[honey bo bo]

Great shots, - but STILL doesn't explain the problems I had at the airshow

Your comments are in "USER REVIEWS" not in "In Depth Reviews". My PLM sounds like it does similar when I'm focusing using Spot Focusing at great distances and when there is a lot of clear sky ( nothing to focus on ). It goes back to "base" blurred at "rest" (probably closest distance focal point), until I give it something to focus on in the spot or in your case the 6 pt frame and it responds instantly.I don't have to use the F- ring I just have to push the back button again until I give it something to focus on. Nothing unusual just needs something to focus on. Lots of that going on in my Pictures submitted of the Kite Surfers.

[Des]

It might help to create a thread specifically for this issue, not just a "show us what it can do" - which is likely to get a broader range of responses.

I agree. The initial post is just a request for comments about the OP's problems with focusing, but the title suggests that it's a counterpart of the threads for the DA 18-135 and DA 16-85. Those thread mainly consist of sample images. I hope this thread turns into a gallery like those ones.

I've had my PLM since Feb 2017 (except when it was in hospital: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/344670-wha...-plm-lens.html) I've got quite a backlog of unprocessed images, because I have been waiting for DxO to release modules for it (especially to correct the vignetting automatically). I've now given up waiting, and I've been using manual adjustments.

[normhead]

Anyway, see the forum users' reviews here - and the latest (my!) post, in which I "point out" that it seems to have a "problem" when that lens get "confused" if the subject moves out of the chosen focus area.

How would the camera focus outside of the user chosen focus grid? When I focus with a single centre point I certainly don't expect the camera to maintain focus if I don't keep the point on the subject.

[normhead]

Back from my first time out with the DA55-300 PLM.

A few casual observations.

A Herring Gull image...

Taken at 300mm, wide open


One of my favourite images of a similar bird.


It's always tough when comparing to your best, because you don't get a great images every time. I may in fact at some point get an image as good with he 55-300, but the first evidence isn't good.

It did an adequate job tracking the gull after he took off. He flew away from me, so it's not a great pose but that's not the lenses fault.



I took the lens instead of my 18-135

I did find it useful for many of the walking around shots I take of forest walks etc.






So long story short, I'm happy with the lens from 55-200. Whether or not I can squeeze useful telephoto work out of it remains to be seen.

---

Last edited by normhead; 05-23-2018 at 07:13 AM.

[swanlefitte]

Back from my first time out with the DA*55-300.

You mean the plm?

[normhead]

You mean the plm?

Man, I must have been sleep typing.
Ya The DA 55-300 PLM, I stand corrected.

[RGlasel]

One of my favourite images of a similar bird.

I think Aperture is eating the lens ID from your EXIF, Flickr says the focal length is 135mm, was this shot taken with the DA 18-135?

Whether or not I can squeeze useful telephoto work out of it remains to be seen.

I don't trust what I can see from the Internet, is the shot of the seagull at 300mm with the 55-300 PLM too soft in your opinion? At web sizes, it's a striking photo, I really like the backlighting, but the feather details are nothing to write home about. I have the slow hunting, screw drive 55-300, the following picture was also taken wide open at 300mm, it's not DA * 300 quality, but from the 16 MP K-30 it isn't bad either.

---

Last edited by Racer X 69; 05-19-2018 at 06:01 PM.

[normhead]

I think Aperture is eating the lens ID from your EXIF, Flickr says the focal length is 135mm, was this shot taken with the DA 18-135?I don't trust what I can see from the Internet, is the shot of the seagull at 300mm with the 55-300 PLM too soft in your opinion? At web sizes, it's a striking photo, I really like the backlighting, but the feather details are nothing to write home about. I have the slow hunting, screw drive 55-300, the following picture was also taken wide open at 300mm, it's not DA * 300 quality, but from the 16 MP K-30 it isn't bad either.

I didn't even take the 18-135 on the trip, that's just not possible. But yes Aperture doesn't correctly report the lens name. 4 years of no support may finally be beginning to take it's toll. However it never accurately reported the Sigma 70 macro so at least I have experience dealing with the issue. I'm not sure any other software does either, but I don't use any other software so I wouldn't know.

[swanlefitte]

Perhaps the "one of my favorite images" was the 50-135?
Funny my sigma 70 comes up as a zoom in photoshop. An annoying extra click.

[northcoastgreg]

Unlike many of the posters here, I didn't acquire the DA 55-300 PLM primarily for the long end of its zoom range. I acquired the lens primarily for landscape work. My Tamron 70-200 is just too heavy for that kind of photography; and besides, I prefer Pentax colors for landscapes. I'm shocked how good the PLM is on the wide end. At 55mm it produces more contrasty, saturated images than my A 50 macro, and is nearly as sharp. And while it can't quite match the artistic rendering of the DFA 100 macro at 100mm, it doesn't give up all that much in terms of sharpness to the macro. Very impressive for a consumer grade zoom. Even at 300mm, where it's only moderately sharp, it will still do in a pinch.

@70mm:



@88mm:



@108mm:



@300mm

[SteveinSLC]

Marmot in Park City

[DrawsACircle]

I’ve had the PLM lens more than a year now, and I like it, fast focus and IQ with my K-70, I can’t/won’t complain about it. I have the DA*300 as well, but there’s no reason to compare the two at 300mm, the two lenses each serve their purpose.
Link to some of my PLM pictures (yep, my son is a goalkeeper, and yep photography is not my only hobby )
Football (Soccer) | Flickr
Brians trailer | Flickr
Airplanes | Flickr
RC Activities | Flickr

[timb64]

I’ve had the PLM lens more than a year now, and I like it, fast focus and IQ with my K-70, I can’t/won’t complain about it. I have the DA*300 as well, but there’s no reason to compare the two at 300mm, the two lenses each serve their purpose.
Link to some of my PLM pictures (yep, my son is a goalkeeper, and yep photography is not my only hobby )
Football (Soccer) | Flickr
Brians trailer | Flickr
Airplanes | Flickr
RC Activities | Flickr

Great shots,I especially like the RC Mosquito,one of my favourite WWII aircraft.

[DrawsACircle]

Great shots,I especially like the RC Mosquito,one of my favourite WWII aircraft.

Thanks Tim, I was actually pretty surprised that the Mosquito shots turned out so well in rather low light conditions.
The Lancaster and the “flying fortress” are my favourite WWII planes, the Lancaster visited the western part of Jutland where I live 7-8 years ago. A “fly-over” a Lancaster crash site kept as a memorial for the Australian crew burried in the ground - a moment to remember for all the spectators and the Australian relatives visiting the site that day.
http://www.airmen.dk/p216pp.htm

[honey bo bo]

I 'm impressed with AF on spot & back Button and like the speed and accuracy. Just have to figure out whether I should use focus on distance and follow the subject in or wide open and zoom in on the subject to get the aerial shots. Focus on distance is ok if I can predict the path travelled and wide and zoom is ok as long as I don't lose the subject out of the view finder. I'll figure it out ! Some examples from the past week . The first 4 shots are before & After with heavy cropping in P.P. also I have the HD 1.4 X TC attached (up o 420mm). The last shot is just a Motion study : note the water bubbles suspended and the wings are blurred had no 1.4 TC (300mm) on the PLM . All shots were hand held by a little old man that doesn't drink a pail full anymore.