Author: | | Site Supporter Registered: January, 2022 Location: London Posts: 136 | Review Date: September 17, 2022 | Recommended | Price: $400.00
| Rating: 10 |
Pros: | Superb sharpness and contrast; NO fringing at all. Good tripod collar. | Cons: | Somewhat heavy; 3m minimum focus distance. | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: 645Z
| | Overall, IQ-wise, this is possibly the very best telephoto lens I've ever used - and I've used dozens, on different systems (Pentax 35mm, Pentax 645, Nikon 35mm, Fuji APS-C, Fuji GFX).
Superb sharpness right from wide open, it peaks at f/5.6 and stays there until f/11; at f/16-22 it is slightly less sharp due to diffraction, but still very usable.
NO fringing at all, even in torture tests with backlit subjects and specular highlights.
Excellent build quality, good manual focus feel, accurate autofocus, and good balance on a tripod thanks to the integrated collar (a huge improvement on the otherwise also excellent manual focus version of this lens, the A* 645 300/4).
If one can live with the weight, and 3m minimum focus distance, I can't recommend this enough.
One quick sample wide open, with a very busy background to showcase the contrast and bokeh:
One MASSIVE 184 megapixel pano obtained by stitching six vertical shots (right click to access full resolution photo and check the detail and sharpness):
Marco
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: October, 2018 Location: Quebec City, Quebec Posts: 6,493 | Review Date: September 12, 2021 | Recommended | Price: $625.00
| Rating: 10 |
Pros: | Very sharp and contrasty, gorgeous colors. | Cons: | Heavy, requires fast shutter speeds | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: 645Z
| | I found this excellent lens used on eBay in Japan for a mere 625 U.S. $ (it still sells new for 4500 $). No fungus, no haze, very pristine external appearance and everything mechanical working properly. I clean used lenses thoroughly when I receive them : car polish on the black painted surfaces, gentle cleaning of the glass and vigourous cleaning of the lens mount (electrical contacts, back flange and bayonet components). The back part of the lens is always the dirtiest. Delivery by FedEx took a little longer than usual because it was the Labor Day weekend and the lens spent 3 days idling in, of all places, Anchorage, Alaska ... It came without the PH-RBE 77 lens shade but I already have one as both the 645 FA* 300 mm and the 645 FA 400 mm share the same sunshade. "77" refers to the front filter diameter of the lens. The lens has a substantial feel (1,5 Kg), being rather long and narrow and having about the same diameter over its entire length. This telephoto magnifies things by a factor of 5X and really pulls far-away subjects. AF works satisfactorily but will hunt sometimes when the contrast of the scene is low. I had one chance to try it on the 645Z the first day after it arrived. Light conditions were dull at the end of the day. I got a very sharp first image handheld at ISO 200, 1/400 sec and f/8. The rest of the session was taken handheld at 1/60 sec at a lower ISO setting and all the resulting images were fuzzy on my monitor. The combo is front-heavy and requires faster shutter speeds to bring back sharp images. A heavy tripod is almost a must to insure consistent results. The lens has a solid rotating tripod mount. Sharpness, colors and contrast are excellent as seen in this delicately pastel very first picture : I formerly used a P67 M* 300 mm f/4 with the 645Z. The P67 lens is manual-focus only, much heavier and more cumbersome to handle, with a much wider diameter. Results will likely turn out similarly with this new 645 FA* 300 mm f/4 ED IF, with the smaller AF lens being easier to manipulate. I still have a lot of testing to do to reach an "enlightened" opinion, but early pictures seem promising. Successful handheld pictures of my neighbor's Maple tree : 1) 1/400 sec @f/8 2) 1/200 sec @ f/11 A shutter speed of 1/200 sec is my absolute threshold to achieve sharp handheld pictures. Steeple detail taken handheld, lying on a park bench, 1/800 sec @ f/7.1 : Using f/4 permits separation between the rock formations 300 feet away and the far-away background, creating a very narrow Depth-of-Field. I added a picture of the Batiscan River taken at every aperture opening, on a tripod, revealing the sharpest edge-to-edge results are obtained between f/8 and f/16. Wide-open as well as f/32 should be used sparingly. Corners seem darker and a little soft wide-open and diffraction begins to reduce resolution at f/32. OPTIMUM RANGE : f/8 to f/16 The lens can also be used with K-mount cameras using the Pentax '645 to K' adapter in Av mode : The rock Starting to rain . Highway 55 Interchange with Highway 40 in Trois Rivières
Water lilies on the Saint Maurice River | | | | Senior Member Registered: May, 2011 Location: Hanoi Posts: 213 | Review Date: February 14, 2020 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | | Cons: | heavy, short collar ring | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: Pentax 645Z
| | | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: July, 2011 Location: Berlin Posts: 1,137 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: April 11, 2019 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| I recently bought one on the popular auction site from a Japanese dealer, in mint condition, which including shipping came to less than US$700.
There is surprisingly very little information available about this lens, and even less about pairing it with the purpose made 1.4TC.
Even with a couple of hand held test shots I can confirm the other reviewer's results. This lens and the pairing with the 1.4TC is an absolute winner.
I also have the 150-300 zoom and found the 300mm FA* to be far superior, even with the 1.4tc it is sharper than the zoom. Thr 150-300 is already a very sharp lens, but not to this standard.
Pairing with the 2.0TC was less than perfect and the crispness started to fade. Also losing 2+ stops of light limits the 2.0TC's practical use.
My only regret is that I did not buy this lens a long time ago. We plan to go on a spectacular trip later this year and I was considering taking my 600mm lens, but after seeing these results, I'll settle for the 300mm with 1.4TC instead.
| | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2010 Location: Auckland Posts: 18 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: March 17, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $2,550.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | Sharp, contrast, tripod mount | Cons: | Hint of chromatic aberration | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax 645D
| | Having sold the older A version of this lens about a year ago I have missed it. After a recent purchase of a x1.4 rear converter and using it on a 67 200m lens I had the feeling that I did not have the best.
I have run a few tests shots today with the FA 300mm and the lens absolutely matches the glory of the older manual focus version. The x1.4 converter does little to detract from image quality. Contrast is maintained as is sharpness. There is a loss of a stop or two. The results are far superior to using this converter on the shorter 67 lens.
I was prepared to pay the extra for the newer auto-focus model of this lens as it would preserve re-sale value and the newer lens has a TRIPOD MOUNT which is a BIG must in such a large piece of glass.
The following images are taken with this lens. Some are with the x1.4 rear converter and for comparison there is one image shot with the Pentax 67 200mm with rear x1.4 converter on the 645D (with adapter)
645 300mm FA
645 300mm FA
67 200mm with x1.4 converter
645 300mm FA with x1.4 rear converter
645 300mm FA
300mm FA with x1.4 converter | | | | Veteran Member Registered: March, 2008 Location: Hogtown, ON, Canada Posts: 329 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: September 1, 2009 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | My sharpest 300 | Cons: | | | Excellent lens.
I have not use any manual focus 300mm 645 lens so I am really comparing this to the 350 and 250 Sonnars.
When I semi retire I decide to stick with Pentax as my 35mm/Dslr and I still have to find another 300mm that is better.
This lens along with the 120Macro dispel the myth that 120 camera lens are inferior to 35mm counterparts because of the larger chromes makes up for any shortcoming.
| | |