[derelict]

For use on my film MX and film ZX5. I have come to the point where I would like a 300 in my bag for certain shots. They are both highly regarded and they are both around the same price. One, the F* has a tripod foot, the other does not. The F* is slightly in the lead just because of that. Does the F* have a focusing ring?

[Adam]

Of course it has a focusing ring But as an AF lens it doesn't provide as much friction so it might be harder to make fine focus adjustments than the A*. If you plan to or also shoot digital, then I'd go with the F* without a doubt, however.

[Driline]

If you want the best lens Pentax has ever made then buy the F*300. All others pale in comparison. Even the FA 31. End of Story. Plus the off white color will give you "Street Cred".

[TwoUptons]

I love my K300, but wish it had a foot...

I'd get the F just for that... especially in conjunction with a teleconverter...

-Eric

[derelict]

Of course it has a focusing ring But as an AF lens it doesn't provide as much friction so it might be harder to make fine focus adjustments than the A*. If you plan to or also shoot digital, then I'd go with the F* without a doubt, however.

I don't shoot Pentax digital anymore but an thinking about going back to it. I went Olympus M4/3 for size, pivoting screen, and touchscreen auto focusing. I think about picking up a used K3 but I cannot give up the screen. Helps make low vantage point shots possible without having to last on the ground, which I do often as I shoot mostly cars.

If the focusing is anything like my F 35-70 zoom, it's pretty short but still possible with the prism screen I've got in.

[Adam]

I'm sure whatever replaces the k-3 will have a fancy screen, so it might be worth sitting tight for that. The KP already has a nice screen but without touch.

The focusing should be better on the 300mm, just because the ring itself is massive.

[Des]

The FA*300 f4.5 is optically identical to the F*300 f4.5, and maybe easier to find. It really is an excellent lens. The FA* doesn't come with a tripod collar/foot, but users report that an aftermarket one for the Canon 70-200 f4 will fit (although it may need to be lined with neoprene or something for better grip and to protect the surface of the lens barrel). Several threads about this.

[ChatMechant]

I can vouch for the F*300. Incredible quality of construction and the IQ is benchmark. The manual focusing is 180 and nicely damped. And its impossibly tiny!
Here's some sample photos from the K-1:







All wide open. I think the scrub jay one was with the tamron 1.4 tc but i don't remember for sure.

Here it is on a MZ-3:

[danielchtong]

For use on my film MX and film ZX5. I have come to the point where I would like a 300 in my bag for certain shots. They are both highly regarded and they are both around the same price. One, the F* has a tripod foot, the other does not. The F* is slightly in the lead just because of that. Does the F* have a focusing ring?

My view is that the tripod foot is not that big an advantage with the advent of SR in all latest Pentax dslr.
I am biased as I have A300mmF4.
I think optically the 2 lenses are close.

[monochrome]

The FA*300 f4.5 is optically identical to the F*300 f4.5, and maybe easier to find. It really is an excellent lens. The FA* doesn't come with a tripod collar/foot, but users report that an aftermarket one for the Canon 70-200 f4 will fit (although it may need to be lined with neoprene or something for better grip and to protect the surface of the lens barrel). Several threads about this.

The FA* is (surprisingly to me) heavier than the F* (935 gm vs. 880 gm) according to the PF Lens Database and has a detachable, reversible hood rather than retracting self-hood. It is easily the fastest focusing screwdrive lens I own, and optically sublime. I think it's often about 20% less than the F*, too.

[derelict]

I'm sure whatever replaces the k-3 will have a fancy screen, so it might be worth sitting tight for that. The KP already has a nice screen but without touch.

The focusing should be better on the 300mm, just because the ring itself is massive.

The KP was SO close to getting me back into the Pentax digital world. Fell short on a few key features. Screen with better live view and touch to focus point. I took delivery of a brand new one from B&H but ended up returning it.

My view is that the tripod foot is not that big an advantage with the advent of SR in all latest Pentax dslr.
I am biased as I have A300mmF4.
I think optically the 2 lenses are close.

I don't shoot Pentax digital. This would be a film lens.

I can vouch for the F*300. Incredible quality of construction and the IQ is benchmark. The manual focusing is 180 and nicely damped. And its impossibly tiny!
Here's some sample photos from the K-1:







All wide open. I think the scrub jay one was with the tamron 1.4 tc but i don't remember for sure.

Here it is on a MZ-3:

Those are great photos. Especially it mounted on your MZ body. The ZX is the same size and the MX is a little smaller. Gives me a decent idea of size.


I'm going to get the F* version. That tripod foot is pretty crucial for me.

[fwcetus]

As well as I can remember, the F* 300/4.5 was my first AF lens, picked up way back in "Ye Old Film Days of Yore", when I was shooting most of the time with LX's, and before I bought my first AF body (not counting my MEF's, which are AF only with the AF 35-70/2.8 lens) - an *ist DS. At the time I got the F* 300/4.5, I had an A* 300/4 (that I did like a lot) (after previously owning an M* 300/4). What got me to pick up an AF 300mm lens for trial use on MF bodies was a comment from a well-respected PDML member who made it very clear that the F* 300 was significantly sharper than was the A* 300. I found that, in comparing them on FF 35mm film bodies, I did have to agree. So, as much as I did like the A* 300/4, it ended up going to a Good Home somewhere else, and the F* 300/4.5 has been my fave 300mm prime ever since.

[angerdan]

The FA* is (surprisingly to me) heavier than the F* (935 gm vs. 880 gm) according to the PF Lens Database and has a detachable, reversible hood rather than retracting self-hood.

PF lens database isn't written correct. The F* 300 does weight 1.120 with.tripod mount.
Weight of F* 300mm 4.5 - PentaxForums.com

[Des]

F* 300/4.5 was my first AF lens, picked up way back in "Ye Old Film Days of Yore" ... and the F* 300/4.5 has been my fave 300mm prime ever since.

That's why they are so hard to find. They are so often in the category "The One Lens To Be Prised From My Dead Hands".

PF lens database isn't written correct. The F* 300 does weight 1.120 with.tripod mount.
Weight of F* 300mm 4.5 - PentaxForums.com

That answers one of the burning questions in physics: how does the F*300 with a tripod foot weigh less than the FA*300 without one, given that they have the same optics? A: It doesn't.

[monochrome]

The FA* is (surprisingly to me) heavier than the F* (935 gm vs. 880 gm) according to the PF Lens Database and has a detachable, reversible hood rather than retracting self-hood. It is easily the fastest focusing screwdrive lens I own, and optically sublime. I think it's often about 20% less than the F*, too.

That's why they are so hard to find. They are so often in the category "The One Lens To Be Prised From My Dead Hands".


That answers one of the burning questions in physics: how does the F*300 with a tripod foot weigh less than the FA*300 without one, given that they have the same optics? A: It doesn't.

Surprisingly to me . . . . . Boz Dimitrov's K-Mount Page also lists the weights 880gm for the F* and 935gm for the FA* I seem to do fine without the tripod foot.

I will be buried with the FA*300/4.5 in my right hand and the K28/2 in my left.