[jersey]

I have an issue with my 55-300 PLM. On long end when photographing things that are far away it is very soapy around the edges, it clearly lacks resolution and frankly I almost never photograph planes at 300, rarely beyond 200mm as most pictures are thrown away. This is not an issue for things that are close so I consider 55-300 great flower photography lens, for example Only for far away it starts to piss me off. Below 250 it is ok, from 200 down it is as sharp as I want.

I can remove this soapiness with Topaz or some other program but I want my gear to do the job, not rely on programming. And in long run I pay more for good lens then for program and updates


So I am considering getting myself DA* 60-250. Length-wise it will not hinder me as I do not use 300mm range for planes. But I wonder if it is worth getting it, will the sharpness and IQ that much better from 55-300 at 250mm? Has anyone some sort of comparison between those two lenses for long range shooting? Not birding as you are pretty close to bird anyway, but planes and so? Also will AF-C be much worse for SDM then it is for PLM? Think planes zooming by during start or landing?


And before someone say anything about DFA 150-450 - I do not have enough money

[clickclick]

Two thoughts. Is what you're seeing actually atmospheric issues, e.g. haze, heat etc., or do you have a bad copy of the PLM? I have both lenses, and I find my PLM to be just fine at the long end. So much so, I rarely grab my 60-250. I really use that on my K-1 II (I've done the baffle modification), and the PLM on my K-3 II. I know people talk about the 300 end of the PLM to not be as good as backed off a bit, but I've not really experienced that. Perhaps I have an exceptional copy.

[jersey]

No, when I do same plane, sitting still, at 200 and 300 there is slight difference in look. At 300 all the edges are a bit blurred, like someone use slight smudge on them. At 200, even after cropping, everything is sharp. I tried this handheld, on tripod, with different f-stops and different shutter speed. And with different weather - hot, cold, cloudy etc.


But, as I said, this is only for images of objects that are far away. When something is close everything is very sharp, no matter the focal length. I like PLM cause it is very light, fast to focus and small making transportation easy. But it does not serve its role for me when I photograph air planes at local airport so I though about replacing it for spotting. Maybe it is an issue with lens, but as I said I have no issues with it at 300mm when shooting flowers or some butterflies for example. Only when subject is far away.

[yucatanPentax]

You may want to consider the DA* 300mm for distance shots. Although not as flexible as a zoom, it has great sharpness. I use an F* 300mm and also have a DA* 60-250mm. I find the F* 300 focuses faster and adds a bit more reach for moving objects at greater distances. Honestly, if you spend the money on the DA* 60-250, which I like very much, you may be disappointed in the speed of focus for small objects like distant aircraft.

[jersey]

Prime is out of question. At least for now. Gdansk airport has several spotting platforms around the runaway and my favourite is in the middle of its length so I have nice view on planes zooming by when landing or starting few dozen meters for me. Lots of missed shots with long primes.

But if focus speed of DA* lacks so it may be even bigger issue in this case. It seems that I will have to live with PLM using it as I use it now, at 200-250 max and cropping if needed. I am not in much hurry to spent my hard earned money I just thought that I can get something that will cover the falling slightly worse IQ of PLM in the 200-250 range. Well, nothing is perfect it seems.


Perhaps Pentax will make star version of 55-300 in future

[One3rdEV]

Looking forward to have other owners also contribute their personal findings.

The 55-300mm PLM is one of many Pentax lenses that I like to follow for future knowledge someday.

To Jersey-
Out of curiosity, for investigative purposes have you tried verifying best performance at 300mm (specifically, momentarily ignoring lower focal length performance) near infinity focus using optimized AF fine adjust (this of course can be very difficult to do)? And I suppose verifying with focus enlargement in Live View may mitigate my prior question/suggestion anyways??

[jersey]

No, hyperfocal for this lens would be like 500 meters at f8 if I am not mistaken so I never really tried to check it in this way

[ramseybuckeye]

I kind of wonder about your copy of the PLM, maybe you should try to calibrate. I have occasionally seen the atmospheric heat conditions causing a similar problem (also in the DA*300). I am lucky enough to have the PLM and the DA* 300, I will more often use the DA* for birds and wildlife, and use the PLM if I need a zoom or I am at the beach or on a boat, places that have good light. These example are of distant subjects with the PLM on the DA 1.4 converter.

[ToddK]

I have both the PLM and the DA*60-250, and although I don't feel that I am losing that much quality at the long end of the PLM, there is no doubt that the DA*60-250 is better, assuming you can get it in good focus. For birds in flight, I have all but given up on the DA*60-250, but larger targets like planes, cars, etc., I think it works fine. I have taken very few photos of planes, but here are a few samples of a helicopter and sea plane. I was shooting birds at the time the helicopter flew over and I had way too fast of a shutter speed thus the static blades, but you can see the resolution and details. The sea plane images were taken with the DA*60-250 combined with the HD 1.4x teleconverter, which is a very good combo.

[AfterPentax Mark II]

I have both the PLM and the DA*60-250, and although I don't feel that I am losing that much quality at the long end of the PLM, there is no doubt that the DA*60-250 is better, assuming you can get it in good focus. For birds in flight, I have all but given up on the DA*60-250, but larger targets like planes, cars, etc., I think it works fine. I have taken very few photos of planes, but here are a few samples of a helicopter and sea plane. I was shooting birds at the time the helicopter flew over and I had way too fast of a shutter speed thus the static blades, but you can see the resolution and details. The sea plane images were taken with the DA*60-250 combined with the HD 1.4x teleconverter, which is a very good combo.

The helicopter is great! Especially now you do not see the blades working both on top and at the tail. That is what makes it special and made me think: WOW!

[EricBT]

You might want to give calibrating the lens at the long end a try. I did this using the dot tune method and it made a difference. Both these photos are at 300mm and heavily cropped. I did apply Topaz DeNoise which adds a little extra sharpening to the end result.

[UncleVanya]

There’s also no harm in using software, if overdone it shows, use a light touch and it’s not a bad thing.

[Sandy Hancock]

The DA*60-250 is optically better, but the SDM motor is very slow. I imagine that might become a source of frustration if you are used to the speed of the PLM.

[K2 to K50]

No, when I do same plane, sitting still, at 200 and 300 there is slight difference in look. At 300 all the edges are a bit blurred, like someone use slight smudge on them. At 200, even after cropping, everything is sharp. I tried this handheld, on tripod, with different f-stops and different shutter speed. And with different weather - hot, cold, cloudy etc.


But, as I said, this is only for images of objects that are far away. When something is close everything is very sharp, no matter the focal length. I like PLM cause it is very light, fast to focus and small making transportation easy. But it does not serve its role for me when I photograph air planes at local airport so I though about replacing it for spotting. Maybe it is an issue with lens, but as I said I have no issues with it at 300mm when shooting flowers or some butterflies for example. Only when subject is far away.

Generally I have found the 55-300 PLM very sharp at the full 300mm length (In fact, I rarely used it at any other length). But - once or twice, when cropping shots of subjects that were quite a distance away, I have felt the lens has not pulled in all the detail. Have never been sure if that was the lens, or me.

[butchblack]

Another thing that you might want to have checked is if the lens is focusing correctly.