Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-01-2008, 06:13 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
ah that's a lot better, as expected the prime (especially a macro) is better. it was kind of scary seeing the first comparison because i was considering grabbing this lens when the occasion arose until i saw your comparison. thanks for putting this up Heather

07-01-2008, 07:12 PM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
I'm just not seeing shots fromt he 55-300 that inspire me at all, the 50-200 still seems the bette rlens ... well up to 200mm
07-01-2008, 08:34 PM   #18
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,156
QuoteOriginally posted by séamuis Quote
agreed, but the results shouldn't be that different, something is going on with either the setup or the 55-300 itself. I can get better results with the kit 50-200 particularly concerning the fabric rose.
The results are what they are. Presuming that whatever the set up was, it was the same for both lenses, it is, for the tester, the results she got with her equipment.
If I saw that, I'd be hanging onto the macro as well.
For myself, I'm not surprised that a good quality macro lens beats up on a consumer zoom in a test that shows off the macro lens' capabilities to it's best.
07-01-2008, 10:32 PM   #19
Inactive Account




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 302
Looks like the DA55-300 has a focus issue. There shouldn't be such a distinct difference between the 2.

07-01-2008, 11:09 PM   #20
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 464
Definitely looks like a focus issue - perhaps a close focus issue.

Or, for whatever reason, the 55-300 is just softer up close. The minimum focusing distance for that lens is pretty long compared to a macro lens, and some lenses just don't do all that great at their minimum focus distance.

----------------------

Your results look like something I had posted comparing K20D crops vs K200D crops - I thought the K20D was really underperforming.

Then, someone mentioned the K20D was having focus problems and I needed to adjust...for whatever reason I just hadn't thought of that possibility. After a few adjustments - Viola, K20D sharp as the K200D, but larger due to the MP count.

----

One would expect the prime to win an IQ test, but not by this wide of a margin.
07-02-2008, 12:55 AM   #21
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
weel, in that second test DA 55-300 fares bit better, but to my eye, the difference is still more than smidgen. Still not much of a contest...
prime stealls it...
07-02-2008, 03:09 AM   #22
Inactive Account




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 302
bit hard to say the prime steals it when there is possible evidence of a focus issue with the 55-300.

By all accounts they should not be far apart.
07-02-2008, 04:42 AM   #23
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,684
Clearly the first test was flawed and should be ignored. Could someone tell me what difference they see in the second test? Because at this resolution the two look pretty much the same to me.

07-02-2008, 05:01 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: West Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 338
Heather, your results aproximate mine though I have not done as detailed a test. I did though
test the 55-300/K20 v. Tamron 18-250/K100D on a telephone pole transformer off my balcony at full extenson; the latter combo IQ was superior in my opinion, especially in sharpness.
07-02-2008, 05:42 AM   #25
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,684
QuoteOriginally posted by John Kovarik Quote
Heather, your results aproximate mine though I have not done as detailed a test. I did though
test the 55-300/K20 v. Tamron 18-250/K100D on a telephone pole transformer off my balcony at full extenson; the latter combo IQ was superior in my opinion, especially in sharpness.
No offence John, but I find that conclusion hard to believe, given the 18-250mm's reputation for softness at the long end. Did you use a tripod?

I tested the 55-300mm vs my Tamron 70-300mm Di, which is by most accounts the telezoom to beat at 300mm. As in Richard Day's tests, the Pentax 55-300mm clearly resolved more detail and showed less CA. The Pentax does a lot of other things better than the Tamron too. I'll post my test results later, when I have more time.
07-02-2008, 05:43 AM   #26
Veteran Member
ftpaddict's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Yurp
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,669
The A lens trumps the new DA 55-300.

This makes me wonder what computer-aided design has done to improve image quality.
07-02-2008, 06:35 AM   #27
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,156
QuoteOriginally posted by ftpaddict Quote
The A lens trumps the new DA 55-300.

This makes me wonder what computer-aided design has done to improve image quality.
It's made zoom lenses like the DA55-300 possible.
07-02-2008, 06:36 AM   #28
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,047
These tests are consistent with what I've found true when comparing primes to zooms. An excellent prime out resolves a zoom, always. The one zoom that's half decent is the old Tamron SP 35-80 2.8-3.8, but it gives up contrast to a modern lens.

These zooms trade on contrast a level or two above resolution limits, like old Leica lenses used to. The photos look good on their own, only through these sorts of comparisons does one see what's missing.
07-02-2008, 06:42 AM   #29
Veteran Member
ftpaddict's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Yurp
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,669
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
It's made zoom lenses like the DA55-300 possible.

to improve image quality

Not to improve the versatility of lenses.
07-02-2008, 03:42 PM   #30
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,684
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
I tested the 55-300mm vs my Tamron 70-300mm Di, which is by most accounts the telezoom to beat at 300mm. As in Richard Day's tests, the Pentax 55-300mm clearly resolved more detail and showed less CA. The Pentax does a lot of other things better than the Tamron too. I'll post my test results later, when I have more time.
My test photos are posted in a new thread.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/31269-sharpnes...tml#post282195
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!
a100, a100/4, basket, da55-300, k-mount, lens, macro, pentax lens, pics, slr lens, test
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Night 100mm Macro WR star burst test elpolodiablo Photo Critique 9 10-09-2010 04:22 PM
Macro Lunchtime nature/macro with the DA55-300 goddo31 Post Your Photos! 6 10-14-2009 07:16 PM
So let's try this again: DA55-300 applejax Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 0 06-13-2008 09:05 AM
Sale dates for DA55-300 and DA*300 Japan Peter Zack Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 25 03-30-2008 05:22 PM
Tamron 70-300 DI Macro Test codiac2600 Post Your Photos! 6 06-27-2007 08:56 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:34 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