Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-30-2016, 05:50 PM - 1 Like   #31
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Scorpio71GR's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Michigan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,407
K50 with the HD 55-300. Poor lighting, overcast, not enough light, bright white grey background. Lots of PP and cropping, the HD 55-300 handles PF very well.
European Starling







04-30-2016, 06:16 PM   #32
Des
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Des's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Sth Gippsland Victoria Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,891
Nicely done Michael, as always.

I'm finding the 55-300 pairs well with the K-3. AF is faster, and the extra pixels (compared to K-30) and lack of AA filter are yielding better results. Here's a young Eastern Yellow Robin that visits often.



[Edit: apologies for posting in the wrong thread. I didn't realise this thread was for the HD WR version only.]

Last edited by Des; 08-16-2016 at 10:10 PM.
04-30-2016, 10:04 PM - 2 Likes   #33
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Scorpio71GR's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Michigan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,407
The 55-300 does very well on the K3. The K3 is powerful enough to quickly rack that lens back and forth. Not so much on the K50. It tends to hunt a bit and can struggle in low light. Luckily that is what quickshift is for. Nice shot of the robin. I like the bokeh in the background.

An American Goldfinch that was in the tree in front of my house. Never seen one here before.
K50 with the HD 55-300.





05-03-2016, 01:06 AM   #34
Pentaxian
schnitzer79's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,196
some great photos here. Will have the chance to test out the HD(and WR) version pretty soon since I bought one(new) over the weekend at a bargain. I sold my DA version 1 month ago and couldnt resist at the deal I came across online. I was putting money aside for the tamron 70-200 f2.8. oh well, LBA has hit again. look at this way, I bought the lens for 50 euros more of what I sold mine, so not much harm done.
I used the DA version quite a bit with my k-50, which I also sold. Any noticeable improvement with the HD version and K-3ii? This and the 18-135 make a perfect combo for travelling abroad. light, WR and versatile!
will post some pics soon!

05-03-2016, 07:05 PM   #35
Senior Member
naldopr's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 163
I need this lens I want to start taking birds photo seems great for the price?
05-03-2016, 07:23 PM - 2 Likes   #36
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Scorpio71GR's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Michigan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,407
QuoteOriginally posted by naldopr Quote
I need this lens I want to start taking birds photo seems great for the price?
You can not beat this lens for the price. The build quality is very good. The only real downside is that is a bit slow and needs to be stopped down to F8 to get decent sharpness. That is typical for a lens in this price range. My 60-250 is sharp right at f4 but that is a $900 dollar lens. I have the DA*16-50, DA*50-135, DA*60-250 and I still have alot respect for the 55-300. Learn it's limitations and build on what it does well.

K50 300mm f10 1/200s ISO200 handheld









---------- Post added 05-03-16 at 10:36 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by schnitzer79 Quote
some great photos here. Will have the chance to test out the HD(and WR) version pretty soon since I bought one(new) over the weekend at a bargain. I sold my DA version 1 month ago and couldnt resist at the deal I came across online. I was putting money aside for the tamron 70-200 f2.8. oh well, LBA has hit again. look at this way, I bought the lens for 50 euros more of what I sold mine, so not much harm done.
I used the DA version quite a bit with my k-50, which I also sold. Any noticeable improvement with the HD version and K-3ii? This and the 18-135 make a perfect combo for travelling abroad. light, WR and versatile!
will post some pics soon!
I only have the K3 so I can not comment on the K3ii. On the K3 the lens focuses faster and better in low light. SR on the K3 is much better than the K50. The HD version handles flare much better and controls PF better as well. Both lens are sharp and will produce excellent results. I got the HD version for the WR since this what I take camping. I primarily use the 55-300 on the K50 paired with the 18-135 for the ultimate lightweight WR kit.

This is a shot with the K3 where I did not have enough room in my camera bag for the 60-250 so the 55-300 went along. I was shooting into the sun.
300mm f9 1/400s ISO 1600


Last edited by Scorpio71GR; 05-03-2016 at 07:39 PM.
05-04-2016, 08:09 AM - 1 Like   #37
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,927
Here is a recent (yesterday) photo taken hand held with the K3 and 55-300. I find the quality quite good for the price. I still lust over the 150-450, but will probably never get it because of the limited retirement income. I make do with the 55-300 and M 400, and occasionally the M400 + AFA 1.7X. This on land photo shows the detail available with the lens.1/250@f/11, ISO 200, 300mm. Cropped from 6016x4000 to 2400x1600.

05-28-2016, 02:12 AM - 1 Like   #38
Pentaxian
schnitzer79's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,196


07-28-2016, 01:45 PM - 1 Like   #39
Pentaxian
Archimedes the Dog's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 1,131
I've found the lens rather soft, but when conditions are right it works well for a truly reasonable price. If it was a stronger performer I might reach for it more but when I need range it's a decent choice.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5  Photo 
07-28-2016, 06:19 PM   #40
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,801
QuoteOriginally posted by Archimedes the Dog Quote
I've found the lens rather soft,
I'm not surprised that the photo you posted is soft. 1/125s is simply too slow a shutter speed for a photo with this much movement.

The 55-300mm is not a soft lens, as most of the images in this thread show. It won't stand as much cropping as my DA*300, but if not cropped too hard, it is very sharp with amazing colour and contrast for a budget lens. If that is not your experience, then your lens is defective. Have you tried AF Adjust? That could explain your difficulties.
07-29-2016, 09:07 AM   #41
Pentaxian
Archimedes the Dog's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 1,131
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
I'm not surprised that the photo you posted is soft. 1/125s is simply too slow a shutter speed for a photo with this much movement.

The 55-300mm is not a soft lens, as most of the images in this thread show. It won't stand as much cropping as my DA*300, but if not cropped too hard, it is very sharp with amazing colour and contrast for a budget lens. If that is not your experience, then your lens is defective. Have you tried AF Adjust? That could explain your difficulties.
I was tracking the target to get background blur, so 1/125 is a decent setting for that (on the advice of an experienced photographer of horse racing), as is a little softness to be expected as I track a moving target. I actually found that image to be one of my better examples from this lens.

I have found mine to be soft even on tripod under ideal conditions, perhaps mine is defective (I bought it almost a year ago so I think perhaps I'm stuck with it, though). I've got my AF dialed in to the best result (and verified it this morning) and still it compares as soft to my other lenses. Comparing here to the 18-85, which is admittedly a top-notch lens, and the 35mm DA 2.8. These examples are at ~5.6 but I had similar results at f11.

I also don't find mine to "hunt" on AF like others have reported (at least not like my FA 100mm macro). Color and contrast are good, and sharpness is a bourgeois concept anyway, according to Cartier-Bresson (who shot with a Leica and thus found it easy to say). I just don't find this lens as impressive as my others.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5  Photo 

Last edited by Archimedes the Dog; 07-29-2016 at 04:24 PM.
07-29-2016, 03:00 PM   #42
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
The problem we don't speak of the same sharpness. The 55-300 is good at 300mm if you stop down to f/8. But if you look at a 100% crop and it is not that great. If you need to crop significantly, then it start to really show. I would call that on the borderline of soft but for that amount of money, this is indeed a great choice. There nothing better. At 190mm f/4.5 the lens is sharp even on a 100% crop. This isn't perfect but it is much better.

I don't think the 55-300 provide really that much more details than a DA*200 despite the difference in focal length. But it is almost half the weight, less than half the price (5 time less expensive for a used DAL).. You can't have everything.

If you are not willing to spend 800€ and get something that is 800g or more, the 55-300 is hard to beat. There would be a tamron 70-200, for 550€ new, but that already more expensive and more than 1kg... I am sure the tamron beat the 55-300 once you put a TC, but then the price diffferent grow again.

Basically, in current line up there no way arround it. We may get one day a high quality 70-300 f/4-5.6 that woud perfectly sharp at f/8, but that would cost at least 600€ and also 600g.
07-29-2016, 03:20 PM   #43
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,801
Not looking good Arch. The 55-300mm is a sharper lens than the 18-55, IME, especially at 55mm where the 18-55 is known to be soft. At the very least they should be equal.

You say you dialed in the auto-focus. A good way to double check is with CDAF (use Live View). If that is indeed not the issue, then I'm confident in saying your 55-300 is defective. I've compared all my DA zooms, 18-55 (original & II), 16-45, 18-135, 18-250 and 55-300. My 55-300 tested sharper than all but the 16-45.

Last edited by audiobomber; 07-29-2016 at 04:04 PM.
07-29-2016, 03:46 PM   #44
mee
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,021
Any HD Teleconverter 1.4x owners with this lens that would be willing to weigh in with their thoughts on the pair? I know it's going to be super slow on the long end (aperture wise) but I'm wonder if the combo still function? Specifically with AF... 1 stop from f/5.8 is what? a bit over f/8 ? But I find this lens is better stopped down to f/8 so that would be f/11 essentially with the TC.

How well/poor does it work with the 55-300?
07-29-2016, 04:32 PM   #45
Pentaxian
Archimedes the Dog's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 1,131
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
Not looking good Arch. The 55-300mm is a sharper lens than the 18-55, IME, especially at 55mm where the 18-55 is known to be soft. At the very least they should be equal.

You say you dialed in the auto-focus. A good way to double check is with CDAF (use Live View). If that is indeed not the issue, then I'm confident in saying your 55-300 is defective. I've compared all my DA zooms, 18-55 (original & II), 16-45, 18-135, 18-250 and 55-300. My 55-300 tested sharper than all but the 16-45.
Sorry for the typo, it was the 16-85 (posting too early in the morning) which is pretty notably sharp.

The 55-300 is largely a stepping stone lens for me on the way to something more expensive. It's definitely better than my FA 100-300 was. My example at least just doesn't dramatically outperform its price point IMO.
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!
camera, flickr, hd, hd pentax-da 55-300mm, k-mount, k3, k50, lens, michael, pentax lens, photos, price, sample photo, sharpness, slr lens, tree, trip, version, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HD PENTAX-DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED WR user review Painter Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 01-28-2014 02:16 PM
HD 55-300mm vs DA* 60-250mm Comparison Adam Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 01-28-2014 11:25 AM
Is there an in depth HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm WR review? OldNoob Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 01-27-2014 02:53 PM
HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm f/4-5.8 ED WR Mistral75 Pentax News and Rumors 126 10-08-2013 10:00 AM
New PENTAX-DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED WR HD RonakG Pentax News and Rumors 3 10-05-2013 02:32 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:36 AM. | 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