| Author: | | Inactive Account Registered: September, 2007 Location: Belgium Posts: 18 | | Review Date: September 24, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Glass is ok, it can take nice pictures. | | Cons: | Focus ring doesn't move very smoothly | |
For the price I paid, this is a nice zoom lens and it gives some nice images on my K10D.
Definitely not as sharp as my DA 16-45 lens, and the focus ring doesn't move very smoothly, which can make it a bit harder to get the focus 100% right.
But again, for this price it is very nice to have until you have more money to spend...
| | | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: May, 2009 Location: USA Posts: 1,971 | | Review Date: August 9, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $35.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharp for this price range. Easy to use zoom/focus rings. | | Cons: | Plastic outer build. Front element rotates. Manual focus. | |
An excellent performer on my K20d at this price point. It's sharpness has outperformed some $100-$200 range AF zooms I've used in the past, from both Pentax and other brands. It's a sharp lens when stopped down, and I haven't had any focus ring problems as the other reviewer states, so it must be their copy. I would assume that build quality may be an issue so you really need to double check condition and test it out. I've seen plenty of these for sale new in the box for around $50, so you really can't go wrong for a basic long zoom.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: egypt Posts: 435 | | Review Date: September 30, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $70.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | good glass,good zoom | | Cons: | plastic body | |
nice zoom lens For the price ,not sharp enough but it gives some nice images in good light.
| | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2010 Location: New Hampshire Posts: 8 | | Review Date: March 29, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $16.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Great value | | Cons: | Amount of plastic | |
The price says it all. $16 including shipping from E-bay. Takes sharp pictures when stopped down. I am using it on a K-x. It feels like a toy but performs good. I do not have any problems with the focus ring like the first reviewer had mentioned, however every time I reach up to stop down it feels like I am going to break it.
| | | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: August, 2009 Posts: 417 | | Review Date: June 23, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: 3 |
| Pros: | Short focus distance, light weight, 49mm filter | | Cons: | Build quality, rotating front element, slow | |
Simply awful build quality, this is the worst Pentax lens I have used. Plastic bushings in the focus mechanism mean loads of play. Indefinite focus around infinity and beyond. As much as I like to praise Pentax equipment, I think it ought to be berated when appropriate. I'd not waste my money on this. My copy had a spidery haze in the rear elements, but it optically still looked sharp. I guess this was the Canada balsam separating and the lens looked like it had been well cared for.
I would not call this cheap even if it was free.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: July, 2009 Location: West Midlands Posts: 2,066 | | Review Date: August 1, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $29.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Very light weight and compact | | Cons: | It's a consumer zoom | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 4
Value: 9
| |
For the price I can't really find any major fault with this lens. It's a consumer zoom, so happiest in good strong light. It's sharp at f8. I have bought the 200mm f4 and the DA55-300mm with an eye to replacing this lens with 'better glass'. Both of them were sold on shortly after testing them against this little lens - I just couldn't see any vast improvement in iq.
This is not an autofocus lens, nor is it a classic manual focus lens with metal construction, smoothly damped focus etc. It's like a budget AF lens without the motor. But I find focusing very easy. I suppose you'd call the build quality flimsy, but OTOH it's very light weight.
Sample pic:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4013/4360901276_16a1fdfc55_o.jpg | | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2011 Location: Pavia- Italy Posts: 1 | | Review Date: November 16, 2014 | Not Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Basso costo, buona nitidezza | | Cons: | Anello messa a fuoco | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 6
Value: 9
Camera Used: k5II
| |
Per quello che costa buona nitidezza a 200 mm .
Unico problema la ghiera messa a fuoco troppo morbida e difficoltosa all uso
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: November, 2014 Posts: 56
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 8, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $13.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Good optics, light, compact | | Cons: | Some CA, softer at 200, plasticky | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K10D
| |
I was surprised by the very good optical performance of this cheap manual focus lens, which I suspect is a stripped version of its autofocus F and FA 80-200mm siblings. In fact, the optical formula of all three lenses is identical (11 elements, 7 groups, 8 blade aperture). I do have the FA 80-200 version, and the differences seem purely cosmetic, except this manual focus lens has a wider manual focus ring in front and weighs much less (under 300gm vs about 500 gm).
Performance: Amazingly good at center, less so at edges and longer focal lengths. Set to F8, it's very sharp in the center and medium sharp at edges from 80-150mm, softer at 200 but better than most others. CA is fair at the edges. Bokeh is not remarkable with an F4.7 maximum aperture. My copy looked new and felt tight but moved easily through zooming and focusing.
Some positives: This has a wider autofocus ring than its siblings, usable but still not an ergonomic delight. Compared to the other 80-200 manual focus lenses I have, this lens is amazingly lightweight and compact, thanks to its mostly plastic innards. I find it easy to focus, with the aid of a split image focusing screen and the camera's visible and audible focus confirmation signals. Ironically the FA lens is quite slow to autofocus, so this is almost an improvement. It is a Ka lens, so you get all the exposure automation you might want. And lastly, it's so, so cheap for a well performing lens.
If you are looking for a compact, very light, and inexpensive manual focus lens to walk around with, this is a good candidate. I'm conflicted about what overall rating to give it. The overall rating is a subjective compromise, considering performance, cost and intangibles. There are sharper lenses, but they weigh a lot more and cost much more. In its present condition, it seems a 9, considered as a small, light, cheap lens with very good performance. Over time it might wear heavily and rate 8. An 8.5 seems about right, but since I believe others have under-rated this lens (at 3??), I'm going with a 9. Your mileage may vary.
| | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Posts: 14 | | Review Date: November 11, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | with macro ring an excellent performer | | Cons: | nothing | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: k-s1, k-x k200d
| |
this lens gives its best results with a macro ring, because of an achromatic rear lens
++ one of my best butterfly photos with tis lens
++ absolutely no CA's with f 11 at 1:2
full points | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: February, 2009 Location: Indianapolis Posts: 527 | | Review Date: January 8, 2021 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Super light, super cheap, decent range | | Cons: | Slow, plastic, variable aperature,rotating front lens | |
I got this lens in my film days and used it mostly with my P30T and SuperProgram. I traveled extensively with the lens in China and Europe. It is super light which I would say is it's selling point. That and 49mm filters.
It's hard to fault a lens like this when it is so inexpensive. I didn't have serious aberrations. And it is so light.
This lens is NOT a pleasure to focus, but it works okay.
The rotating front element is an issue if you use filters.
It seemed to have some light vignetting on the K1, not too bad.
This image is taken on the long end.
 | | |
