| Author: | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Posts: 3,348
5 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 23, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $77.03
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Range, sharpness, light weight, AF speed | | Cons: | Light weight, construction, exposure, WB | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 5
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K-30
| |
I bought this lens a while ago when I was exploring >100mm focal lengths. It takes a special skill and talent to wield one of these photon busting canons. My initial results with any long focal length lens were poor until I started following some simple guidelines like minimum shutter speeds, mirror lock up, etc. I also had to experiment to figure out the ideal aperture settings at different focal lengths. It has taken me a while to get the hang of this lens and I still have a ways to go. Anyways, with that background in mind, here is my review of this lens.
Pros:
Sharpness : The lens is sharper at the wide end than at the tele end. It's noticeable when pixel peeping not when filling your 2-3 megapixel monitor. You'll definitely not notice anything in prints until you get big. But who views large prints up close, like 6" away, anyways? I'm finding that the lens is very sharp starting at around f/6.3 in the wide range and from f/8 at the tele end. Noticeable diffraction kicks in at f/11 and beyond at all focal lengths.
Aberrations : I don't notice any massive fringing, color shifts, or barrel distortion. Maybe I should shoot some more shots of bricks walls?
Colors and Contrast : I can get some wonderful colors and proper contrast from this lens. Improper white balance throws things off at at times (see below).
Bokeh : It can be smooth, wonderful, and creamy but it takes some work with proper settings and composition.
Range : Going from 100mm to 300mm feels like warping through time and space! It's massive when it's at those magnitudes!
Focusing : AF is fast and usually accurate. Your DoF at those long focal lengths is very thin. Even minimal camera shake can make my K-30 hunt for focus. That's more to do with technique than functionality.
Light Weight : The lens is made of plastic which is both good and bad. In this sense it's good because the lens is light and easy to handle.
Aperture Ring : DSLR bodies make the aperture ring obsolete since you can control the aperture with the body now. My film cameras, a ZX-60 and a PZ-20, have an Av mode which allows to do the same. Aperture rings are kind of a neutral for me but I know that users of older film bodies will appreciate it.
Handling : Standard fare here. Nothing feels hard to reach.
Full Frame : Never a bad thing! On APS you get extended telephoto capabilities. Soft corners are cropped out too.
Neutral:
Construction : The lens mount is plastic and I'm OK with that. I know some people prefer metal.
Cons:
Construction : I'm not against plastic lenses but this lens does feel flimsy. The zoom and focusing rings are not dampened so they feel like they're about to break off with the slightest force. Nothing wobbles and shakes in my copy but nothing feels solid like a DA 18-135mm.
Exposure : I've noticed that this lens tends to force my K-30's exposure meter to under expose in some cases. That throws the white balance off and my shots look warm. Since I shoot in RAW it's easy enough to fix. With the right setting the colors and contrast comes out perfectly though (see above).
Optically Slow : The lens is sharpest starting at f/6.3 at the wide end and at around f/8 in the tele end. Shutter speeds will be slow in low light unless you crank up the ISO. Perceived sharpness can be low if fine details get lost in the image sensor's noise.
Conclusion:
I have been wondering if I should keep this lens or move to a DA 55-300mm. Today I have decided to keep this lens. It's plenty sharp when properly used and it's full frame capable. I can use this lens on my DSLR with APS sized sensors and on my film bodies. If/when Ricoh releases a FF DSLR then I'll be ready for that too. There are higher end lenses that are optically faster and are no doubt sharper ... but they also cost a whole lot more than than the $77 I paid for this lens. I'm sure that there are several modern consumer grade zooms from Sigma and Tamron that are better than this lens but, again, they also cost more too. This lens is a great value for the money that I paid and for the use I will get out of it. I don't shoot enough telephoto to warrant a high end long range zoom and I would probably opt for a prime before I go to a zoom anyways.
This lens paired up nicely with my 16 MP K-30. Lower MP cameras will love this lens. I don't know if the 20 MP and higher sensors like what is found in the K-S1 and K-3 will "break" this lens. FF performance probably be different too. Corners that may be soft were cut out by the smaller sensor.
Samples:
Here are three sample images I made. They were shot in the golden hour of the later afternoon one day after the shortest day of the year. The first shot came with good light, low ISO, and damn near perfect focus. This is the shot that convinced me this lens is capable of great IQ.
IMGP5012 by Never Off, on Flickr
Once the sun starting setting and going down my ISO started climbing. Finer details in the shot started to blend in with the sensor's noise.
IMGP5022 by Never Off, on Flickr
The bokeh isn't too bad either. You got a taste of it in the first shot. Here's some more.
IMGP5023 by Never Off, on Flickr
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2012 Posts: 17
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 6, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Light, sharp, good colour and contrast, across the full zoom range | | Cons: | Lightweight build doesn't inspire confidence | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: Samsung GX-20
| |
I had no need to buy this, but when an eBay auction came up offering the FA 35-80mm f4-5.6, the FA 80-200 f4.7-5.6, and this lens together, curiosity got the better of me, and £43 including postage later I was the proud owner of all three. I apportioned this total to give the indicated price.
These lenses can have seen little use. They look optically perfect, their bodies are almost unmarked, their zoom mechanisms are astonishingly smooth, and there is none of the looseness that characterises the other silver FA lenses I have owned and used. They are plastic, with plastic mounts, and look flimsy, but the benefit is lightness. Whereas the Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 DG Macro weighs over 600 gm, this only weighs 400 gm.
I spent a couple of afternoons playing with this, the Sigma, the Pentax F 70-210 mm, the Pentax FA 80-200mm f4.7-5.6, and some Tamron Adaptalls with the Pentax 1.7x AF in the back garden, once on a sunny day, and once on a miserable grey day when I had to shoot hand held at 1/50 s or less at all focal lengths. My conclusions were:
- The Adaptall/Pentax 1.7x AF combination lacks contrast compared with the AF zooms, and there was no reason to prefer any of the Adaptalls (the 03B 135mm f2.5, the 04B 200mm f3.5 and the 19AH 70-210mm f3.5) plus the Pentax 1.7x AF over any of these, except the F 70-210mm at 200mm.
- At 70 mm the order was 1 Sigma 70-300, 2 Pentax F 70-210, and they are close
- At 100mm the order was 1 Sigma 70-300, 2 Pentax F 70-210, 3 FA 100-300, 4 FA 80-200. The Sigma is a bit ahead, and the other three are very similar.
- At 200mm, the order was 1 FA 100-300, 2 FA 80-200, 3 Sigma 70-300, 4 F 70-210. The FA 100-300 is a bit ahead, the Sigma 70-300 and the FA 80-200 are similar, and the F 70-210 is just awful.
- At 300mm, the order was 1 FA 100-300, 2 Sigma 70-300, and by a clear margin if you pixel peep.
I used a hood on all of them.
This lens doesn't play well with the Teleplus 2x Pz-AF DG MC4. My results with the Sigma 70-300mm and, especially, the FA 80-200 are better at all the focal lengths they have in common.
However, in every other respect I am very pleased with it. Colours, contrast and sharpness all excellent in the centre of the frame. A bit of blue fringing on high contrast transitions near the edges of the frame beyond the plane of focus, and purple in front of the focus frame, but otherwise no aberrations.
So I give it 9.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: August, 2011 Location: South Florida Posts: 31
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 6, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $110.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Very sharp and great colors | | Cons: | Flimsy | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 5
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-5, K-3
| |
I bought this lens on impulse because I had nothing that went to 300 mm. For the price ($110) I felt I could discard it if it was horrible. I did not take the lens very seriously for a while, using my 70-210 zoom instead since I was used to it and it takes superb pictures (rated here as a 8.20). The pictures I did take looked good but I never bothered to do a critical test. Well, I am doing that with all my lenses now after I used this lens in the Florida Keys for sunset shots and came out with some super pictures. In critical back to back tests this 100-300 zoom performed about equal with the respected 70-210. There was a slight difference in the corners but that was it. Of course, the lens is flimsy (don't drop it !!!) but I only paid $110, brand new. I am using this lens now as my standard long zoom, and of course I get weird looks from Nikon-Canon owners.....!!!
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2014 Posts: 370 | | Review Date: October 1, 2014 | Not Recommended | Price: $75.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | Low cost | | Cons: | Soft focus, fringing, noisy, | | Sharpness: 4
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 6
| |
Only had this lens for a short period and resold it. It was very inexpensive and some of the reviews indicated it produced some nice pictures. I am just getting into some nature photography and thought it would be a good start, but the quality of images was very disappointing. Took many different images in nature and some candids from a distance. Did not like the output at all. Soft, washed out color.
Ended up with a 60-250mm DA zoom to replace it (which is surprisingly shorter).
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2014 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: June 6, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | optics | | Cons: | rotating front element | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 7
Value: 9
Camera Used: K-r (12 Mpx)
| |
good lens
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: August, 2010 Location: São Paulo, Brazil Posts: 1,019
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 1, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | cheap, sharp | | Cons: | slow and noisy focus, prone to zoom creep | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 5
Value: 9
Camera Used: K-x
| |
Very good lens for the price. A good copy will be sharp and have superb color rendition, specially because it's an FA so you'll be only using the center on APS-C. Use a hood to control aberrations and improve contrast. The downside is that it's a screwdriver lens, with a long focus throw, so expect some long AF action (up to 1 sec). Manual focus is flimsy, so can't count on it either. If you work around it's limitations though it will deliver. Some samples:
IMGP5025 por hcarvalhoalves, no Flickr
IMGP3808 por hcarvalhoalves, no Flickr
IMGP4145 por hcarvalhoalves, no Flickr
IMGP4134 por hcarvalhoalves, no Flickr
| | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Posts: 14 | | Review Date: January 31, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $130.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | very sharp lens, few CA's - stopped a few down no CA's / aperture ring | | Cons: | not so good for tele converter | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 9
Camera Used: k-x,k200, k-5, k-s1, fuji x-t100 + x-e1
| |
I'am very content with this lens./je suis très content avec cet objectif 
Even 300mm with f8-11 are excellent sharp, much more better than sigma or tamron lenses with similar start aperture. / Notamment 300 mm sont très nets au diaphragme f 8-f 11, beaucoup plus de piqué que tamron ou sigma 
For macro shootings - aperture shut to f11-16 with achromatic focal reductor (self made by an element of binocular 8x30, integrated into a small macro extension tube) the sharpness of 300mm tele shootings is really high./ Macrophotos très nettes au diapfragme fermé à f 11-16 (avec un réducteur focal achromatique=lentille d'un binoculaire 8x30, fixée avec du col dans une bague d'extension)
not so good for converter using neither on the top, nor on the back side of this lens in order to get still sharp photos /
2x télé redoubleur focal ne donnera guèrre de photos nettes  | | | | | Senior Member Registered: May, 2013 Location: Lima-Peru Posts: 118
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 2, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $85.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Inexpensive, Good IQ, Sharp | | Cons: | Slow AF, big, | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: pentax k-30
| |
AT the beggining i bought this lense with a filter, and the images weren't that good, then i took the filter and it turn out to be an amazing lense for the price. For less that 100 you can't go wrong with this one,
gato 1 por [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/96617340@N08/]
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: January, 2012 Location: Tokyo Posts: 2,821 | | Review Date: December 1, 2013 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharpness (100-200mm), contrast, light weight | | Cons: | Cheap construction, loose zoom ring, slow AF | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 5
Handling: 7
Value: 10
Camera Used: K20D, K-01
| |
I bought this lens in a second hand shop for 3,800 yen (around $40) and have been using the lens for two years now. At first I was unsure how much I would use this focal range, so I didn’t want to spend much, but it has become one of my most used lenses, almost always with me when travelling.
I really like the fact that I can cover this focal range with such a light lens. It is pretty bulky, but only weighs 400g. The flip side of that is cheap build quality. It doesn’t affect image quality, but mine is loose and manual focussing is not very easy.
I find it to be very sharp between 100mm and 250mm, with excellent contrast. It's less sharp from 250mm to 300mm. Overall, I would say that the results from this lens look very similar to my DA lenses in terms of contrast and sharpness. I’ve looked at samples from the DA50-300 and it seems to be on a par with that. The samples from a previous reviewer inspired me to get a rubber hood (thanks!) and it does make a difference.
One of the things I don’t like about it is auto focus. It is slow with my K20D's PDAF system, taking more than a second in most cases. Nowadays I use it with the K-01. Long slow zooms are torture for that camera’s CDAF system and I often switch to manual focus, which as I mentioned before, is not a very pleasant experience.
Overall, it is a lens that surprised me and has been much more useful than I expected. Compared to a current lens there are some compromises with the FA100-300, but it's still a bargain for the image quality you get.
 | | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2010 Posts: 23
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 19, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $129.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Light weight, nice bokeh, excellent IQ for its cost | | Cons: | Inaccurate autofocus sometimes | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-x
| |
Some reviewers complain about the sharpness of this lens. I think, just like any other lens, the personal experience is different because of the copy variation. For this particular copy, I think its sharpness is quite acceptable. Note that shooting with hood is highly recommended! It really improves the contrast and image quality as mentioned by one of the reviewers. Do not use the flower lens hood because the light could still get in easily from sides. Use screw-in rubber hood (fully extended) to provide as much shading as possible (it won't cause vignetting). BTW, the number of aperture blades should be only 6 (mistaken in the introduction) but the lens renders pretty good bokeh.
(100 mm)
(300 mm, cropped)
(300mm, cropped)
(300mm, cropped)
(240mm)
 | | | | | Junior Member Registered: December, 2012 Location: Oamaru Posts: 49 | | Review Date: April 10, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $300.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Decent sharpness, lite weight, bokeh | | Cons: | autofocus, cheap plastic feel, | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: K-01, MZ-6
| |
Bought this lens 8 years ago when I started off photography. It came with my Pentax MZ-6 and the Pentax-FA 28-90mm F3.5-5.6 lens.
This lens had been my primary lens for 3 years while I studied photography at school. The 28-90mm was not a lens I used a lot because of its dullness and soft images.
A few months ago I bought a K-01 and so I started using this lens again which had gained some fungus and webbing on its inner glass in the past 5 years while not being used.
Once I took some photographs I saw why I loved this lens. The fungus and webbing don't effect the photographs too much and the images are beautiful! Maybe not as sharp as other lenses but it is still much better than my 28-90mm lens and it is supposed to be a budget lens.
 | | | | | Senior Member Registered: September, 2012 Posts: 107 | | Review Date: September 15, 2012 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Light, reliable | | Cons: | Slow, plastic build | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: KZ-M, K-r
| |
I've had this lens for about 10 years now, and it's still holding on great. The focus ring is a little loose at this point resulting in an unsteady focus, but other than that it works great on the K-r. It's a fairly slow lens, and with the K-r it runs into autofocus problems under non-ideal lighting conditions, but manual focus is quick and easy. Images are sharp, but do suffer from aberrations (though easily fixed in software). It has a plastic-y feel to it, but is fairly solid nonetheless, and for the size it's very light. For the price, it's definitely a great lens to have. Here are some example shots:
| | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2012 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: May 12, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, price, low weight | | Cons: | No hood | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: K-x
| |
Elected body of the lens for a long time. After reading the reviews on this forum about this lens has decided to take it and have never regretted.
Hroshoshy contrast and colors, very sharp, even in the open at the long end.
I recommend to buy.
 | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: August, 2010 Posts: 189
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 1, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $130.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Lightweight, improved sharpness | | Cons: | plastic mount, no internal focus | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: Pentax K10D
| |
I bought this optimistically hoping for visible improvement over the f4.5-5.6 version.
Very pleased with the result. The following image is a quick test showing the difference at 300 mm, wide open f8 and f11.
Additionally it shows the difference having a hood on the lens can make...
 | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2012 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: February 12, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, usual nice pentax color, smooth bokeh | | Cons: | a bit plastic, noisy focusing | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
Bought this 2nd hand lens from ebay.. very nice results. How i wish this lens starts from 55mm instead of 100mm.. no complaints about this lens... Would definitely recommend this lens
Some of the results from this lens could be seen in the links below,
Bird shots
more pictures here
http://www.flickr.com/photos/15449193@N06/sets/72157629274635085/
Football shots
more pictures here
http://www.flickr.com/photos/15449193@N06/sets/72157625310493342/ | | |
;)
;)
;)
