| Author: | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: August, 2017 Posts: 142 | | Lens Review Date: January 11, 2021 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $300.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Compact, light and reasonably sharp. | | Cons: | Edge to edge sharpness at longer focal lengths | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: New
| |
Unless a wide angle shot is called for, this lens is on my K-1. It is compact and not heavy. It will handle most shooting situations with ease.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-DA-55-300mm-F4-5.8-Zoom-Lens.html
It's affordability makes it a great choice for those without tons of money. It's sharpness is more than adequate for most shooters. I don't over analyze except for image quality. I find it a very capable lens. I cropped he submitted image, and this lens paired with my K-1 makes for a formidable duo. | | | | | | | Insanely humble Registered: June, 2011 Location: Lowlands of Norway Posts: 16,793
2 users found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: January 4, 2020 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $400.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Small, light, reasonablt sharp | | Cons: | Noisy focus, and at times slow | |
Probably my most-used lens by number of pictures taken, even though I rarely shoot with tele (or zoom) at home. It's my go-to travel lens and safari lens. The small size makes it perfect for travel and for carrying on walking safaris.
I find the sharpness quite good at all focal lengths (including at 300mm) and all apertures. It does sharpen up some when stopped down to f/8, but it's good enough at 300/5.8 that I don't hesitate to use it when needed.
It has a long focus throw, so if it misses focus and has to rack all the way to minimum and out again it's slow - and noisy. This was mostly a problem I had with the K-5 in low light, though, and not so much on the K-3 - and even less on the K-1.
Yes, I use it on the K-1, and in FF mode. It does vignette some at 300mm (more near infinity than at closer range, I think). Crop to 4x5 or 16x9 and it's mostly gone. Around 200mm I can't see any vignetting at all. At the short end it's somewhat more. Note: I have not tried to shoot without the hood at the wider end; it might be that it would help. Until a compact full-frame tele zoom is released this will cover my needs well enough.
The bokeh isn't too bad even at f/8.
K-3, 300mm f/8
 Cape fox pup by -savoche-, on Flickr
The somewhat slow autofocus can be remedied with a bit of planning.
K-3, 230mm f/8
 Pale chanting goshawk by -savoche-, on Flickr
K-3, 300mm f/8
 Gemsbok by -savoche-, on Flickr
K-3, 300mm f/5.8 (ISO 3200)
 Kalahari lion by -savoche-, on Flickr
K-1, 300mm f/11 - FF mode, uncropped
 Sommelier by -savoche-, on Flickr
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: December, 2007 Location: In the most populated state... state of denial Posts: 1,258
1 user found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: December 4, 2019 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $170.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Wide range, sharp image, light | | Cons: | AF hunts | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K5II
| |
Very good tele-zoom lens fro every day photos
Got it used to replace an aging FA80-200
Sharp. good color rendition
| | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Posts: 8 | | Lens Review Date: June 30, 2019 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $55.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | very sharp lens | | Cons: | sometimes few visible CA's, slow AF | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 10
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 8
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: k-s1 k-x k200d
| |
Due to the very good optical construction of 4 (!) achromatic lenses and 2 ED-lenses is the optical quality of this les very nice / fine.
suitable for macro shootings with macro ring wit AF-function and all A-contacts, too. The brand is "Micnova (R) 25mm EXTENSION TUBE.
I take photos with aperture 8-11, so bokeh and sharpness are nice - CA's reduced and scarecely visible
this lens is still better than the excellent 4.7-5.8/100-300 and the very nice 4.7-5.6/80-200
++ colors, sharpness, contrast and bokeh
+ CA's
O AF
for the low price full recommendation !!! | | | | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: October, 2018 Location: Quebec City, Quebec Posts: 2,114
2 users found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: March 5, 2019 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $230.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Very sharp in the lower ranges. Very good with the K5. | | Cons: | A little soft @ 300 mm and disappointing on the K3. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: Pentax K5
| |
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: May, 2011 Location: Malmö, Sweden Posts: 126 | | Lens Review Date: August 16, 2018 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $450.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharp, compact & lightweight, price/quality ratio | | Cons: | Autofocus noisy & a bit slow, sticky zoom ring | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 6
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-5, K-x
| |
Very good telezoom and excellent value for money. Pictures are sharp with good saturated colours and contrast. (I also have the M*300mm, and while the 55-300 isn't quite as good as that at the long end, it's actually not that far off). It's great as a walkaround lens thanks to compactness and low weight. I'm not a pixel peeper but in practical use I really haven't had any problems with aberrations of any kind.
The downside is that the autofocus is a bit slow and rather noisy. The slowness can be overcome to a good extent thanks to quick shift, it's easy to put it in the right range first and then AF. The focus ring is not really dampened and not much fun for precise manual focusing. At least on my copy the zoom ring isn't really smooth but tends to stick a bit during zooming, which is a bit annoying. But considering the low price this certainly is no deal breaker.
I'd wholeheartedly recomend this lens to anyone needing a bit of range without having that much money to spend.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2017 Posts: 140 | | Lens Review Date: December 29, 2017 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $201.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Lightweight and fairly small, Overall IQ, Simplicity | | Cons: | Dreadfull AF speed, Sharpness not great at max aperture at 300mm, Quite expensive (would never buy it new) | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 4
Handling: 8
Value: 6
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K-70
| |
Decent compact wildlife lens.
| | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Location: Odessa Posts: 19 | | Lens Review Date: February 8, 2017 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: N/A
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Cheap, Graet Reach, overall sharpness, Bokeh | | Cons: | Really NONE | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K30
| |
I rate this lens true 8.
It's nearly glued to the body. So great for walking! I do like it's bokeh and IQ. You can use it wide open and it will give you great results. There is no near any lens to compete with it. Solid build, nice look, easy to use.
I bought it instead of 70 lim which is limiting me a lot. And I am very happy.
What else I must say? It produces pics in cold tones with so sweet reds!
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: April, 2015 Posts: 157 | | Lens Review Date: December 17, 2016 | I can recommend this lens: No |
Price: $100.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Long reach, light weight | | Cons: | slow af, variable sharpness, bokeh meh | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 5
Handling: 7
Value: 7
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K5 K5iis
| |
Got this lens for a bargain price. First off, this is way better than the 50-200, BUT the 50-200 is just so awful so that is saying not much.
The 55-300 is capable of delivering some very pleasing results, but within limited parameters> something like 55-180, at f8 you will get some really nice shots. Outside this you are going to have a lot of chuckers. Eventually this led me to get rid of the lens. For wildlife it is a non-starter really, too slow and not really adequately sharp wide open.
The AF is screw-drive, slow and noisy. The bokeh is not too pleasant to my eyes.
Weighs so little and it's cheap so it's a bargain if you need some drag anywhere lens, but I don't recommend it for critical work. I believe the Tamron 70-300 may be better, and perhaps even cheaper.
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: December, 2011 Location: North Rhine-Westphalia Posts: 978
4 users found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: July 13, 2016 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $325.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Serious telephoto reach, versatile zoom range, unusual IQ for a consumer zoom (including snappy contrast), light and compact, allows for flexible hand-held shooting, decent build, affordable. | | Cons: | Not the fastest aperture, fairly slow and noisy AF prone to some hunting (prefocusing helps a lot, though), no WR. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-3, K-7
| |
Have been shooting this one since 2011; it was my first extra lens beyond the 18-55mm kit lens, and I've never looked back. It remains my telephoto workhorse, capabable of coping with pretty much anything you throw at it that requires a little more reach.
There sure are telephoto offerings out there with that nth-degree resolution, but they are easily three times the price of this immensely versatile piece of glass. Contrastwise, the lens does not disappoint, not even at the long end, where many zooms of this type struggle. Wide open at F5.8, the 300mm are usable, by stopping down to F6.3, my most-used aperture on this lens, perceived sharpness is actually quite decent, and at F7.1 I have no qualms about sharpness at all.
Likely due to its fairly low element count and dependable coatings, the lens renders lively colours. There is some distortion at both ends of the zoom range, but nothing that would cause particular concern. Likewise, the residual purple fringing is easily corrected in post. Flare resistance is about average, I'd say, but the hood that comes with the lens takes care of that in most situations.
Subject tracking may not be a forte of the DA55-300mm, but given that it is the only lens with this kind of reach I got, I have used it on moving subjects, and under less than ideal lighting conditions, at events, zoo outings, and on other occasions and did return with a fair number of keepers.
In fact, this lens is probably responsible for more well-received images than any other glass I own, in a kit that also includes two DA Limiteds, and it's also among those that spend the most time on my camera, which should be saying something, I guess.
Here are some zoo images I shot with the DA55-300mm:
https://500px.com/marc_synwoldt/galleries/burgers-zoo | | | | | Junior Member Registered: August, 2011 Location: Bournemouth Posts: 29 | | Lens Review Date: August 13, 2015 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $187.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | light, durable construction | | Cons: | purple fringing in direct sunlight | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: Pentax K-30
| |
I caught this lens at ebay UK and won the bid at £120 while I was preparing to attend the Royal International Air Tattoo and Farnborough last year (2014). I was impressed by the results having a light zoom lens which gives me the freedom to raise my camera for the whole day while pointing it on airplanes flying. As I have owned an earlier version of this lens with plastic mount I already had an idea what it could do and I was impressed that this metal mount version is a lot better. With the downside of purple fringing when shooting planes in direct sunlight with the reflection on the fighter jets canopies, the rest are desirable results you would have expected in images taken at high speed handheld without the burden of having a tripod or monopod because of the weight of the lens which allows you to save your effort in lifting it.
I have the image samples for your own consideration.
 | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2013 Posts: 2 | | Lens Review Date: February 5, 2015 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $450.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | range | | Cons: | hunts in low light | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 8
Value: 8
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K30
| |
 | | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2012 Posts: 1
1 user found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: December 11, 2014 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $240.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, colour | | Cons: | slow, aberation, good value for price | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 3
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 4
Handling: 7
Value: 9
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: Pentax K10D
| |
I used ordinary kit DA 50-200 previously. And to be honest, 55-300 beats it almost everywhere.
Sharpnes in much better, colours are more pleasen, more accurate. Abberation is simmilar, both lenses are slow - dofinitely not for sports.
I was using it half year for landscape photography and I can say - try it. It it not heavy, and around 200mm pretty sharp. And most important thing - you will learn how to select important things into your picture. Your eye will become more careful, more focused on details, curves.... I am not able to imagine landscape photography after spending so much time with this lens.
Portraits - also nice, bokeh is not creamy, but I like it. It is like Gaugains
in general - go for it. You will not regret money. Perfect update from 50-200mm, if you have limited budget.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: September, 2014 Posts: 4
3 users found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: November 30, 2014 | I can recommend this lens: No |
Price: N/A
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Lightweigth, sharp in sunny condition, good price | | Cons: | not for the rainy days, slow autofocus, loss of sharpness at the tele end | | Sharpness: 5
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 8
Value: 7
New or Used: New
Camera Used: Pentax K-30
| |
Before purchasing this lens, I tested it on a weekend. I thought this lens could be a replacement for my 18-135 WR on the tele end. An everyday lens for hiking and days in the nature.
I am very satisfied with the 18-135 but I want more zoom 
Maybe I was wrong. Here are the facts: (this is a usability review, not a professional one)
The lens is a lightweight and eays to use. The "wheels" are easy to handle and you can take pictures without a tripod.
My first impression while shooting was a bad one: what a loud and slow autofocus. This is a fact I can handle with, but the birds fly away, when they hear the focus .
The first day was a dark day and I was very sad about the pictures I made:
 55mm
  
55mm - 55mm - 300mm
As you recognize there is a loss of sharpness on the 300mm pic. At all these pictures are too bad for me.
At the next day, it was sunny.
Church
  
150mm - 210mm - 300mm
Bird table
  
170mm- 210mm - 300mm
Surprise. These pictures are much better. But you will again see the loss of of sharpness and even focus in the 300mm pictures.
Garden (nearly perfect condition - the lawn and the light)
   
55mm - 78mm - 135mm - 300mm
Wow, look at the 300mm picture. This is the first sharp and acceptable shoot with this lense.
Here are some pictures to compare:
  
18-135WR 18mm - SMC A 1.7/50mm - 18-135 at 135mm
So, what is my opinion about the 55-300.
This is definitely a "good weather" lens, much more than my 18-135 is. You can make sharp 300mm pictures, but there has to be the right light.
Handling is easy, it is lightweighted and not too long, it comes with a bag.
At all it is not the travel and hiking zoom I need. The pictures at the 300mm tele end are bad, although the quality rises fast and from 200mm you will have some good pictures.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: February, 2012 Location: Houston Posts: 129 | | Lens Review Date: November 27, 2014 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $350.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | light, price | | Cons: | Slow AF, not very sharp | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 5
Autofocus: 2
Handling: 7
Value: 7
New or Used: New
Camera Used: k5
| |
Nice cheap zoom but beware that Autofocus can be slow and hunt.
| | |
;)
;)
