[Gold Coast]

I am getting a Pentax KP shortly and need help with a 50-300 zoom lens. B&H has two available one is the Pentax HD Pentax-DA-55/300 F/4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE lens and the other is the
Pentax HD Pentax- DA 55/300 F/4-5.8 WR lens. Between these two which would you choose and WHY. If you consider one over the other what would be your choice? I have had many cameras over the years and am looking to get the Pentax KP with the kit lens 18/135 and want to get to 300mm at tops so one of the above lens will get me there. all feed back will be
greatly appreciated. Thanks

Bill

[luftfluss]

I am getting a Pentax KP shortly and need help with a 50-300 zoom lens. B&H has two available one is the Pentax HD Pentax-DA-55/300 F/4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE lens and the other is the
Pentax HD Pentax- DA 55/300 F/4-5.8 WR lens. Between these two which would you choose and WHY. If you consider one over the other what would be your choice? I have had many cameras over the years and am looking to get the Pentax KP with the kit lens 18/135 and want to get to 300mm at tops so one of the above lens will get me there. all feed back will be
greatly appreciated. Thanks

Bill

Here's a review of the PLM model that includes a comparison with the older one:

HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 PLM WR RE Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

[aslyfox]

among the variants the PLM version is considered quite good and was my choice

Pentax Lens Review Database » Digital Era Pentax K-Mount Lenses » DA Zoom Lenses HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE Review RSS Feed

Description:
The HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE is a compact, weather-sealed APS-C telephoto zoom lens featuring a retractable barrel design. This lens also debuts PLM (Pulse Motor) autofocus technology and an electromagnetic aperture diaphragm to facilitate smooth focusing and exposure adjustments during video recording.

Unlike earlier Pentax lenses, the aperture stop-down lever in the camera is not used to control the diaphragm of this lens. A DSLR launched in 2013 or later is needed to operate this new system (the K-500 is not compatible).

The optical formula of this lens has been redesigned compared to the previous DA 55-300mm F4-5.8. The new lens now has a rear-mounted focus ring and internal focus, is nearly 3 cm shorter when collapsed, but also loses about half a stop of light at both ends.

Unofficial Full-Frame Compatibility Tests by Pentax Forums
★☆☆ Usable with reservations at select F-stop/focal length combinations

High-precision exposure control in movie mode thanks to the electromagnetic aperture diaphragm.
NOT COMPATIBLE with the K-500 and with Pentax DSLRs launched before 2013.
Firmware update needed for compatibility with the Pentax K-S2, K-S1, K-3 II, K-3, K-50, and K-1. Fully supported by newer bodies.

Read more at: HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 PLM WR RE
Conclusion
In short, the HD Pentax DA 55-300mm F4.5–6.3 ED PLM WR RE is an improvement in almost every conceivable way over its predecessor. It's smaller. It's lighter. It's tougher. It's faster. It's quieter. It's sharper. And it has less distortion.

Better still? It costs $50 less at launch than its predecessor did when it hit store shelves.

There simply isn't a better non-pro telephoto zoom option in the Pentax lineup, and no third-party lens rivals its abilities or price.

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/hd-pentax-da-55-300mm-f45-63-ed-plm-wr/...#ixzz6Cja3Bwyy

[gump]

I was faced with this choice and went here for advise. The consensus was the PLM was a better lens and at the time the price difference was 60 bucks and well worth going with the PLM. I cannot compare it to the other lens, however, I have not regretted the purchase.

[Pentax Syntax]

I have both lenses. IQ is similar but focusing on the PLM variant is MUCH faster. For most telephoto applications the PLM is better. Note that only modern bodies like your KP will work with the PLM. Older bodies don’t work well with aperture or the PLM focus. For these reasons, I kept the older screw drive version to work with older bodies.

[BWG]

I’ve had the older version (it committed suicide by falling 14 floors) and replaced it with the PLM. Buy the PLM, no matter the price difference. The PLM focuses faster and much more accurately. It’s not even close. And for the record, the older slower lens wasn’t bad per se.

[THoog]

The older 55-300 (not PLM) was regarded to be optically one of the best "consumer" zooms in that range, and the PLM is generally considered to be as good or better, so the decision really comes down to the cost difference and whether you are going to use the lens on an older body that can't support the PLM. My 55-300 hasn't done me the favor of falling 14 floors or I would have probably replaced it for the faster focusing speed. (The KP has a stronger screwdrive motor than older bodies, which helps the older 55-300 in that regard).

[boriscleto]

I bought the 55-300 WR when B&H had it at half price. I won the 55-300 PLM in the drawing here in November. I'll probably be listing the 55-300 WR in the marketplace very soon.

I only use either one as part of my light kit, I own the 150-450, with the 18-135. The 55-300 is faster at the long end, but you have to stop it down, it isn't as sharp wide open as the PLM. It is also slower to AF, and the screw drive AF is loud. The PLM is silent. The 18-135, and especially the 150-450, make some noise when they AF, but I don't hear the PLM at all

On the other hand the 55-300 WR isn't an IF lens, so it doesn't focus breath. It was always a nice close up lens, which is nice for a nature walk around lens.

[carlb]

Get the PLM - the focusing is fantastic.

[philanker2012]

I also have KP. Previously had the former 55-300 which had good IQ as others have noted. The non PLM is well known for focus hunting on older bodies, this is improved on the KP as it does not hunt so much and is a bit faster at locking on.

I recently traded it in against the PLM lens. The IQ is as good, maybe better. The main difference is the focus speed. It really is fast with no hunting, so PLM is the way to go every day.

[Des]

I have had one of the screwdriven 55-300 f4-5.8 models and the f4.5-6.3 PLM. The short answer is, I agree with other posters: if it is within budget and you have a camera that supports KAF4 (ie K-50 or later), just get the PLM. It is a great combination with the KP.

My subjective impression from using these two zooms for some time is that the resolution on the older screwdriven model (mine was the DA-L) is about as good at 300mm f8-f11 as the PLM is. Here are two examples at 300mm f8, both taken with the KP, the first with the screwdriven model and the second with the PLM.



Hardly anything between them in terms of resolution, with a good copy of each.

But IMO the PLM is better at wider apertures. Stopping down to f8 is still an advantage, but you can get very good results at 300mm f6.3






With my screwdriven model 55-300 I don't think the results at 300mm f6.3 were as good. The same is true at other focal lengths: the PLM doesn't need to be stopped down as much. Even though the PLM has a slightly narrower maximum aperture across most of the focal range (e.g. f4.5 v f4 at 55mm; f5.6 v f4.5 at 200mm; f6.3 v f5.8 at 300mm), the fact that the PLM is more usable wide open largely overcomes this disadvantage.

Like many consumer zooms, the screwdriven 55-300 is rather prone to nisen bokeh, like the lines you see in the background here.

The PLM rarely exhibits this. In fact its bokeh and rendering are generally very good for a consumer zoom - no doubt because of the rounded aperture blades.




And of course the PLM's real party trick is its much faster and quieter AF - the ideal lens for the fleeting, once-in-a-lifetime wildlife opportunity:


Even though the maximum magnification is about the same, the PLM has a shorter MFD (0.95 metres v 1.4 metres) which is a big advantage in the field. It also folds up to a more compact size.

The build quality is good, but I'd add a word of caution. It doesn't take a lot to break the plastic barrel, especially with the lens extended. You don't need to baby it, but take more care than I did: What to avoid with your 55-300 PLM lens! - PentaxForums.com

For PLM samples and discussion, see this thread: HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE - Show us what it can do, what it CAN'T! - PentaxForums.com You will notice how popular the lens is for shots across the focal range, not just at the long end. You'll see some fine landscape images in this thread.

The one other comment to add about the PLM is that the slow maximum aperture at the long end can hinder focusing when the light is poor. The practical solution is to back off to where the maximum aperture is f5.6 - around 260mm. There seems to be a meaningful difference between the ability of each of my current cameras (KP, K-3 and K-S2) to focus at f5.6 compared to f6.3 in mediocre light.

[SSGGeezer]

I love the PLM, spend the extra as it is an amazing value and as Des has shown, can take great images with fine IQ.

[ramseybuckeye]

I had the older non WR DA 55-300 which was good at F8, but horribly slow And noisy autofocus. Now I have the KP and the PLM model. It is a monumental difference in focus speed, Better IQ without having to stop down, and smaller. The PLM seems to be made for the KP, I highly recommend it, as seemingly everyone else that has one does.

[timb64]

If your aim is the best two lens kit you might want to consider the DA16-85WR instead of the 18-135,more wide end range,less overlap and (arguably?) better IQ?

I've also found my non PLM 55-300 focuses with far more assurance on my new KP compared to my previous K5ii.

[Des]

If your aim is the best two lens kit you might want to consider the DA16-85WR instead of the 18-135,more wide end range,less overlap and (arguably?) better IQ?

I like the 18-135 and I don't have the 16-85, but I agree with you Tim.

We had this discussion in an earlier thread posted by the OP: Pentax K70 or KP with the 18/135 Pros & Cons - PentaxForums.com For the benefit of anyone else considering this choice of kit I would repeat what I said there. The arguments for the 16-85 over the 18-135 as a companion for the 55-300 are:
1. The 55-300 would cover off the telephoto end better than either the 16-85 or the 18-135 (the PLM is really good for what it is). So the extra reach of the 18-135 is not such a compelling case.
2. The extra width of the 16-85 would save carrying an ultrawide on many occasions. Or to echo what Tim says, it's a better basis for a two-lens kit.
3. The 16-85 has HD coatings (a big plus IMO and makes it a more seamless pairing with the PLM), which the 18-135 doesn't.
4. The 16-85 would be better for the types of landscapes requiring better edge-to-edge sharpness (and it would save carrying another lens for this purpose).
For someone buying a whole kit who baulks at the extra cost of the 16-85, I would say if you need to make savings choose a cheaper body (e.g. K-70 rather than KP) instead. The other thing to bear in mind is that if you get the 18-135, you are more likely to want a wider lens to go with it - with the 16-85 you might be able to save (or at least defer) that expense.