[UncleVanya]

Yes, it would be a waste on the K5 or K200D, because you only can use it wide open.
The cheapest Pentax which can accept KAF4 would be the K30 with this firmware:
Running K-50 firmware on K-30 - PentaxForums.com
So if you are good in DIY you find a K30 with ABF, take the solenoid out of the flash-circuit of your K200D (or buy one on ebay.com)
and repair it.


To use the PLM on the K5 is like trying to do sowing with a needle with boxing-gloves on your hands.

The PLM needs the electric aperture control from the K30 upwards.

Just wide open: Kind of hoping for flying roastbeef entering one's mouth.

Respectfully at 300 you’re at f6.3 and diffraction sets in around f8 or f11. There’s not a huge amount of useful aperture control available on slow zooms. Some but not a lot. I was skeptical until I read the reports of people using it.

[que es tu]

The shake reduction rattles? Haha. I was not sure about the OS. There is a button with that name on the lens, which does not have any effect. Googling around I concluded that Sigma left the button but leaves the reduction to the Pentax button.

I don't see why I would want to carry the K200d around, or those not-so-good lenses. K-5 is better.. stronger.. faster..

There is an pentax da 55-300mm f/4-5.8 ed wr hd occasion for sale for 299 at camera express. I've checked reviews. Is this, at this point, the best zoom with more mm?

If you want a reliable, durable inexpensive lens with great IQ I would definitely recommend the HDDA 55-300 f4-5.8 wr (screwdrive). I bought mine used 4 years ago, and it is still going strong. It is a very versatile lens.

[photogem]

Respectfully at 300 you’re at f6.3 and diffraction sets in around f8 or f11. There’s not a huge amount of useful aperture control available on slow zooms. Some but not a lot. I was skeptical until I read the reports of people using it.

The PLM is a zoom and not "just" a 300mm.
It is an excellent lens thoughout its complete range.

[mikesbike]

If you want a reliable, durable inexpensive lens with great IQ I would definitely recommend the HDDA 55-300 f4-5.8 wr (screwdrive). I bought mine used 4 years ago, and it is still going strong. It is a very versatile lens.

I agree completely. This is beyond question the best solution for a K-5 and K200D. And it even has its own advantages over the newer PLM. I found upon replacing my earlier DA 55-300mm having the same optics, that this newer version with the HD coatings was definitely giving me better imaging in so many instances I considered it a major upgrade for this lens. Others here have posted having the same experience- much better than the non-HD, non-WR. Of course, AF is not speedy and quiet, as is true of the new PLM model. But IQ is quite similar, with each having its own strong points. It might be worth comparing the two as tested by ephotozine, if interested.

Its advantages over the new PLM lens- not internal focusing so there is no focus breathing. This is not always an issue but could be when working at relatively close range. If you get fairly close to a bird, for example, you'd get a larger image in your frame. Its AF is slower largely due to a longer focus rotation, but then this is better for fine-tuning manual focus. It also has a slightly faster aperture range. It can keep to f/4-4.5 out to near 200mm, with very good IQ. About one stop off from a very expensive, very heavy 70-200mm f/2.8 lens, which also cannot provide 55mm imaging.

I know of these advantages and thus what the new PLM version can bring of its own. And I also have the little K-S2 and the KP, both of which will work fine with PLM lenses. But I have no intentions towards replacing my DA 55-300mm HD WR lens with the new PLM model, nor do I have any interest in any other PLM lens offered, including the DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 PLM, as I am very satisfied with my Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM lens, which I acquired as a closeout for a fraction of the price. For my uses, I am doing quite well without the PLM advantage.

---

Last edited by mikesbike; 08-22-2022 at 04:31 AM.

[reh321]

I agree completely. This is beyond question the best solution for a K-5 and K200D. And it even has its own advantages over the newer PLM. I found upon replacing my earlier DA 55-300mm having the same optics, that this newer version with the HD coatings was definitely giving me better imaging in so many instances I considered it a major upgrade for this lens. Others here have posted having the same experience- much better than the non-HD, non-WR. Of course, AF is not speedy and quiet, as is true of the new PLM model. But IQ is quite similar, with each having its own strong points. It might be worth comparing the two as tested by ephotozine, if interested.

Its advantage over the new PLM lens- not internal focusing so there is no focus breathing. This is not always an issue but could be when working at relatively close range. If you get fairly close to a bird, for example, you'd get a larger image in your frame. Its AF is slower largely due to a longer focus rotation, but then this is better for fine-tuning manual focus. It also has a slightly faster aperture range. It can keep to f/4-4.5 out to near 200mm, with very good IQ.

I know of these advantages and thus what the new PLM version can bring of its own. And I also have the little K-S2 and the KP, both of which will work fine with PLM lenses. But I have no intentions towards replacing my DA 55-300mm HD WR lens with the new PLM model, nor do I have any interest in any other PLM lens offered, including the DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 PLM, as I am very satisfied with my Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM lens, which I acquired as a closeout for a fraction of the price. For my uses, I am doing quite well without the PLM advantage.

I ordered my KP and a 55-300 PLM lens at the same time.
Ignoring other considerations, I already knew I would like the quiet of an in-lens focusing motor …. my wife had already complained of the noise made by the motor which drove the screw-drive in my K-30

[mikesbike]

I ordered my KP and a 55-300 PLM lens at the same time.
Ignoring other considerations, I already knew I would like the quiet of an in-lens focusing motor …. my wife had already complained of the noise made by the motor which drove the screw-drive in my K-30

Well, of course. If I were in your shoes, ordering a KP, not also having the K-5 IIs, and I do appreciate having a fast, quiet AF motor on other lenses, I would probably have done likewise. But the noise of screw-driven lenses does not bother me all that much. I have plenty of those, including a number of Limiteds.

[UncleVanya]

The PLM is a zoom and not "just" a 300mm.
It is an excellent lens thoughout its complete range.

Lol. I’m sorry but that’s not news to me. Even wide open at minimum length the amount of aperture adjustment is limited. Unlike film you have ways to adjust exposure via iso. Think of it as a fast focusing mirror zoom if you want. The point is this lens isn’t useless on a body without kaf4. It’s less convenient, it is less capable - but far from unusable.

[mikesbike]

Lol. I’m sorry but that’s not news to me. Even wide open at minimum length the amount of aperture adjustment is limited. Unlike film you have ways to adjust exposure via iso. Think of it as a fast focusing mirror zoom if you want. The point is this lens isn’t useless on a body without kaf4. It’s less convenient, it is less capable - but far from unusable.

So apparently from statements made, the PLM AF works perfectly (?) just as well on a K-5 as with more recent models (?) but aperture has ro be wide open. In this case, its usefulness would have to be for someone who ONLY wants this lens for higher shutter speeds and faster AF for action shots. I would say this means very limited usefulness, and not just less capable, but a whole lot less capable. I would also add the PLM lens's capability for video use, but camera models offering good video are those of more recent vintage anyway, and do not have these aperture limitations with PLM.

Control of aperture is a very important part of photography, as we all know. Perhaps even more important for telephoto use where DOF becomes more critical. Using f/11 and up is common to maximize DOF for many telephoto shots. And a lens's best performance, edge-to-edge is nearly always at best when stopped down to some degree, not to forget the lens's usage at shorter FL settings starting with 55mm. Apart from that very narrow singular usage for shooting fast action, recommending the PLM model for K-5 series owners or for any other cameras not designed for PLM use, compared to recommending the DA HD 55-300mm f/4-5.8 WR, to me makes no sense at all.

[UncleVanya]

So apparently from statements made, the PLM AF works perfectly (?) just as well on a K-5 as with more recent models (?) but aperture has ro be wide open. In this case, its usefulness would have to be for someone who ONLY wants this lens for higher shutter speeds and faster AF for action shots. I would say this means very limited usefulness, and not just less capable, but a whole lot less capable. I would also add the PLM lens's capability for video use, but camera models offering good video are those of more recent vintage anyway, and do not have these aperture limitations with PLM.

Control of aperture is a very important part of photography, as we all know. Perhaps even more important for telephoto use where DOF becomes more critical. Using f/11 and up is common to maximize DOF for many telephoto shots. And a lens's best performance, edge-to-edge is nearly always at best when stopped down to some degree, not to forget the lens's usage at shorter FL settings starting with 55mm. Apart from that very narrow singular usage for shooting fast action, recommending the PLM model for K-5 series owners or for any other cameras not designed for PLM use, compared to recommending the DA HD 55-300mm f/4-5.8 WR, to me makes no sense at all.

That’s a good summary. There are situations where the PLM might be the right choice - and those are a narrow use case. There are situations where the screwdrive lens is a much better option for a k-5 user. There are also situations where someone might buy the PLM planning to upgrade bodies. My point is simply that this lens isn’t totally unusable but it is limited as you point out.

[Rob Gravelotte]

Thanks, guys, I ordered the SMC DA 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED AL DC WR. Now no more excuses, gonna take some pictures.

[photogem]

Thanks, guys, I ordered the SMC DA 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED AL DC WR. Now no more excuses, gonna take some pictures.

But learn RAW!