Inner Focus is a lie. About DA* 60-250 f/4 IF

Andrea K · 05-24-2017, 02:09 AM - **1 Like**

Hi,

I bought a DA* 60-250 new to replace my FA 80-320 that with k-1 has some performance problems, I will use it in my k-1 after baffle removal.
I was aware about the INNER FOCUS behavior that reduce focal length if lens focused on near subjects but.... this is too much reduction. As I wrote I have also the FA 80-320 to do some comparison and at circa 3 meters (10 feet) the DA*, set to 250mm, has a focal length of 170mm!!!! Now I can't test at min focus range or infinity, perhaps tomorrow, but I think I'll be really frustrated with the results...

Damned IF! Now I'm in doubt whether to keep or sell this lens...

Adam · 05-24-2017, 02:27 AM

Despite that, the DA* lens should still easily outresolve the FA lens for distant subjects

**clackers** · 05-24-2017, 03:21 AM

You'd turn down a lens with constant aperture, WR, nine blades and two elements made out of ED glass? Very brave, Andrea, but I guess it's your money!

Andrea K · 05-24-2017, 03:45 AM

I did not write about lens quality or optical performances, it's about huge focal length reduction and not at minimum focus but already at 3 meters. I'm in doubt, I have to do moooore tests. See you soon with some test pictures.

Unregistered User 8 · 05-24-2017, 03:52 AM - **1 Like**

Hi Andrea. Yes, the DA*60-250 does focus breathe quite a bit, but optically it is a wonderful lens, and any loss of reach from the breathing can be regained by cropping the image. I would not be without my 60-250. Good luck.

**clackers** · 05-24-2017, 03:55 AM

Originally posted by Andrea K

I did not write about lens quality or optical performances, it's about huge focal length reduction and not at minimum focus but already at 3 meters. I'm in doubt, I have to do moooore tests. See you soon with some test pictures.

There is no doubt, like all internal focus lenses, it's subject to what is well known as 'focus breathing'.

Na Horuk · 05-24-2017, 04:00 AM

I think most users on this forum stick with that lens despite the IF problem. The optical quality and overall build quality (its a pretty compact lens, compared to modern high end zoom lenses) outweighs this problem, for most people.
Feel free to go for one of the Sigma zooms that go to 500mm or the Pentax 70-200mm (or even the cheaper Tamron 70-200mm, though its not quite on the same level)

BrianR · 05-24-2017, 04:13 AM

It's a shame you're finding the focus breathing disappointing. For ages, I've wished this sort of thing was publicized in a uniform and objective way in the lens descriptions so you'd know exactly what to expect.

The max magnification of 0.15x at the minimum focus distance 110cm should be a big clue on how much focus breathing this lens has (compare with some of the FA zooms in the 200 to 300mm range), but wouldn't it be nice to have a little magnification vs distance graph for a few of the focal length settings?

Sandy Hancock · 05-24-2017, 04:16 AM

Accept its limitations, or don't.

Personally, I didn't like the physical handling and focus breathing, but there are legions of fans.

Kozlok · 05-24-2017, 04:17 AM

Originally posted by Na Horuk

I think most users on this forum stick with that lens despite the IF problem. The optical quality and overall build quality (its a pretty compact lens, compared to modern high end zoom lenses) outweighs this problem, for most people.
Feel free to go for one of the Sigma zooms that go to 500mm or the Pentax 70-200mm (or even the cheaper Tamron 70-200mm, though its not quite on the same level)

Not sure I agree with "not at the same level". The Tamron is stunning. Stopped down to f4 to match the 60/250, I can't imagine the Pentax is sharper. The one and only shortcoming of optical performance is 200mm/f2.8 has some ghosting. It's long gone by f4.

Andrea K · 05-24-2017, 04:35 AM

Originally posted by Kozlok

Not sure I agree with "not at the same level". The Tamron is stunning. Stopped down to f4 to match the 60/250, I can't imagine the Pentax is sharper. The one and only shortcoming of optical performance is 200mm/f2.8 has some ghosting. It's long gone by f4.

I think that also the Tamron has IF. Correct?

---------- Post added 24-05-17 at 13:40 ----------

Originally posted by BrianR

It's a shame you're finding the focus breathing disappointing. For ages, I've wished this sort of thing was publicized in a uniform and objective way in the lens descriptions so you'd know exactly what to expect.

The max magnification of 0.15x at the minimum focus distance 110cm should be a big clue on how much focus breathing this lens has (compare with some of the FA zooms in the 200 to 300mm range)...

You're right about this but I did not do "homework" so I thought it came from the difference between 250mm and 320mm. The real problem is that I use this type of lenses especially in a range of 2 to 10 meters.... However this is just an initial disappointment, I still have to use it in the field.

bdery · 05-24-2017, 04:49 AM

Originally posted by Andrea K

I did not write about lens quality or optical performances, it's about huge focal length reduction and not at minimum focus but already at 3 meters. I'm in doubt, I have to do moooore tests. See you soon with some test pictures.

You can solve any impact this has on the field of view by taking one step forward or back. Or cropping. Or not thinking about it, framing your image the way you see it in the viewfinder and enjoy the gorgeous results.

BrianR · 05-24-2017, 04:59 AM

Originally posted by Andrea K

I think that also the Tamron has IF. Correct?

Yes, but it has impressive magnification at close distances. I don't own one, but the magnification at minimum distances (and optical awesomeness) tempted me for years

geoffw · 05-24-2017, 06:00 AM

Hi. I'm lucky to have the 60-250. I use it two fold. One. Great iq,even cropped. Two. Walk about lens instead of gym membership. Not overly heavy but a good work out on a long walk, especially c/w a tripod. Thought about trading it in for the 300mm but couldn't bring myself to part with it.

normhead · 05-24-2017, 06:50 AM - **1 Like**

The lens is just a super lens. But it's more a landscape scenery type lens than birding , lens. At 10 feet, it's about equivalent to a 135mm lens at full reach. Years ago I posted some tests showing that, testing it against my old film Viitar 135 2.8. That being said, I used to love my 18-135 before I got my K-1. With the K-1 the 60250 has taken it's place for the long end with the 28-105 doing the wide angle work. SO, there's nothing wrong with a 135mm as the top end for a walk around. And once you get out to 40-50 feet, you are getting more magnification.

Despite the initial disappointment, I bought this to be a birding lens and it's not, I have some great bird pictures taken with it, and on my K-1 it's a walk around. The best way to get around the reduced FL at close distances is to get the HD DA 1.4 TC to use with it. It's more than sharp enough to out perform your 80-320 even with the TC on. Just give it time. Sooner or later it will start blowing you away on occasion.

DA*60-250 slides show <click here>.

05-24-2017, 02:09 AM - 1 Like	#1
Andrea K Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Rome, Italy Posts: 822	*Inner Focus is a lie. About DA 60-250 f/4 IF** Hi, I bought a DA* 60-250 new to replace my FA 80-320 that with k-1 has some performance problems, I will use it in my k-1 after baffle removal. I was aware about the INNER FOCUS behavior that reduce focal length if lens focused on near subjects but.... this is too much reduction. As I wrote I have also the FA 80-320 to do some comparison and at circa 3 meters (10 feet) the DA*, set to 250mm, has a focal length of 170mm!!!! Now I can't test at min focus range or infinity, perhaps tomorrow, but I think I'll be really frustrated with the results... Damned IF! Now I'm in doubt whether to keep or sell this lens...

05-24-2017, 02:27 AM	#2
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,595	Despite that, the DA* lens should still easily outresolve the FA lens for distant subjects Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DA* 60-250 owners: How do you carry your 60-250 at the ready?	apisto	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	25	12-30-2017 01:49 PM
is the 60-250 really a 60-200 ?	roro	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	25	12-19-2015 03:27 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA* 60-250, 16-50, Sigma 10-20 3.5, Pentax 18-250	millertime	Sold Items	9	10-04-2015 07:23 PM
DA 17-70 + DA60-250 or DA16-50 + DA*50-135	Cambo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	54	01-01-2011 12:12 AM

05-24-2017, 03:21 AM	#3
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	You'd turn down a lens with constant aperture, WR, nine blades and two elements made out of ED glass? Very brave, Andrea, but I guess it's your money!

05-24-2017, 03:45 AM	#4
Andrea K Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Rome, Italy Posts: 822 Original Poster	I did not write about lens quality or optical performances, it's about huge focal length reduction and not at minimum focus but already at 3 meters. I'm in doubt, I have to do moooore tests. See you soon with some test pictures.

05-24-2017, 03:52 AM - 1 Like	#5
Unregistered User 8 Closed Account Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,694	Hi Andrea. Yes, the DA*60-250 does focus breathe quite a bit, but optically it is a wonderful lens, and any loss of reach from the breathing can be regained by cropping the image. I would not be without my 60-250. Good luck.

05-24-2017, 03:55 AM	#6
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by Andrea K I did not write about lens quality or optical performances, it's about huge focal length reduction and not at minimum focus but already at 3 meters. I'm in doubt, I have to do moooore tests. See you soon with some test pictures. There is no doubt, like all internal focus lenses, it's subject to what is well known as 'focus breathing'.

05-24-2017, 04:00 AM	#7
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	I think most users on this forum stick with that lens despite the IF problem. The optical quality and overall build quality (its a pretty compact lens, compared to modern high end zoom lenses) outweighs this problem, for most people. Feel free to go for one of the Sigma zooms that go to 500mm or the Pentax 70-200mm (or even the cheaper Tamron 70-200mm, though its not quite on the same level)

05-24-2017, 04:13 AM	#8
BrianR Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,332	It's a shame you're finding the focus breathing disappointing. For ages, I've wished this sort of thing was publicized in a uniform and objective way in the lens descriptions so you'd know exactly what to expect. The max magnification of 0.15x at the minimum focus distance 110cm should be a big clue on how much focus breathing this lens has (compare with some of the FA zooms in the 200 to 300mm range), but wouldn't it be nice to have a little magnification vs distance graph for a few of the focal length settings?

05-24-2017, 04:16 AM	#9
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	Accept its limitations, or don't. Personally, I didn't like the physical handling and focus breathing, but there are legions of fans.

05-24-2017, 04:17 AM	#10
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	Originally posted by Na Horuk I think most users on this forum stick with that lens despite the IF problem. The optical quality and overall build quality (its a pretty compact lens, compared to modern high end zoom lenses) outweighs this problem, for most people. Feel free to go for one of the Sigma zooms that go to 500mm or the Pentax 70-200mm (or even the cheaper Tamron 70-200mm, though its not quite on the same level) Not sure I agree with "not at the same level". The Tamron is stunning. Stopped down to f4 to match the 60/250, I can't imagine the Pentax is sharper. The one and only shortcoming of optical performance is 200mm/f2.8 has some ghosting. It's long gone by f4.

05-24-2017, 04:35 AM	#11
Andrea K Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Rome, Italy Posts: 822 Original Poster	Originally posted by Kozlok Not sure I agree with "not at the same level". The Tamron is stunning. Stopped down to f4 to match the 60/250, I can't imagine the Pentax is sharper. The one and only shortcoming of optical performance is 200mm/f2.8 has some ghosting. It's long gone by f4. I think that also the Tamron has IF. Correct? ---------- Post added 24-05-17 at 13:40 ---------- Originally posted by BrianR It's a shame you're finding the focus breathing disappointing. For ages, I've wished this sort of thing was publicized in a uniform and objective way in the lens descriptions so you'd know exactly what to expect. The max magnification of 0.15x at the minimum focus distance 110cm should be a big clue on how much focus breathing this lens has (compare with some of the FA zooms in the 200 to 300mm range)... You're right about this but I did not do "homework" so I thought it came from the difference between 250mm and 320mm. The real problem is that I use this type of lenses especially in a range of 2 to 10 meters.... However this is just an initial disappointment, I still have to use it in the field.

05-24-2017, 04:49 AM	#12
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,357	Originally posted by Andrea K I did not write about lens quality or optical performances, it's about huge focal length reduction and not at minimum focus but already at 3 meters. I'm in doubt, I have to do moooore tests. See you soon with some test pictures. You can solve any impact this has on the field of view by taking one step forward or back. Or cropping. Or not thinking about it, framing your image the way you see it in the viewfinder and enjoy the gorgeous results.

05-24-2017, 04:59 AM	#13
BrianR Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,332	Originally posted by Andrea K I think that also the Tamron has IF. Correct? Yes, but it has impressive magnification at close distances. I don't own one, but the magnification at minimum distances (and optical awesomeness) tempted me for years

05-24-2017, 06:00 AM	#14
geoffw Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Photos: Gallery Posts: 193	Hi. I'm lucky to have the 60-250. I use it two fold. One. Great iq,even cropped. Two. Walk about lens instead of gym membership. Not overly heavy but a good work out on a long walk, especially c/w a tripod. Thought about trading it in for the 300mm but couldn't bring myself to part with it.

05-24-2017, 06:50 AM - 1 Like	#15
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	The lens is just a super lens. But it's more a landscape scenery type lens than birding , lens. At 10 feet, it's about equivalent to a 135mm lens at full reach. Years ago I posted some tests showing that, testing it against my old film Viitar 135 2.8. That being said, I used to love my 18-135 before I got my K-1. With the K-1 the 60250 has taken it's place for the long end with the 28-105 doing the wide angle work. SO, there's nothing wrong with a 135mm as the top end for a walk around. And once you get out to 40-50 feet, you are getting more magnification. Despite the initial disappointment, I bought this to be a birding lens and it's not, I have some great bird pictures taken with it, and on my K-1 it's a walk around. The best way to get around the reduced FL at close distances is to get the HD DA 1.4 TC to use with it. It's more than sharp enough to out perform your 80-320 even with the TC on. Just give it time. Sooner or later it will start blowing you away on occasion. DA*60-250 slides show <click here>.