[dark64]

Pentax smc PENTAX DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED vs Pentax smc DA 18-270mm f/4-5.8...

I need telezoom lense at least 250mm wide. The 18-270 have faster af and lower min. light but higher max liht. It's also more expensive than 55-300. In the other hand 55-300 is sharper, cheaper but min. Light is higher . Also i read that af is slower... any ideas? Other ideas?

[UncleVanya]

Which camera do you own?

[Adam]

If your camera supports it, get the new 55-300mm PLM. Compatible with the K-50 and newer.

[pathdoc]

Which lenses do you already own and which camera(s) do you have? These are important things to know in order to make recommendations.

[UncleVanya]

Which lenses do you already own and which camera(s) do you have? These are important things to know in order to make recommendations.

Totally agree. Also where the current lenses fail you - too heavy, too many lens changes, not enough quality, need weather resistance, etc.

[jddwoods]

If your camera supports it, get the new 55-300mm PLM. Compatible with the K-50 and newer.

Hello Adam I noticed you have highly recommended this lens including as an upgrade from the previous version. I was waiting to see if there would be an in depth review but I definitely wanted to move up from my HD DA 55-300 WR to something better, as in quicker and quieter autofocus. The image quality of the current DA 55-300 is fine for my eyes and budget. If the DA* were twice the price I might have saved up for it but it is almost $900 higher than the 55-300 PLM which is just too much for me. I ordered the 55-300 PLM from Adorama yesterday. If it has image and build qualities as good as the HD 55-300 but with faster and quieter autofocus I will be a very happy person.
Will there be an in depth review soon? I would expect it should be mainly positive, especially considering the cost of the lens. I will be using it on my K-3 with the latest version 1.30 firmware installed.

[Kerebron]

If your camera supports it, get the new 55-300mm PLM. Compatible with the K-50 and newer.

I second that. I've got mine only for a couple of days now, but all I can say is 'Good work, Pentax!'. Highly recommended.

I have found only one fault so far - front lens cap slips out of my fingers very easily, because of weirdly shaped (rounded) parts used to pinch its locking mechanism. It makes removing and attaching of the cap very tricky (especially with a hood on). YMMV.

[Adam]

Hello Adam I noticed you have highly recommended this lens including as an upgrade from the previous version. I was waiting to see if there would be an in depth review but I definitely wanted to move up from my HD DA 55-300 WR to something better, as in quicker and quieter autofocus. The image quality of the current DA 55-300 is fine for my eyes and budget. If the DA* were twice the price I might have saved up for it but it is almost $900 higher than the 55-300 PLM which is just too much for me. I ordered the 55-300 PLM from Adorama yesterday. If it has image and build qualities as good as the HD 55-300 but with faster and quieter autofocus I will be a very happy person.
Will there be an in depth review soon? I would expect it should be mainly positive, especially considering the cost of the lens. I will be using it on my K-3 with the latest version 1.30 firmware installed.

The preliminary review is already live, full review almost done. Pretty much everything that needed to be said has been said below

Hands-On with the Pentax DA 55-300mm PLM WR RE - Hands-On Tests | PentaxForums.com

[Des]

Pentax smc PENTAX DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED vs Pentax smc DA 18-270mm f/4-5.8...

I need telezoom lense at least 250mm wide. The 18-270 have faster af and lower min. light but higher max liht. It's also more expensive than 55-300. In the other hand 55-300 is sharper, cheaper but min. Light is higher . Also i read that af is slower... any ideas? Other ideas?

Welcome to PF @dark64.

When you refer to max and min light, I assume you mean aperture? The narrowest aperture doesn't really matter, because you would almost never want to go much beyond f16 anyway. By that point the resolution has deteriorated because of diffraction. As for the widest aperture, the 55-300 will be faster (ie wider maximum aperture) at every focal length in their common range (55-270). The maximum aperture for the 55-300 is as follows:
55-125mm f4
125-200mm f4.5
200-275mm f5.6
275mm+ f5.8
For the DA 18-270, the maximum aperture (reportedly) is as follows:
18-24mm f3.5
25-33mm f4
46-69mm f4.5
46-69mm f5
70-168mm f5.6
169-270mm f6.3

I had the Tamron 18-250 (one of the ancestors of the 18-270) for 6 years and have the DA-L 55-300. The 55-300 is better at the long end. The superzoom is pretty good at the wide end (better than an 18-55 kit lens anyway). Each lens needs reasonably good light, especially because these zooms need to be stopped down (ie aperture narrowed) by one or two stops for best results - the superzoom more so.

If you are mainly looking for telephoto shots, the 55-300 is much better. The magnification of images is much greater, not just because it goes to 300mm, but because it doesn't suffer from focus breathing. With the superzoom, the degree of magnification is much reduced when it is focused to less than infinity.

The main advantage for the superzoom is convenience. It is very versatile so you don't need to change lenses. If you have another lens covering the wide-normal range and don't mind swapping lenses, the 55-300 will generally give better images.

[dark64]

Wow. Thanks for responses. In next week im going to buy a a k-70 + lens. Earlier i had a compact panasonic fz300 ( 24-600mm ) and almost always I've took a zoomed photos. So it's seems like i don't quite need a wide angle. I especially love to shooting birds& animals.

[SnapperDaddy]

Wow. Thanks for responses. In next week im going to buy a a k-70 + lens. Earlier i had a compact panasonic fz300 ( 24-600mm ) and almost always I've took a zoomed photos. So it's seems like i don't quite need a wide angle. I especially love to shooting birds& animals.

If you're buying a K-70, you're buying the first Pentax camera specifically designed to work with the narrower maximum aperture of the 55-300 PLM lens that Adam mentions above. Its aperture is narrower than that of the older 55-300 WR screw-drive lens. Many comments from users praise the 55-300 PLM for performance that is much more responsive than that of the 55-300 WR, so Adam's advice is spot-on.

[dark64]

So new 55-300 is best option ? It's same dark as a 18-270 so that's why i didn't look for it. The AF damn fast. Does also the sharpness of the image is best from those above?

[Des]

Wow. Thanks for responses. In next week im going to buy a a k-70 + lens. Earlier i had a compact panasonic fz300 ( 24-600mm ) and almost always I've took a zoomed photos. So it's seems like i don't quite need a wide angle. I especially love to shooting birds& animals.

For mainly telephoto use the 55-300 will be better than a superzoom. But even though you prefer tele there will be times when you need something wider. I think sooner or later you will want to have coverage of the wide-normal range. If you don't mind changing lenses, there will be plenty of options for that wide-normal range.

So new 55-300 is best option ?

See the discussion in this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/335445-want...-55-300-a.html

[dark64]

Yeah. I already conisider to buy a used Pentax 16-45 f/4 - lense. it's not cheap but also not very expensive. Im not gonna use it to much but in case I'll need wider lense ( landscapes, citysights ) i can easyly change it.

[Des]

I raise the question because if you haven't already bought a wide-normal lens and your budget is not large there is a case for a superzoom to cover both wide-normal and telephoto. The Sigma 18-300 is an option to consider: Sigma 18-300mm F3.5-6.3 DC Macro HSM (Contemporary) Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

One thing I would say about superzooms is that they tend to have more distortion at both ends than lenses with a small range of focal lengths. That distortion is generally correctable in post-processing. That is just one way in which images from a superzoom benefit greatly from shooting in RAW and post-processing (especially with software like DxO Optics Pro which automatically corrects distortion, vignetting etc with supported camera and lens combinations). If you are mainly a jpg shooter a superzoom is a less attractive alternative.

But don't get me wrong: if you don't mind changing lenses, and overwhelmingly shoot telephoto, one of the 55-300 lenses will be the better option.