[DeadJohn]

...Is there a flaw in the plot?...

With respect to airshows, there's a potential flaw: 300mm can be too close for wide formation flying and large aircraft. Aviation examples wider than 300mm provided below. If you make the DA* 300 your main airshow lens you might want your 50-135 on a 2nd body.

87mm:


120mm:


150mm:

[r0ckstarr]

Get the DA*300. That lens will make you find things to use it on.

[Billk]

LBA strikes.. I feel the DA 300 calling. Tell me I'm mad or mad in a good way.

What would I use it for? Landscape, airshow, the odd nature photo. What would I sell? Is there a flaw in the plot?

it[/HL]

You would use it for landscape, airshows, astro and more than the odd nature photo. Your rate of taking nature photos would increase massively, 'coz you would have the DA 300. It is great for anything that moves and a lot that doesn't, like flowers and leaves.

The DA 300 is my most used lens, followed by the FA 77.

[Mr. Ed]

I would part with the 55-300 and keep the rest. Similar to my gun collection, add to it but never part with anything.

[mechmike10]

I will be the naysayer here. I had the 55-300, and I sold it and bought the 300 f4. I wish I had not. The 300 has better image quality than the 55-300, and the extra stop is nice (so you can use the TC with autofocus), but I have 3 small letters for you: SDM. I bought the 300 new in late 2013. In the last 6 months the SDM autofocus has become unreliable. Sometimes when I turn on the camera with the 300 attached, autofocus is non-functional. So far, I have been able to kick start it by rotating the manual focus ring while holding the shutter down half way. I don't use the lens constantly, but probably use it once a month anyway. I am waiting until it fails completely when I will convert it to screw drive. This is unacceptable for a lens less than 2 years old (with a one year warranty), given the price of the lens. I'd look elsewhere for a long telephoto, or wait until Pentax changes this lens to its newer autofocus system.

[drypenn]

Just a thought. How about getting a DA*60-250 instead of DA*300? Similar weight, similar quality, similar sharpness/colours, similar speed, similar price. Less reach, but much more versatile. Maybe add the 1.4x TC for reach. It's a better replacement for the DA 55-300 if you aren't always at the long end of that lens.

Then you might be able to sell the DA*55, DA 55-300 and (gasp!) DA*50-135. Keep the DFA 100 for f2.8 medium tele (as well as macro), and you'll have the FA 77 (and FA 31) for portraits, speed and general magic.

I have never used the 60-250 but most people who own it seem to love it. Norm argues that it's a lens to buy Pentax for. If your main focus isn't small birds but airshows, landscape, etc, it might fit the bill nicely.

The "vaguely portable WR zoom" to add down the track could be either DA*16-50 or DA 16-85.

I knew I should be avoiding your posts (and Sandy's). They just make too much sense to justify LBA.

My plastics definitely hate you guys, and if I tell my wife about you, I'm pretty sure the household will drop our internet subscription posthaste.

[UncleVanya]

I have the FA* 300 and the DA* 60-250 and a bunch of other stuff. I find since I rarely need to stalk prey and I rarely use a large telephoto that the 60-250 is the more likely to be used on any given trip but they are complementary not exclusive.

[Conqueror]

Some interesting views.

The DA* 55 is indeed a great lens. The 100 may get a stay of execution.

I don't think I can justify owning lots of lenses... even 6 seems quite a lot (to me at least). The problem is Pentax has spoilt us with high quality primes.

I have now ordered a DA* 300 as it was at 2/3 of the normal price and I will also have a warranty.

If you make the DA* 300 your main airshow lens you might want your 50-135 on a 2nd body.

Yup last one I used the 50-135 and mostly at 135 stopped down a bit

The "vaguely portable WR zoom" to add down the track could be either DA*16-50 or DA 16-85.

Yeah was possibly thinking 18-135 2nd hand eventually. As that covers a wide FL range and will not be expensive.

[Des]

I have 3 small letters for you: SDM.

Sorry to hear of the SDM problems, Mike. It's disconcerting. I had the impression that there were fewer reports of SDM problems with the 300 than with the 16-50, 17-70 or 50-135.

I knew I should be avoiding your posts (and Sandy's). They just make too much sense to justify LBA. My plastics definitely hate you guys, and if I tell my wife about you, I'm pretty sure the household will drop our internet subscription posthaste.

I don't think either Sandy or I would qualify for the LBA Temperance Society. As he says, he's the wrong person to talk to about lens rationalisation. It was Sandy who gave us one of the all-time great quotes on this site: "I buy everything. It takes the worry out of it." As for me, well, just over two years ago my kit consisted of a K100D Super, a superzoom and a couple of filters. Now look at my sig. (And that doesn't count two bodies and four lenses that have moved on.)

But if your wife would like some advice on how you could rationalise your kit, Drypenn, we'd be happy to help.

I don't think I can justify owning lots of lenses... even 6 seems quite a lot (to me at least). The problem is Pentax has spoilt us with high quality primes. I have now ordered a DA* 300 as it was at 2/3 of the normal price and I will also have a warranty.

I admire the strength of will. Enjoy the 300.

Yeah was possibly thinking 18-135 2nd hand eventually. As that covers a wide FL range and will not be expensive.

I got one recently, and I've been very impressed. Love walking in the bush in the rain with it.

[UncleVanya]

Sorry to hear of the SDM problems, Mike. It's disconcerting. I had the impression that there were fewer reports of SDM problems with the 300 than with the 16-50, 17-70 or 50-135.

I'm offering SDM to screwdrive conversions and so far I have been contacted much more frequently about the DA* 16-50 and DA* 50-135 fhan either of the primes (DA* 200 and 300) but I have converted one DA* 200 and been contacted about 1 DA* 300 (it spontaneously started working again so I haven't had to convert one yet).

So if my conversions are representative I would say the DA* 300 is far less likely to fail than the zooms.

I can't speak to things like the 17-70 where there is no option to convert to screwdrive.

[drypenn]

Slightly off topic: but how hard will it be for Pentax to run a "self-check" on SDM lenses?

I mean, can they program it to run like this?

1) the camera sends instruction to focus,
2) Can lens do a "loop test" to check whether SDM responds? Say, a second or two, without confirmation, and it means SDM is dead, and lens sends a "no-go"
3) If SDM responds "no-go", then camera should resort to screwdrive (when available).

I think that if Pentax can incorporate this programming to their lens/camera, then a lot of us will not shy away from SDM.

[Mr. Ed]

Slightly off topic: but how hard will it be for Pentax to run a "self-check" on SDM lenses?

I mean, can they program it to run like this?

1) the camera sends instruction to focus,
2) Can lens do a "loop test" to check whether SDM responds? Say, a second or two, without confirmation, and it means SDM is dead, and lens sends a "no-go"
3) If SDM responds "no-go", then camera should resort to screwdrive (when available).

I think that if Pentax can incorporate this programming to their lens/camera, then a lot of us will not shy away from SDM.

Than makes sense to me as I have had two lenses, 16-50 & 200 converted to screw drive. Pentax top of the lines lenses