Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-17-2020, 07:22 AM   #16
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,950
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by RICHARD L. Quote
FA 200 mm f/4 @ f/11

FA 80-160 mm f/4.5 @ f/11

Pictures of a Norway Maple in overcast weather conditions. Subject at 40 feet. Tightly handheld Pentax 645Z with the photographer leaning against a door frame. Both lenses at f/11, at or near their optimum aperture. RESULTS : Both lenses produced very similar images, saturated colors, excellent contrast, uniform sharpness from corner to corner. The FA zoom is 50 % heavier than the FA 200 mm f/4 but it is more versatile, being a 2X variable focal length lens. Anybody would be hard-pressed to determine a winner in these conditions, both are excellent performers when used correctly. Both of these lenses can be bought used on eBay for about 200 $ (U.S.) each.
Thanks for this comparison. Both lenses look good and are value champs. The 200 has the advantage of working with the Rear Converter 1.4X.

---------- Post added 07-17-20 at 09:41 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by RICHARD L. Quote
Maybe get an FA 150-300 mm f/5.6 instead of an FA 200 mm, but it's more cumbersome, that's true. Or buy both a small FA 200 mm for hiking and an FA 150-300 mm for its usefulness and imaging quality.

Regards
Ended up buying the 645 FA 300 F5.6. Lighter than the 100-300 and the biggie...works with the Rear Converter 1.4X for a light lens of over 400mm! I tend to go for more extreme focal length coverage vs having every mm covered. PentaxForums needs to add the FA 300 F5.6 lens to their compatibility chart for the 1.4X converter.

I need to try a short hike with the new backpack and all my lenses to see if the weight is too much. Another choice would be to leave all 200ish lenses at home and just use the A 120 macro with the Rear Converter 1.4X for an ultra light kit.

Thanks,
barondla

07-17-2020, 10:34 AM - 1 Like   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Quebec City, Quebec
Posts: 1,981
645 FA 200 mm f/4 + 645 1.4X teleconverter : very nice results, highly usable.



This morning I tried the combination of the 645 FA 200 mm f/4 + 645 1.4X teleconverter. Equivalent to a 280 mm f/5.6 telephoto. I upped my ISO to 1600 and shot at 1/500 sec @ f/9 despite very dark rainy and windy conditions. Resulting picture is more than satisfying, uniformly sharp and contrasty. I never tried the FA 300 mm f/5.6 but it's a well regarded optic.

Last edited by RICHARD L.; 07-19-2020 at 11:39 AM.
07-17-2020, 09:43 PM   #18
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,950
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by RICHARD L. Quote

This morning I tried the combination of the 645 FA 200 mm f/4 + 645 1.4X teleconverter. Equivalent to a 280 mm f/5.6 telephoto. I upped my ISO to 1600 and shot at 1/500 sec @ f/9 despite very dark rainy conditions. Resulting picture is more than satisfying, uniformly sharp and contrasty. I never tried the FA 300 mm f/5.6 but it's a well regarded optic.
The 200 with 1.4X converter photo looks very good. Wouldn't hesitate to use the combo. This adds another data point to the mix. Please consider adding this example in the Rear Converter 1.4X review. Once I've had time to shoot with it more, the FA 300 F5.6 with 1.4X will be added to the reviews.

Thanks again for taking and posting this test shot,
barondla
07-18-2020, 04:12 AM - 1 Like   #19
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Quebec City, Quebec
Posts: 1,981
Done. I just posted a review on this 1.4X TC.

Regards

07-19-2020, 11:29 AM   #20
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
wa2kqy's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Raleigh, NC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 274
Hi,

So, out shooting the Gourd Arch again. I used the FA 200/4 with the 1.4xTC and then the A* 300/4 by itself. On the tripod on the deck like I did the 200/4 and the 80-160 @ 160. This time just at f5.6 for both the 200 and the 300. I figure this is the most critical aperture to compare.

FA 200/4 plus 1.4x TX f5.6



A* 300/4 at f5.6



I can't say as I see enough difference to matter to the point where one would not want to use the 200 plus the TC. Now it boils down to what one wants to carry.

I picked up a new backpack bag yesterday and can fit the 300/4 in there but could just as easily leave it out and use the 200 plus TC and save the weight. I didn't get the TC with the 200 in mind, it was to lengthen the 300 so I don't need a 400. But options are always good.

Stan

Last edited by wa2kqy; 07-19-2020 at 11:36 AM.
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!
1.4x, 645d, 645z, camera, converter, f/11, fa, fa 200 mm, fa 80-160 vs, lens, lenses, medium format, mm, norway maple, vs 645 fa
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Architecture Last of my tests : 645 FA 80-160 mm f/4.5 RICHARD L. Post Your Photos! 10 01-08-2020 02:01 PM
Architecture Old flour mill with a 645 FA 80-160 mm f/4.5 RICHARD L. Post Your Photos! 2 11-02-2019 11:41 AM
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs....... Steelski Pentax K-5 2 06-28-2017 04:59 PM
Anyone Using FA 80-160 on 645D Images Anyone ? rollsman4 Pentax Medium Format 12 09-18-2016 07:56 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:54 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