[HoundFrog]

I understand the vignetting situation, but what about aberrations and, generally, resolution? In the mod topic there are some pics of the test object, but no numbers is given so it's hard to compare.

Asking because I was (still am) shopping for one, specifically to be used with K-1. I tried two copies that were on the second-hand market in my area, both unmodified. And I must say the edges/corners at 250 did not look good at all. There was some weirdness in the fine details, looking like a mix of coma and spherical aberration. I am not talking about CA here, that's another story. Maybe that were not the best copies, of course.

Guys, what is your experience with this lens on FF? Will you make a shot of something with fine details close to the edge, at 250?

[luftfluss]

Have you checked out the review of the D FA 70-210/4, which has comparisons with the 60-250?

HD Pentax-D FA 70-210mm F4 ED SDM WR Review - Sharpness Comparison with the DA* 60-250mm | PentaxForums.com Reviews

[HoundFrog]

Have you checked out the review of the D FA 70-210/4, which has comparisons with the 60-250?

HD Pentax-D FA 70-210mm F4 ED SDM WR Review - Sharpness Comparison with the DA* 60-250mm | PentaxForums.com Reviews

No, I did not Thanks!

[jslifoaw]

I treat it like a full frame lens and it's very good. I don't bother to crop with it. Maybe a bit of purple/green CA but good sharpness to the edges. Probably key to have a good copy on hand.

Also make sure your focus is spot on since small differences could have a huge impact on perceived sharpness, and if you're shooting a distant object outdoors, you also have to be mindful of atmospheric distortion that can smear details.

[jatrax]

I had the 60-250 for some time. Modified it work on FF but still was not 100% happy with it. Focus on my copy was slower than I wanted. I sold it in anticipation of the 70-210 f/4 but after it was released I could not decide on the 70-210 or buying the 60-250 again. The indecision lasted about 6 months.

I finally bought the 70-210 and I am happy with it. But either lens is very good, you just have to decide which feature set is more important to you.

---------- Post added 05-25-21 at 01:40 PM ----------

Is 60-250 really full-frame?

And the answer to that is: no. But modified by removing the baffle it is very close. Perhaps no worse vignetting than some FF 70-200 lenses.

[HoundFrog]

which feature set is more important to you.

Right.. I want it for landscapes, and 'long' architecture. Zoom range, colors --just what I need, zoom range especially. What disappointed me in the copies I tried is the edge/corner.. well it's not the lack of sharpness per se, it's more an ugly rendition of slighly out-of-focus fine objects located far from center.

[bdery]

There's the 70-210mm comparison I wrote indeed, but you'll also find valuable information in this article where I explain how to modify it, and test the results:

Modifying the DA* 60-250mm F4 for Full Frame - Introduction - In-Depth Articles

TL;DR : it's a full frame lens all the way. I have been using it on FF for many years without second thoughts.

[Andrea K]

I modified the mine to use with FF, now is in the service center to change the SDM... I feel naked without it

[Wheatfield]

It can be turned into a full frame lens via some minor butchery, but it cannot be turned into a reliable lens. Owners are playing Rusdian Roulette with this lens regarding the very failure prone autofocus.
The AF on my copy failed twice, once under warranty, and once on my dime.
There isn't a barge pole in existence long enough to get me to touch another copy of that piece of junk.
Just buy the 70-210/4. You are giving up a little bit of zoom range, but you are gaining a lens that will actually work.

[Andrea K]

My DA* 60-250 AF almost die one month after the warranty expire... the service center is charging me of 200 euros...
I have not changed it because the 70-210 is a little longer and does not have the tripod collar.

[RICHARD L.]

the 70-210 is a little longer and does not have the tripod collar.

You can acquire a Tamron tripod collar for this lens (# A034TM) as the lens is sold both as a Pentax DFA and a Tamron version too.


Regards

[Sandy Hancock]

Suggesting the DFA70-210 is physically longer than than the DA*60-250 is hilarious. While it may be true at the short end, the former has an internal zoom design, while the latter extends a mile at the long end. It is also heavier, chunkier, and infinitely slower focussing (if it focusses at all).

As far as effective focal length goes, unless you are at near-infinity the DFA70-210 may in fact feel longer. For me, focus breathing matters.

I know the DA*60-250 has its fans, but I've have two copies of it (still have the second) and just can't love it on crop, let alone full frame. I don't need no steenkin' tripod collar - just get the 70-210

[RICHARD L.]

know the DA*60-250 has its fans

Indeed, despite its weight, I still like it very much. Unbeatable for sharpness and contrast in landscape imaging. Mine still works like a trooper after many years.

[Sandy Hancock]

I haven't been to the Grand Canyon, but the DFA70-210 works for landscapes too

[RICHARD L.]

For my K1, I purchased a used DFA* 70-200 mm f/2.8. It got better reviews than the Tamron-sourced 70-210 f/4, particularly after B. Dery's evaluation. From your picture, it seems to deliver brilliantly in landscape imaging too.