[Stagnant]

Some test shots at infinity. At F4.

70 mm
100 mm
150 mm
210 mm

- F7.1.

Some shots of my sleepy doggy. 210mm at F4.




The lens is very good for the price I paid (55 pounds). It is not super sharp and not super contrasty, but it works well enough to sometimes replace 60-250. I mostly intend to use this lens on film cameras anyway. Chromatic aberrations can be quite tricky to handle, but otherwise no complaints thus far. Mechanically this lens works like a charm.
Click on the images to see them full size in Flickr.

[grispie]

I think this lens is a stunner..

cute doggie :-)

[fwcetus]

It is not super sharp and not super contrasty, but it works well enough to sometimes replace 60-250. I mostly intend to use this lens on film cameras anyway. Chromatic aberrations can be quite tricky to handle, but otherwise no complaints thus far. Mechanically this lens works like a charm.
Click on the images to see them full size in Flickr.

The sharpness (and I looked at some images on Flickr) seems quite good. The contrast does look a little less than "crisp" (but not surprising, and it did look like a dreary winter day for the infinity shots). Were the pix processed at all (and, if so, in what ways)?

Thanks for sharing your images (of a nice ol' A zoom).

[Stagnant]

The photos were processed in SilkyPix 5 pro. I corrected exposure and boosted contrast, tried correcting CA, but without much luck. I can upload the RAW files for you to judge the quality of lens yourself.
And the doggy is indeed cute

Link to the RAW files : Download .

---

Last edited by Stagnant; 01-19-2016 at 11:16 AM.

[fwcetus]

The photos were processed in SilkyPix 5 pro. I corrected exposure and boosted contrast, tried correcting CA, but without much luck. I can upload the RAW files for you to judge the quality of lens yourself.

Well, I can't really see a problem with CA there (?). [I was looking in the corners of some of the f/4 pix, and I'd be happy with them already.]

And the doggy is indeed cute

Yes, indeed.

[Stagnant]

Well, I can't really see a problem with CA there (?). [I was looking in the corners of some of the f/4 pix, and I'd be happy with them already.

Check the snow covered roof of a lower house in the centre of the 70mm F4. It has a distinct purple halo. Take a closer look at that roof, and you will notice some degree of haloing in every shot.

[fwcetus]

Check the snow covered roof of a lower house in the centre of the 70mm F4. It has a distinct purple halo. Take a closer look at that roof, and you will notice some degree of haloing in every shot.

Yes, OK, I see what you mean. However, I've seen a lot worse from some other older tele zooms, and the snow does present a worst-case (or, at least, a bad-case) scenario for the lens to handle. All in all, I'd say that you are right to be a proud owner of your A 70-210/4.

[PKMike]

No surprises here. The 70-210mm is a great lens but is often overlooked and undervalued due to its being overshadowed by its "celebrity" 35-105mm sibling. It's also unfairly maligned here due to its low composite score (7) on its database rating that stems almost entirely from low handling scores from users not used to one touch manual zooms.

I agree. I owned both, but owned the 70-210 as my first zoom, thereby learning on a "one touch". When I later obtained the 35-105 I found it both more cumbersome and time consuming to use. I never really viewed the 35-105 as superior to the 70-210. They are both solid performers in my opinion. I still have the 70-210, and agree that it is both underrated and under valued.

PS Love that first doggie pic! Tells a story.

[fwcetus]

No surprises here. The 70-210mm is a great lens but is often overlooked and undervalued due to its being overshadowed by its "celebrity" 35-105mm sibling. It's also unfairly maligned here due to its low composite score (7) on its database rating that stems almost entirely from low handling scores from users not used to one touch manual zooms.

I agree. I owned both, but owned the 70-210 as my first zoom, thereby learning on a "one touch". When I later obtained the 35-105 I found it both more cumbersome and time consuming to use. I never really viewed the 35-105 as superior to the 70-210. They are both solid performers in my opinion. I still have the 70-210, and agree that it is both underrated and under valued.

And I agree as well.

My first zoom (in 1980 or so) was a VS1 70-210/3.5 (Tokina V.2) in K-mount, and my next zoom (and my first Ka lens) was the A 70-210/4, so I "cut my zoom teeth" on one-touch zooms. Later on, when my first two-touch zooms became the A 35-105/3.5 and the A 28-135/4, I found the two-touch operation, at first, less than intuitive (although it did not take too long to become able to work with either system). In any event, I always thought the A 70-210/4 to be a ~very~ good lens, and I still have one here (although not the original copy, which eventually succumbed to too many rough and soggy whale watch trips over time, as did the VS1 70-210/3.5 before it).

I guess I'm still an "SMC Pentax A 70-210/4 Proud Owner", too...

[Stagnant]

- 70 mm at F8
- 210 mm at F8
- 210 mm at F4

I am still waiting for a more sunny day. I got some more shots, that I will upload tomorrow.

[Stagnant]

Tetrapodes (shore reinforcement structures) covered in ice. Some other shots from this session can be found in Soviet Lens Club.

[Stagnant]

Some more shots with this lens. Finally a sunny day. All these shots were done from the deck of the ship with K-3. Post processing was done in SilkyPix Developer Studio 7 Pro. Lots of fiddling with tone curve and contrast. Out of camera images looked too lifeless. Click images to see them full size and to read detailed descriptions of the subjects in the photos. More shots can be found here






Click images to see

[pepperberry farm]

it is an awesome lens - I have a copy along with TSOP (A 35-105mm f3.5) and, aside from being a bit heavy, love shooting with both of them....


BTW - there's a Manual Zoom Club over in the Lens Club forum; take a look and share your shots there, too!