Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-08-2019, 07:06 PM - 4 Likes   #286
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Perfessor5646's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Louisville, KY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 174
Front porch safari with HD DA 55-300mm PLM

For some reason I was stuck home on a beautiful day so shot what I could from the front porch. That is the fattest 5 Line Skink Iíve ever seen. Iím surprised it can fit under my front steps.

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-70  Photo 
02-11-2019, 10:12 AM - 1 Like   #287
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 70
I have never had a complaint about this lens until I tried to take photos of the recent "super blood" moon.
To get a better focus, I switched to manual focus and used Live View.
However, turning the focus ring precisely was difficult because it is "by wire". When I turned it in live view it was hard to get focus when compared to the old 55-300 screw drive.
I suppose I should go back out at night an use the old lens and see if my live view focus is easier.
02-11-2019, 11:40 AM   #288
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 882
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Lloyd_Christmas Quote
I have never had a complaint about this lens until I tried to take photos of the recent "super blood" moon.
To get a better focus, I switched to manual focus and used Live View.
However, turning the focus ring precisely was difficult because it is "by wire". When I turned it in live view it was hard to get focus when compared to the old 55-300 screw drive.
I suppose I should go back out at night an use the old lens and see if my live view focus is easier.
Not having tried the lens for that purpose, I don't have any relevant experience, but I do agree that accurate manual focusing is very difficult for the reason that you mention.
02-11-2019, 12:24 PM   #289
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
acoufap's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Munich, Germany
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,605
QuoteOriginally posted by Lloyd_Christmas Quote
However, turning the focus ring precisely was difficult because it is "by wire".
I also made moon shots with this lens. Live view, magnified and manual focusing and didnít observe any problems. But I never had the old lens versions so I canít compare them.

03-16-2019, 02:54 PM - 1 Like   #290
Seeker of Knowledge
Loyal Site Supporter
aslyfox's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Topeka, Kansas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,856
light and shadow

K 3 + HD PENTAX-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3  Photo 
04-01-2019, 11:47 AM - 3 Likes   #291
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,941
A host of things were going on today, looking at the 55-300 and DA*60-250 but ended up going to the Tamron 300 300 2.8 and F 1.7x.

First off, Iussed the 1.4 TC on both lenses, deciding it would be abetter comparison if magnified.

The results, the DA 55-300 PLM produced a larger subject, even though I had to enlarge the 60-250 to match the extra reach, IMHO the 60-250 image was still better.

PLM+ 1.4 TC for 420mm


DA* 60-250 + 1.4 TC for 350mm


Answers the question 60-250 or 55-300 for straight up image quality. Mind you for squirrel shots , do you really care? Also with a 9.5 minimum aperture there were some birds with finer feathers (like the White Breasted Nuthatch) the PLM simply would not lock focus on. Yet no problem for the 60-250. What a difference 1.5 stops makes.

I did however finally manage a PLM image at 420mm image of this bird.


A downy wood pecker visited for a bit. Absolutely no problem for the PLM.
04-01-2019, 04:41 PM   #292
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,615
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
A host of things were going on today, looking at the 55-300 and DA*60-250 but ended up going to the Tamron 300 300 2.8 and F 1.7x.

First off, Iussed the 1.4 TC on both lenses, deciding it would be abetter comparison if magnified.

The results, the DA 55-300 PLM produced a larger subject, even though I had to enlarge the 60-250 to match the extra reach, IMHO the 60-250 image was still better.

PLM+ 1.4 TC for 420mm


DA* 60-250 + 1.4 TC for 350mm


Answers the question 60-250 or 55-300 for straight up image quality. Mind you for squirrel shots , do you really care? Also with a 9.5 minimum aperture there were some birds with finer feathers (like the White Breasted Nuthatch) the PLM simply would not lock focus on. Yet no problem for the 60-250. What a difference 1.5 stops makes.

I did however finally manage a PLM image at 420mm image of this bird.


A downy wood pecker visited for a bit. Absolutely no problem for the PLM.
Norm,

Nice shots all round, to answer your questions and also make some observations , for squirrel shots, while Rupert is sadly gone, Otis is still out there going strong, watch yourself as you have already announced to the world that you are going out in the woods for an extended period

As to the difference between the 55-300 and 60-250, I get the impression that the real difference I see between the shots is contrast not actually sharpness of the image , have you looked at adding contrast (just a little tweek) to the 55-300 shot?

Also your lead in suggests you were going to try the 300/2.8, but no shots?

Lastly, I detect a hint of lateral CA on the 55-300 shot, look closely at the right hand side of the tree on the left side of the frame, if you have a lateral CA tool that change the magnification ratio of the three color layers,(as opposed to a fringe removal tool) I would be willing to bet the 55-300 would get a much sharper appearance.

As a second thought, what if you have the camera use lens correction curves for both? Just a last minute thought here, but if you can correct for the lateral CA, the weight advantage you mention in the 300mm plus thread where you share these images, make the 55-300 the one to take, assuming the loss of 1.5 stops lets you focus.
04-01-2019, 05:06 PM   #293
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,941
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
Norm,

Nice shots all round, to answer your questions and also make some observations , for squirrel shots, while Rupert is sadly gone, Otis is still out there going strong, watch yourself as you have already announced to the world that you are going out in the woods for an extended period



Also your lead in suggests you were going to try the 300/2.8, but no shots?

Lastly, I detect a hint of lateral CA on the 55-300 shot, look closely at the right hand side of the tree on the left side of the frame, if you have a lateral CA tool that change the magnification ratio of the three color layers,(as opposed to a fringe removal tool) I would be willing to bet the 55-300 would get a much sharper appearance.

As a second thought, what if you have the camera use lens correction curves for both? Just a last minute thought here, but if you can correct for the lateral CA, the weight advantage you mention in the 300mm plus thread where you share these images, make the 55-300 the one to take, assuming the loss of 1.5 stops lets you focus.
QuoteQuote:
As to the difference between the 55-300 and 60-250, I get the impression that the real difference I see between the shots is contrast not actually sharpness of the image , have you looked at adding contrast (just a little tweek) to the 55-300 shot?
After pixel peeping on the centre of the frame, the eye which was the focus point. The DA* 60-250 is sharper. I intentionally used the same settings on both images I used the best image I could get on the DA 55-300 and then copied those settings onto the DA*60-250. So this is a raw comparison, not a jpg comparison, what could be done with the jpgs, lens correction etc I really have no idea.

There is a contrast difference, the sun moved a little while I was changing lenses or between the first and last images. But there is a clear difference in sharpness. I'd be very surprised if anything would change that. And in any case, using a lens that requires correction as opposed to one that doesn't still leaves the lens at disadvantage.

The Tamron I used for the last images, but took no comparison images with the other two. Much as I'd love to keep testing all day, I'd like a few good Redpoll images before they go, and neither the 55-300 or a 60-250 is a good small bird lens from my set up. OK for squirrels though.

I'm happy with the DA 55-300 without the TC so I'll probably just stick to that.

04-01-2019, 05:58 PM   #294
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,034
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I used the best image I could get on the DA 55-300 and then copied those settings onto the DA*60-250.
That seems a reasonable test. Was the 60-250 worse than the 55-300 without much pp? Either way you get less hassle or better photo.
I am interested about the 55-300+1.4x at the 270 mark though. I consider the 1.4x about a 1.2x because I think the combo at 270 magnified is better than when at 300 not magnified. The lens is just that much better at 270 and below.
04-01-2019, 06:16 PM   #295
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,941
QuoteOriginally posted by swanlefitte Quote
That seems a reasonable test. Was the 60-250 worse than the 55-300 without much pp? Either way you get less hassle or better photo.
I am interested about the 55-300+1.4x at the 270 mark though. I consider the 1.4x about a 1.2x because I think the combo at 270 magnified is better than when at 300 not magnified. The lens is just that much better at 270 and below.
Hmmm, next time I get a sunny day.
04-01-2019, 07:17 PM   #296
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,034
I still guess the 60-250 will be better since 250, 270 is so close. Is there a fall off with the 60-250 at the long end?
04-02-2019, 05:58 AM   #297
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,941
QuoteOriginally posted by swanlefitte Quote
I still guess the 60-250 will be better since 250, 270 is so close. Is there a fall off with the 60-250 at the long end?
Not much..... there's always a bit but as telephoto go, its quite good.

Last edited by normhead; 04-02-2019 at 06:15 AM.
04-02-2019, 06:13 AM   #298
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,034
Very little falloff from 200mm to 250mm. Interesting that it falls off the most at f5.6. Perhaps that data point is simply within testing accuracy since it isn't that substantial.
04-02-2019, 06:17 AM   #299
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,941
QuoteOriginally posted by swanlefitte Quote
Very little falloff from 200mm to 250mm. Interesting that it falls off the most at f5.6. Perhaps that data point is simply within testing accuracy since it isn't that substantial.
It falls off, but still excellent. And better edge performance than many long lenses. which is what helps it double as a landscape lens.
04-02-2019, 10:51 AM   #300
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2017
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 299
I'm heading off to the jungles of Costa Rica in a week, and had been planning on bringing the 55-300PLM, but Norm's post got me thinking about the 60-250 instead. So here's my quick comparison test, using the KP and roughly equivalent settings(though the 55-300 was at 260 instead of 250). PLM picture is the top one.
These were both handheld, and the light was good. So maybe not a good test for darker conditions. But the PLM result looks much sharper to me. And the PLM weighs half as much, takes up half as much space, and costs half as much.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX KP  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX KP  Photo 

Last edited by SteveinSLC; 04-02-2019 at 10:52 AM. Reason: Add more details
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
birds, elephant, f/6.3, f4.5-6.3 ed plm, flickr, hd pentax-da 55-300mm, k-mount, kp, norm, peanuts, pentax lens, pics, plm wr re, pm, post, slr lens, subject
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE MacLoz Lens Sample Photo Archive 53 02-09-2019 09:49 PM
HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE and K70 compatability rptdc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 05-05-2018 03:03 PM
Trouble with KP and HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE talgarik Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 37 05-01-2018 01:15 PM
HD Pentax-DA 55-300MM F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE for 306 EUR beholder3 Pentax Price Watch 3 11-18-2016 05:08 AM
HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE - No reviews whyhaveone Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 11-03-2016 02:36 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:18 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top