the point where I decided to keep it. I'm glad I did at this point!

**csa** · 09-19-2015, 01:36 PM

Yep; I'm keeping mine!

I've heard that the results are not very satisfactory with this lens, using a 1.4x or 1.7 TC; is this correct?

jimr-pdx · 09-19-2015, 01:42 PM

I have tried several other xx-300 zooms and keep coming back. Starting at 55mm is valuable, but images hold up very well with this lens at all focal lengths.

I'd think any TC would make the slow AF shut down completely, but I have not tried it.

**csa** · 09-19-2015, 02:00 PM

Indeed the wide range, 55-300 is so useful for just about any subject you might come across. I'm definitely really getting a new respect for this lens!

Yeah, I was wondering about that with a TC.

gmiyamoto · 09-19-2015, 02:06 PM

I find that the Vivitar Series I 1.4 teleconverter works well with this lens. Auto focus still works well in daylight but images lose a bit of sharpness.

**csa** · 09-19-2015, 02:10 PM

Thanks, that's helpful. Yes, I would expect some loss of sharpness, but I would guess what you gain with the 1.4, would offset the loss of sharpness.

delboy65 · 09-20-2015, 01:32 AM

Bought the WR soon after buying my K-50 kit back in the Spring and love it in daytime, but felt it lacking for astrophotography.

Recently a SMC D* 300mm f4 and a Pentax HD x1.4 converter came up for auction on eBay from the same seller and i was lucky enough to win them both for £650 (approx $1,000). Did contemplate listing my 55-300 Wr on ebay but felt that for the amount i'd get i'd be better off keeping it

fwcetus · 09-20-2015, 07:04 AM - **1 Like**

Below are two pairs of images. Each pair consists of a reduced version of the original image and a cropped image from the original. One pair was taken with an F* 300/4.5 and the other pair with a DA 55-300/4-5.8. Both crops show the not-easily-seen sensory hairs or "whiskers" on the "stovebolts" on the snouts of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeanglieae). Without using EXIF info, can you tell which lens was used for which?

[DISCLAIMER: This is not really a "fair" comparison, because there are ~multiple~ variables involved here, and not just a simple lens difference, but the intent is to show that the 55-300 ~can~ "bring home the bacon" under sometimes less than photographically ideal conditions.]

robtcorl · 09-20-2015, 07:09 AM - **2 Likes**

Had mine for a few years now, shot many a bird with it, and I'm always pleased with the sharpness and bokeh.

fwcetus · 09-20-2015, 07:26 AM

Originally posted by fwcetus

Below are two pairs of images. Each pair consists of a reduced version of the original image and a cropped image from the original. One pair was taken with an F* 300/4.5 and the other pair with a DA 55-300/4-5.8. Both crops show the sensory hairs or "whiskers" on the "stovebolts" on the snouts of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeanglieae). Without using EXIF info, can you tell which lens was used for which?[DISCLAIMER: This is not really a "fair" comparison, because there are ~multiple~ variables involved here, and not just a lens difference, but the intent is to show that the 55-300 ~can~ "bring home the bacon" under sometimes less than photographically ideal conditions.]

And the answer is ... (May I have the envelope, please) ... The DA 55-300/4-5.8 was used for the first pair, while the F* 300/4.5 was used for the second.

But the most important part of the original question was that I could actually ask the question at all (i.e., it was that the consumer 55-300 zoom was able to do the job at all, as compared to the "starred" 300 prime).

"Well, that's my story and I'm stickin' to it."

**csa** · 09-20-2015, 07:40 AM - **1 Like**

Delboy, I'd agree to keep it; they are not selling that well, I think because many do not realize the capabilities of this "sleeper" lens!

Fwcetis; you've certainly proven this little lens can hold it's own.

Bob, beautiful shot!

I really love the capabilities of this lens. This was handheld, and cropped.

Driline · 09-20-2015, 08:14 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by fwcetus

but the intent is to show that the 55-300 ~can~ "bring home the bacon" under sometimes less than photographically ideal conditions.]

You could use that same argument comparing the DA 55-300 to the El-Cheapo $60 dollar Pentax FA 100-300 F4.7 to 5.8 lens. So why spend all that money on a DA 55-300 when you can get almost the same great shots with a $60 lens?

All I know is my F*300 rivals my FA 31. It's just a superb lens all the way around.

09-19-2015, 12:22 PM	#2
Fauxton Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 100	Nice Pictures - Good Lens I enjoyed looking. I have the 55-300 WR - for the money its a good choice and great value.

09-20-2015, 07:04 AM - 1 Like	#11
fwcetus Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New England Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,286	Whale Whiskers Below are two pairs of images. Each pair consists of a reduced version of the original image and a cropped image from the original. One pair was taken with an F* 300/4.5 and the other pair with a DA 55-300/4-5.8. Both crops show the not-easily-seen sensory hairs or "whiskers" on the "stovebolts" on the snouts of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeanglieae). Without using EXIF info, can you tell which lens was used for which? [DISCLAIMER: This is not really a "fair" comparison, because there are ~multiple~ variables involved here, and not just a simple lens difference, but the intent is to show that the 55-300 ~can~ "bring home the bacon" under sometimes less than photographically ideal conditions.]

09-20-2015, 07:26 AM	#13
fwcetus Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New England Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,286	Originally posted by fwcetus Below are two pairs of images. Each pair consists of a reduced version of the original image and a cropped image from the original. One pair was taken with an F* 300/4.5 and the other pair with a DA 55-300/4-5.8. Both crops show the sensory hairs or "whiskers" on the "stovebolts" on the snouts of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeanglieae). Without using EXIF info, can you tell which lens was used for which?[DISCLAIMER: This is not really a "fair" comparison, because there are ~multiple~ variables involved here, and not just a lens difference, but the intent is to show that the 55-300 ~can~ "bring home the bacon" under sometimes less than photographically ideal conditions.] And the answer is ... (May I have the envelope, please) ... The DA 55-300/4-5.8 was used for the first pair, while the F* 300/4.5 was used for the second. But the most important part of the original question was that I could actually ask the question at all (i.e., it was that the consumer 55-300 zoom was able to do the job at all, as compared to the "starred" 300 prime). "Well, that's my story and I'm stickin' to it." Last edited by fwcetus; 09-20-2015 at 07:55 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Tamron 18-250	dave2k	Sold Items	18	10-30-2015 05:25 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax SMC P DA 55-300 mm f/4.0-5.8 Lens (price reduced)	Keif	Sold Items	3	06-27-2015 02:19 PM
Neoprene lens cover for Pentax 55-300?	csa	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	6	10-11-2014 04:23 PM

09-19-2015, 12:32 PM	#3
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133 Original Poster	Thanks, I wish mine was the WR!

09-19-2015, 12:55 PM - 1 Like	#4
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,404	While I have the 60-250 I also have the DA 55-300. I had listed it to sell but recently prices have dropped to the point where I decided to keep it. I'm glad I did at this point!

09-19-2015, 01:36 PM	#5
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133 Original Poster	Yep; I'm keeping mine! I've heard that the results are not very satisfactory with this lens, using a 1.4x or 1.7 TC; is this correct?

09-19-2015, 01:42 PM	#6
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	I have tried several other xx-300 zooms and keep coming back. Starting at 55mm is valuable, but images hold up very well with this lens at all focal lengths. I'd think any TC would make the slow AF shut down completely, but I have not tried it.

09-19-2015, 02:00 PM	#7
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133 Original Poster	Indeed the wide range, 55-300 is so useful for just about any subject you might come across. I'm definitely really getting a new respect for this lens! Yeah, I was wondering about that with a TC.

09-19-2015, 02:06 PM	#8
gmiyamoto Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Maui, Hawaii Posts: 46	I find that the Vivitar Series I 1.4 teleconverter works well with this lens. Auto focus still works well in daylight but images lose a bit of sharpness.

09-19-2015, 02:10 PM	#9
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133 Original Poster	Thanks, that's helpful. Yes, I would expect some loss of sharpness, but I would guess what you gain with the 1.4, would offset the loss of sharpness.

09-20-2015, 01:32 AM	#10
delboy65 Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: High Wycombe, UK Posts: 47	Bought the WR soon after buying my K-50 kit back in the Spring and love it in daytime, but felt it lacking for astrophotography. Recently a SMC D* 300mm f4 and a Pentax HD x1.4 converter came up for auction on eBay from the same seller and i was lucky enough to win them both for £650 (approx $1,000). Did contemplate listing my 55-300 Wr on ebay but felt that for the amount i'd get i'd be better off keeping it

09-20-2015, 07:09 AM - 2 Likes	#12
robtcorl Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: St Louis, MO Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,606	Had mine for a few years now, shot many a bird with it, and I'm always pleased with the sharpness and bokeh.

09-20-2015, 08:14 AM - 1 Like	#15
Driline Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,697	Originally posted by fwcetus but the intent is to show that the 55-300 ~can~ "bring home the bacon" under sometimes less than photographically ideal conditions.] You could use that same argument comparing the DA 55-300 to the El-Cheapo $60 dollar Pentax FA 100-300 F4.7 to 5.8 lens. So why spend all that money on a DA 55-300 when you can get almost the same great shots with a $60 lens? All I know is my F*300 rivals my FA 31. It's just a superb lens all the way around.