[Cambo]

Any sample images yet? Curious for a compact travel 2 zoom kit (with the 16-85).


Cheers,
Cameron

[UncleVanya]

Any sample images yet? Curious for a compact travel 2 zoom kit (with the 16-85).


Cheers,
Cameron

I haven't seen anything yet. Another compact telezoom that gets forgotten is the 50-200 - I think the IQ is better than most people seem to want to give it credit for. It weighs less and is quite compact.

SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

Of course it gives up a lot of focal length to the 55-300...

[LensBeginner]

Collapsible = too many cranks gears and wheels for too little gain, be it a 18-55 or a 55-300.
There are more important things to focus on than redo a lens that's already been redone more than enough times (DA, DA-L, DL-A, AL-D, AD-L, DL, AD, ADD, ADL...)

My very personal opinion and my 0.01c worth.

[Penumbra]

Of course it gives up a lot of focal length to the 55-300...

In absolute numbers.. In practice, (to my surprise and due to insufficient optics understanding on my part, i concluded), the gain in terms of close-up between 200 and 300mm on this particular lens is so small at medium to long distances - meaning where you would want use it most - that It's irrelevant. But if I'm mistaken, please feel free to correctify. Is this related to this focus breathing I keep hear mentioning about?

[UncleVanya]

Focus breathing is generally when a lens performs as though the focal length is shorter at close distances. So at medium to long distance it should not be a factor.

---------- Post added 08-31-16 at 05:19 PM ----------

It is possible that your mind is tricking you. 200 to 300 is similar in scope to 50 to 75 or 100 to 150. It can seem subtle.

[kh1234567890]

the gain in terms of close-up between 200 and 300mm on this particular lens is so small at medium to long distances

Strange, I have both and the difference at infinity is exactly 1.5x, as it should be. I would include some shots, but it is night over here now ...

[Des]

Compared to the HD DA 55-300 WR, about half a stop slower, as the price for more compactness. F6.3 at 300mm compared to f5.8 doesn't sound like much, but having had two f6.3 lenses I'd say it can be a significant difference.

There are more important things to focus on than redo a lens that's already been redone more than enough times (DA, DA-L, DL-A, AL-D, AD-L, DL, AD, ADD, ADL...)

Different optical formula, it seems: 14 elements in 11 groups compared to 12/8. Optical performance remains to be seen.

The big question to my mind is how the PLM autofocus works compared with screwdrive. No doubt it will be quieter, but is it faster and more accurate? AF noise and focus acquisition are the Achilles heel of the older model. If the image quality is comparable, many people will find an upgrade worthwhile if the AF is much better.

Then there would be a lot of us with K-3s and K-30/K-50/K-5 cameras clamouring for the firmware upgrade that (according to Adam) would make our cameras compatible.

---

Last edited by Des; 09-03-2016 at 05:44 PM.

[reh321]

Then there would be a lot of us with K-3s and K-30/K-50/K-5 cameras clamouring for the firmware upgrade that (according to Adam) would make our cameras compatible.

Right now there are roughtly one-hundred "of us" clamoring for the firmware upgrade that they believe would make their cameras compatible.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/323221-petition-...eries-k50.html
Do they know something the people here don't know, or is the opposite true? {or maybe people are determined to have something to complain about}

[Des]

Do they know something the people here don't know, or is the opposite true?

If you mean me, probably the latter.

[jgnfld]

My 55-300mm PLM arrived today. Went down to park to try it out with my K-70. Initial impressions:

1. Much better AF both in AF.S and AF.C as I took picks of a hunting fish hawk. (These are heavily cropped.)
2. At 300mm, set ISO to 400 and was able to get bird in flight pics at 1/1000sec.
3. Silent focus. Even seems to make the shutter quieter for some reason.
4. Gets very long at 300mm.
5. Nice color rendition on a bronze statue.
6. Nothing special about bokeh, but pleasant enough. (see fairy bust)

While I need to try it out more, I think you will see my SMC DAL 55-300mm in the marketplace soon even though I have really, really enjoyed that lens.

(these pics crossposted to "New K-70" thread)

[Des]

My 55-300mm PLM arrived today. Went down to park to try it out with my K-70. Initial impressions: 1. Much better AF both in AF.S and AF.C as I took picks of a hunting fish hawk. (These are heavily cropped.) 2. At 300mm, set ISO to 400 and was able to get bird in flight pics at 1/1000sec. 3. Silent focus. Even seems to make the shutter quieter for some reason. 4. Gets very long at 300mm. 5. Nice color rendition on a bronze statue. 6. Nothing special about bokeh, but pleasant enough. (see fairy bust) While I need to try it out more, I think you will see my SMC DAL 55-300mm in the marketplace soon even though I have really, really enjoyed that lens.

Thanks for sharing, @jgnfld. Look forward to more samples. Hard to tell much from a small number of scaled down images, of course, but image quality at least looks comparable to the screwdriven 55-300. Good to have the impressions of someone who has both.

[Cambo]

My 55-300mm PLM arrived today. Went down to park to try it out with my K-70. Initial impressions:

1. Much better AF both in AF.S and AF.C as I took picks of a hunting fish hawk. (These are heavily cropped.)
2. At 300mm, set ISO to 400 and was able to get bird in flight pics at 1/1000sec.
3. Silent focus. Even seems to make the shutter quieter for some reason.
4. Gets very long at 300mm.
5. Nice color rendition on a bronze statue.
6. Nothing special about bokeh, but pleasant enough. (see fairy bust)

While I need to try it out more, I think you will see my SMC DAL 55-300mm in the marketplace soon even though I have really, really enjoyed that lens.

(these pics crossposted to "New K-70" thread)

Awesome, thanks. Thinking of getting one for a two zoom travel kit with the 16-85 zoom. Do any of you think it keeps up optically to that wonderful lens? I have the 60-250, but it's a monster.

Cheers,
Cameron

[normhead]

My 55-300mm PLM arrived today. Went down to park to try it out with my K-70. Initial impressions:

1. Much better AF both in AF.S and AF.C as I took picks of a hunting fish hawk. (These are heavily cropped.)
2. At 300mm, set ISO to 400 and was able to get bird in flight pics at 1/1000sec.
3. Silent focus. Even seems to make the shutter quieter for some reason.
4. Gets very long at 300mm.
5. Nice color rendition on a bronze statue.
6. Nothing special about bokeh, but pleasant enough. (see fairy bust)

While I need to try it out more, I think you will see my SMC DAL 55-300mm in the marketplace soon even though I have really, really enjoyed that lens.

(these pics crossposted to "New K-70" thread)

Awesome pics, there's nothing there to complain about as far as I can see.
Since for me, and many other hiker/canoeists, the size and weight of the lens in the camera bag, especially for a long lens, is crucial. The collapsing size is part of what makes this lens so attractive.

Be sure and cross post in the 300 plus club.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/55946-300mm-plus-lens-club...nses-1540.html

[jgnfld]

Thanks for sharing, @jgnfld. Look forward to more samples. Hard to tell much from a small number of scaled down images, of course, but image quality at least looks comparable to the screwdriven 55-300. Good to have the impressions of someone who has both.

Here's some more. Very dark, very foggy day...

Caribou

board processed jpg of 100% crop from above...


Snowy owl

[normhead]

Do you live in a nature reserve?