| Author: | | Veteran Member Registered: April, 2009 Location: NJ, USA Posts: 1,270
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 16, 2009 | Not Recommended | Price: $144.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | no zoom creep, decently sharp under 200mm, little PF/CA | | Cons: | soft, even stopped down, compared with similarly-priced Tamron | |
Soft, soft and soft when passing 200mm... low contrast, too.
| | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: May, 2008 Location: London, UK Posts: 1,697
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 11, 2009 | Not Recommended
| Rating: 5 |
|
Bought one about 6 years ago but did'nt use it that much because, as stated above, it is very soft at the long end (which is where I needed to use it).
Worst problem is that the barrel has become VERY wobbly, and I can find no-one in the UK who was prepared to try to repair it ("cheap plastic lens", "not sure if anything can be done", "not prepared to try", etc.)
Anyone know how to take it apart and fix the problem - otherwise it stays in the cupboard?
(and I now have a DA55-300 and a Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 for my Samsung GX10, so it is rather redundant anyway)
John
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2006 Location: Kaunas Posts: 1,458
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 24, 2008 | Not Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 4 |
| Pros: | f/4.5 up to 200mm, sharp up to 200mm | | Cons: | Zoom creep, low contrast, low sharpness over 200mm | |
This is a decent budget zoom. It is quite nice up to 200mm: sharpness is good, and it keeps constant f/4,5 aperture up to 200mm. Howeve colour rendition isn't very good and contrast is too low.
Sharpness gets worse when you get over 200mm. Lens becomes really soft at 300mm.
I got this lens instead of DA 50-200mm because of longer reach and I must say that DA 50-200 optically was better lens. If I would do this now, I would choose new DA 55-300mm zoom instead.
And avoid black version of this lens. Very often it has defect when aperture information is not provided to camera body. I haven't heard about such problem with silver version.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: January, 2021 Posts: 196 | | Review Date: August 19, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | price, range, very sharp at the right settings and conditions | | Cons: | CA, rotating front element, no given lens hood | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-5, K-3ii
| |
Surveying the used market and previous reviews, I bought my silver version in 2021 for $80 with tax for my K-5 camera.
I was very attracted by the 480mm option.
It was my first lens in addition to the kit lens. It turned out to be a pretty good decision.
I mainly wanted to photograph birds and wildlife with it.
It roughly meets these needs, but with limitations.
Then I experienced that, like all zoom lenses, it no longer performs well at the end position.
I can count on a sharp image from F9. It is not for photographing fast-moving, flying things.
Using in the right conditions, if it gets enough light, it is a reliable partner.
If the conditions do not suit it, the product indicates.
The autozoom wanders off and hunts long and noisily.
Unfavorable lighting is shown by purple fringe CA. Fortunately, this can be handled well in post-production.
I am grateful for all shared experiences!
I took mbukal's advice and added a lens hood. It's not comfortable, but it makes a lot of difference
to the quality of the result.
Later, I understood and began to consider northcoastgreg's experience as well.
All in all, I found it to be a very versatile lens for its price-value ratio.
It performs very well by avoiding its sensitive points.
Overall I recommend it.
| | | | | | | Forum Member Registered: November, 2007 Location: Gwynedd, Wales Posts: 89 | | Review Date: July 6, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $125.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | Nice handling, great range, quite sharp | | Cons: | Reliability | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 5
Handling: 8
Value: 5
Camera Used: K7, K5IIs
| |
I was quite happy with this lens - it's one of a number of mid range medium to long telephotos I own . But it transpires that there is a reliability problem which has stopped mine being usable on the A setting, which of course is a limitation with most Pentaxes from the advent of the 'crippled' KAF mount.
OK, its an old (ish) lens , but my Takumars and M series still work fine!
Reportedly the problem only occurs on black versions of the lens - I mention all this just to warn people not to pay too much for a lens with possible reliability problems.
| | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2019 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: June 1, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $55.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Lightweight, very sharp at certain settings | | Cons: | not so sharp at 320mm | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax Ks-1
| |
I bought this for just $40 off US ebay, but then had to pay import duty to the UK.  For that price it was a bargain. I wanted a lens for a safari to Botswana and this lens proved ideal. At 80mm it gave wider shots of groups of animals, and zoomed in to around 250mm it seems very sharp, and acceptable at 320mm. The edges may not have been so sharp, as others have described, but given I was focussing on animals that were fairly central in the frame, softer corners were no problem.
Just to add that before this I had a Sigma 75-300 Apo zoom, but I rate the Pentax as better both in handling and image quality.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: May, 2016 Posts: 3,724
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 16, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | range, size, KAF mount | | Cons: | build | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 5
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-1II
| |
I wanted a longer zoom that was small and had autofocus. This was my choice, and despite the lower points I'm giving it, I like it.
It's less sharp than my other lens in this range (Vivitar S1 70-210), however, it's sharp enough especially under 200mm and around f8-f11. Build quality is ok except that both zoom and focus are loose, but I don't know if that's from use or it is supposed to be like this. The color and overall rendering is nice, there's something pleasant about the images, which is why I like this lens.
320mm
180mm
108mm
 | | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: July, 2011 Location: Fareham, Hampshire Posts: 570
11 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 4, 2020 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Current price, lightweight, image quality | | Cons: | Noisy if that bothers you | |
I have just completed the May Single In Challenge with the K-1 and this lens. (Flickr album linked from image below)
 SMC Pentax-FA 80-320mm by Warren, on Flickr
I bought the SMC Pentax-FA80-320mm F4.5-5.6 new in 2002 (approx $200 US) to use with my MZ30 for our regular family trips to the local wildlife park and since then it has seen peaks and troughs of use. I bought the 55-300plm in 2016 with a view to replacing the FA but since the arrival of a K-1 at the end of 2017 I’ve been dithering over which to use.
Overall I was pleased with the results from my “Silver Bazooka” at the end of the month. It’s no DA* 200 or 60-250 and it loses out to the 55-300PLM in AF speed; it is, however, light enough on the K-1 not to notice it in the backpack when cycling and that has provided a lot of extra opportunities this month.
Images - they’re good enough for posting online and 6x4 prints but maybe not so much for bigger prints unless you’re using it for landscapes in the 100-200 range.
The bokeh is nice from the 8 blades, OOF areas render smoothly and the one occasion I pointed at the sun (top of frame) it handled the flare pretty well.
* Use this lens between F8-16 in the centre of its range and the results are pleasing and sharp across the frame.
Just to run counter to the norm; the lens is perfectly useable above 240mm and is still good at 320mm - but not away from the centre of the frame if shooting at range.
* Use the longer end for closer work with subject isolation and then you get decent pop with that smooth bokeh.
One other “feature” is the aperture.
* The lens acts as a constant aperture (f4.5) zoom in the range of 80-200mm.
* 220mm (my copy has never registered a focal length between 200-200mm) through to 320mm is f5.6.
Being used for a whole month bought some challenges, especially with current restrictions on visitor attractions; the long MFD of 1.5m made for some frustrations and I rarely got the lens out to infinity focus. For those days when I needed to be closer to the subject I found the Raynox M150 played well with the lens (I imagine a close-up filter would serve equally well too) so it can double as a pseudo-macro if you really needed it to.
With regard to contrast there were no issues with the images; I do use a third party 58mm rubber hood that looks very similar to the recommended Pentax hood.
To conclude; this is a decent lens when used to it’s strengths and I have found it more comfortable to use on the K-1 than the newer APSC-design 55-300PLM (vignettes badly on FF). Also - it’s silver and matches the silver K-1 very nicely thank you 😊
Favourites from the month
 Benches and Bokeh by Warren, on Flickr
 One Month Later by Warren, on Flickr
 Breakwater by Warren, on Flickr
 Upon Reflection....... by Warren, on Flickr
 Evolution by Warren, on Flickr
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: February, 2010 Location: Northern Michigan Posts: 6,173
12 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 30, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $115.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Superb in its sweet spot | | Cons: | Not so good out of its sweet spot | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K-1
| |
This is a difficult lens to rate, because the optical quality varies so widely. In the optical sweet spot (f8 to f15, 80mm to 150mm), it is little short of stunning. But it's only moderately sharp wide open (and then only at the wide end), and performance worsens as one zooms toward the long-end until, at 320mm, it never really gets sharp at all, even stopped down.
When the FA 80-320 was released back in 1997, it would not have been considered a consumer grade lens. According to the patent for the lens, the objective of the design was "to provide a small telephoto zoom lens having a zoom ratio around 4 and exhibiting a high performance over the entire zoom range." This is obviously a more ambitious lens than the other FA (and FA-J) variable aperture telephoto zooms Pentax introduced between 1991 and 2003. Build quality, despite the largely plastic exterior, is tight and solid—definitely a step up from the FA 100-300 f4.7-5.8 and the FA-J 75-300. The lens, despite the patent's claim to being a "small telephoto" does have some heft to it. But it's not nearly as large and heavy as pro-level zooms like the FA* 80-200 or more recent full frame telephoto zooms like the DFA 70-210. Although this is a variable aperture zoom, it's rather odd in that the camera recognizes it as an f4.5 zoom all the way to about 200mm, before jumping two-thirds of a stop to f5.6. The lens is obviously not relaying it's true aperture to the camera.
In the late nineties, expectations of lens performance was not nearly as high as it is today, so the FA 80-320 could pass for a mid-range lens twenty years ago — but today not so much. Which is a pity, because if you are willing to stop the lens down and avoid the long end, you will be treated with a lens that is not merely equal, but in some respects superior to, modern mid-range lenses (such as the aforementioned DFA 70-210). While I had expected the lens to perform reasonably well toward the wide-end stopped down, what I was surprised to discover is how well the FA 80-320 renders objects against backgrounds. It hardly matters whether those backgrounds are in or out of focus. Objects are rendered with a sense of dimension, of tactility, of presence and depth that is rare to find in any zoom lens, let alone a variable aperture zoom. Since acquiring the FA 80-320, I have lost all interest in the DFA 70-210 or any other modern telephoto zooms. The modern glass is better for wide-open shooting, but as a landscape shooter, even f5.6 is useless to me. Hence for landscape photography, this really is a superb option in the 80mm to 135mm range. Even at 200mm, it's still pretty good, although you'll give up some corner and far edge sharpness. The long end can be used for sunsets, where resolution usually doesn't matter much.
The problem, I suspect, with the FA 80-320 is many people buy it to photograph critters and other objects at a distance. This means shooting wide open toward the long end. But that's precisely where the lens does not perform well! This is just not a critter lens. It's a lens for landscapes and scenics. For that sort of photography, you may find, among modern options, lenses that are sharper wide-open or have a bit more contrast (because of advanced coatings) and better CA control (because of ED glass). But you won't find a lens that produces more beautifully rendered landscapes and general scenes.
At 80mm, f11:
At 80mm, f16:
At 90mm, f8:
At 140mm, f11:
At 320mm, f16:
 | | | | | Forum Member Registered: May, 2020 Location: Cabo San Lucas Posts: 53
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 12, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $115.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | zoom range, weight, sharp, good focus, construction | | Cons: | no dedicated hood, no WR | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K-3 II
| |
I bought this lens for wildlife and astrophotography, i had it for two years and still like it, i know there are better zoom lenses than this, but for what i paid for it and what i used for i think is a good value. Mine is a second hand lens the silver version, everything on the lens works really good and the condition of the lens overall is great, the focus is good although a bit noisy, sometimes gets purple aberrations but really not to noticeable. Overall i´m happy with the lens, for the price i would recommend it, but if you have the budget to get a more expensive one then go ahead.
 | | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: October, 2018 Location: Quebec City, Quebec Posts: 6,575
5 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 4, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $115.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Very good on the Pentax K5. Sharp between 80 and 240 mm. Very good contrast. | | Cons: | Performance weakens somewhat at longer focal lengths. | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K5
| |
P.S. My FA 80-320 mm just died on me. When the lens is set on "A" so the camera body governs the diaphragm setting, the body can no longer read and adjust the f-stop. When I permit diaphragm activation in the Menu, it works only @ f/4.5 whichever manual f/stop I try to use. I replaced it with a demo DA 55-300 mm HD I found cheap on eBay. It's the first time I have to say "adios" to any lens I ever purchased (SNIFF !).
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: January, 2011 Location: zagreb Posts: 668
7 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 12, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $101.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Nice range, lightweight size, good value, overall IQ and fantastic range (320mm) for money | | Cons: | The dispute, there is no original hood, crawling with zoom-autofocus, rotating front element | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 7
Value: 9
Camera Used: K1
| |
The silver version, not black,bought used on ebay , later purchased a metal hood from ebay because there was no original 58mm and 62mm was added on her later , it was necessary to calibrate, done in house work, I found a description of the action and succeeded from the first.
The lens is lightweight and it looks quite firmly and surprisingly large optical IQ as it is a lens kit with such a low price. After calibration satisfyingly sharp across the full range and nominal apertures, the hey f5.6 to 320mm is super. With the replacement hood contrast throughout the range is super, neglected with vignettes, it also suffers from creaking / pulling the lens when it is facing down, focusing is fairly quick and decisive in good light but loud, at low / poor light the focus is pretty bad because a lot of it goes first to the maximum and then returns to the minimum and then searches for the focus - that's the only bad thing (very noticeable and sometimes frustrating) high-capacity lens with low price.
Successfully focuses on good light and via a Pentax AF x1.7 adapter (at maximum nominal aperture f5.6), * sometimes you need to zoom in / pre-focus on the lens itself to make the focus fast and reliable via the adapter (satisfactory quality in FF on Pentax FA lens with 550mm and maximum aperture f8 -We have to be aware of the compromise for the autofocus for that mm and such a price )
Before I used K-x / r / 3/30 with Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED or Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG Macro now FA 80-320mm F4.5-5.6 on K1 I look sharper and with a better focus in good light
I would like Ricoh to have / make a Pentax DFA 70-320 / 4,5-5,6 ED PLM WR RE with quiet / fast and determined autofocus (equivalent to approx. 550 ~ 600 euro in Europe) .
Then there would be a telephoto zoom lens sequence for FF = beginner / advanced / professional series (70-320 / f4,5-5,6 + 70-210 / f4 + 70-200 / f2,8)
My recommendation to use at K1 if you need a long / optically decent / cheap lens.
The look of the old used about 19 years with ebay lenses with a replacement hood:
 
 
Some examples of photos with Pentax FA 80-320 / 4,5-5,6 + Pentax K1
PENTAX K-1
ISO : 100
Shutter Speed: 1/250 sec.
Aperture: 1: 6.3
glass/length: 128 mm
in 35 mm: 128 mm
PENTAX K-1
ISO : 1250
Shutter Speed: 1/1250 sec.
Aperture: 1:8
glass/length: 170 mm
in 35 mm: 170 mm
PENTAX K-1
ISO: 500
Shutter Speed: 1/500 sec.
Aperture: 1: 8
glass/length: 180 mm
in 35 mm: 180 mm
PENTAX K-1
ISO : 800
Shutter Speed: 1/80 sec.
Aperture: : 1:6.3
glass/length: 200 mm
in 35 mm: 200 mm
*PENTAX K-1
ISO: 100
Shutter Speed: 1/160 sec.
Aperture: 1: 5.6
glass/length: 260 mm
in 35 mm: 260 mm
PENTAX K-1
ISO: 100
Shutter Speed: 1/125 sec.
Aperture: 1: 5.6
glass/length: 320 mm
in 35 mm: 320 mm
PENTAX K-1
ISO: 6400
Shutter Speed: 1/320 sec.
Aperture: 1:11
glass/length 320mm + af x1,7 adapter
in 35 mm: 550 mm | | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2016 Posts: 2
8 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 20, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Zoom range, IQ, size, weight | | Cons: | rotating front element, no dedicated hood | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K3II
| |
This lens (gray version) is better by far than my 55-300 that will be sold. Maybe the focal range with APS-C is worst but but that depends on the use:
-Is a bit longer.
-Is a bit faster, aperture and focus.
-Has a bit better IQ.
-Has less vigneting.
-Has less distorsion.
-Has 8 blades so bokeh is better.
-Cormatic aberrations are similar.
-Is more solid, like the most old stuff.
-If someday you upgrade to K1 you will can use.
I have to microadjust the AF to -5 to get a perfect focus.
Mine has a problem, cant focus to infinity but that is so easy to fix.
1-Take off the bubber front ring
2-Take off the 3 screws
3-Take off the plastic ring
4-Zoom at 320 and rotate focus ring to infinity
5-Now you can see 3 more screws with something like rails.
6-Loose this 3 screws then rotate a bit the front barrel to left.
7-Try if now can focus to infinity
8-YES? Mount it again NO? Rotate a bit more to left the front barrel.
Now you have a good telezoom!!
9-Buy a hood
Now you have a GREAT telezoom!!
| | | | | New Member Registered: July, 2016 Posts: 1
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 4, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Acceptable price for the received quality | | Cons: | IQ, sharpness and built qualtiy | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 6
Value: 8
Camera Used: K1
| |
For the paid price it's okay but it's not a great lens. You can take good pictures with it but at full extend the IQ is getting worse and can't be denied.
The AF isn't to my satisfaction either, it's to slow and sometimes not reliable. I know that's a good deal of focal length but it's just to slow for any kind of fast moving objects.
Sharpness is good at center but decrease a good deal to the corners.
The Bokeh isn't bad but not really impressive either.
Zoom creep is a thing and the built quality is plastic. It feel still robust and like a good lens to handle mistreating but I dislike this rattling construction.
The colours didn't look beautiful as with some other lenses, it's a bit dull.
The good point of this lens is a good deal of focal length for a fair price. When you can avoid to shoot high contrasts it's a good lens even at 320mm.
What I can't recommend shoot with it are birds. 1. Sky = high contrast, 2. fast moving objects.
It's probably a lot more robust than it feel but I'm upgrading to a used DA*300mm f4 which impressed me in all matters.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: September, 2015 Location: Hampshire Posts: 50
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 11, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $140.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Good zoom range with long focal length on APS-C camera | | Cons: | Large and heavy(ish) | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-S2
| |
I have the silver version, made in Taiwan bought secondhand from SRS Microsystems with a one year guarantee.
I'm really enjoying using the lens when out in the countryside. Using the TAv setting on my K-S2 it's possible to get some cracking long distance shots fully zoomed out, obviously DoF can be quite shallow then.
I'm still experimenting with settings but find for animals/birds anything around F9-F16 and 1/320-1/500 give good results. You can also get pretty good close-ups (flowers etc.) using similar F settings and slower speeds around 1/160.
The focusing is quite noisy, but very fast, usually locking on without hunting when using the viewfinder - I've not tried LV with it.
Overall I'm very happy with the lens and probably won't need anything longer (APS-C = 480 35mm equivalent focal length).
| | |
