Author: | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Posts: 14 | Review Date: April 11, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $65.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | very good lens with wid focus range | Cons: | few CA's - plastic housing | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: k-x, k200d
| | this lens is very similar to Soligor and Penatx FA lens
++ approx. 135mm is usuable with macro ring for really sharp cole-ups.
++ best results between f8-11:
++ nice colors, high constrast, scacely flare
+ low CA's
I like it
95% recommended!
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: October, 2016 Location: Euless Texas Posts: 265 2 users found this helpful | Review Date: March 3, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $15.00
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | Range, Sharp Stopped down, Nice Colors | Cons: | Soft at 210mm, Plastic build | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 9
Camera Used: K-s2
| | Mine is the Cosina version. I got this with a PZ-70 and two lenses.
Handling - Because of the plastic build it is light and feels good. the zoom ring has the right amount of tension and is easy to zoom
Sharpness - At the wider end I have no complaints, at 210mm my shots were really soft until I stopped down to F11.See shots below.
Bokeh is actually very pleasant
My goal for this lens was to have another option for shooting butterflies and flowers. Based on my first impressions it will work but will have to be
stopped down considerably to get usable images.
210mm F5.6
210mm F11
Bokeh test | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2010 Location: Durham, nc Posts: 951 | Review Date: October 24, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $75.00
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | Sharp, great range, fun to use, wonderful color! | Cons: | Slow, has trouble focusing in dim light, poorly constructed | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 6
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-01, K-30
| | This lens has extremely vivid colors, it's pretty sharp (VERY sharp for a cheap 28-210), and it's just a fun lens to use. The bayonet is metal and it works well. It's a little slow to focus in low light, especially zoomed in. It's slow, so this is really an outdoor, nice-day kind of lens. (Which is also where the colors really shine). Unfortunately, the handling is where it's a little behind. The lens feels cheap. It's very plasticy. The barrel creeps quite readily, and will zoom all the way out if you hang the camera lens-down and walk a few steps. It doesn't bother when actually shooting and using the camera, though. The lens hood is cheaply made and doesn't lock onto the end of the barrel with any force, so it easily flies off, especially when in the stowed position. So don't leave it on the camera hanging from a camera strap... you'll look down to find the hood disappeared some time ago. (I backtracked and found it though!)
The biggest problem is that the metal bayonet.... is screwed into a plastic frame. And that plastic frame is very thin. Two screws stripped out of my copy. It was attached to a camera just sitting in a closet. It was never dropped or stressed in any abnormal way. I pulled the lens off and two screws came flying out. I disassembled the lens to find the stripped plastic. Had a bear of a time getting the lens back together, but finally did. Used some crazy glue on the threads to hopefully beef up the plastic, but I'm not particularly hopeful it will hold. Great lens, but the build quality is poor, and the stripped out screws are a big problem.
Overall I recommend the lens, but be very careful handling it. I wouldn't let it hang from the camera while you go on a hike. Really a shame, because it's the perfect walk-about lens for street shooting.
Note: There is also a Tokina version of this lens, but it's not marked "Aspherical" like my Phoenix version is.
| | | | New Member Registered: April, 2013 Posts: 3 | Review Date: April 11, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | Range, build, sharpness | Cons: | Colour? | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 10
Camera Used: K5
| | I have the Voigtlander copy of this lens and I am very impressed with my results so far. It is a useful range for general purposes and I use this lens for site pictures. When teamed up with a quality CPL filter the contrast and colour comes to life. I had not used this with a hood and colours seemed a bit washed out so teamed it up with a Kenko CPL and now everything pings with no PP.
Sharpness is good al the way to the edges at all but the longest end. Bokeh it pretty smooth for a superzoom and certainly better than what I have seen from equivalent Nikon and Canon of the same vintage.
Focussing is accurate even at the long end and is pretty quick for a lens of this age!
Zoom noise is not intrusive and no worse than I have heard from kit lenses. After a while you filter it out. Using live view accentuates the noise due to the focus area check function making it zoom in and out.
Might be worth seeking out the Voigtlander version which I got from Germany. I can't believe they would have put their name on something in the 80's/90's without it being top notch? and it might be slightly better quality than the equivalent versions. | | | | | Junior Member Registered: September, 2014 Location: Maine Posts: 28 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: January 10, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $2.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | Excellent value | Cons: | fat barrel sometime interferes with focus assist light | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| | It is sort of strange how I came about getting this lens. I was looking for a battery door to repair a Pentax ZX-7 and came across a Pentax ZX-10 on ebay that listed a telephoto lens (which I thought to be a 28-80mm standard lens that was offered back then) a camera bag and a flash. I won the bid at $8 and received a large Quantaray heavy canvas, padded camera bag (excellent), Tilt, zoom, swivel, slave flash that works perfect as a slave. The camera (which I robbed the battery door off of and repaired my ZX-7). And low and behold this Promaster 28-210mm.
I already had a Sigma 28-200mm and a Tamron 28-200mm, and Pentax kit 50-200mm of which I was going to keep the Sigma over the Tamron because it edged the Tamron throughout. So I decided to pit the Promaster against the Sigma. Bottom line: the Sigma got blown away.
At one point I had about 15 lenses for my Pentax K-50 and am down to around 6 now with the Promaster 28-210mm as my favorite lens and great for an all around trolling lens when you only want to have one lens.
When compared to my kit 50-200mm Pentax the focal lenght seems a tad short more like 195mm instead of 210mm. This is not a problem for me because it is long enough and is very sharp and doesn’t suffer with any measurable CA or other artifacts and the edges are just fine, maybe because of the crop factor and the fact that the camera is only using 66% of the lens closest to the center which is where the best part of any lens is.
I am a happy camper and at 8/4, $2 for the lens how can you go wrong.
I can’t say what a person should pay for this lens but lets just say it this way - the Sigma and Tamron can’t measure up to this lens at any focal length and the lens seems very flexable with respect to aperture and seems to perform very well at all setting and only when zoomed 400% can you see very subtile changes in crispness... Using 210mm mine seems to be at its best around f8-f11, but other setting are more than acceptable and you really have to do some major crop (zoom in 400%) to actually attempt to determine differences...
There is only one down side and that is, the lens if fat and in dim light the focus assist light will cast a shadow from the side of the lens and this makes the lens want to hunt a little. It will get the focus but sometimes it is slow and will hunt because of the shadow cast...
I won’t repeat what other reviewers have said but I will say this if you find one of these lenses, determine what you are willing to pay and buy it - you won’t regret it one bit.
| | | | New Member Registered: December, 2011 Posts: 9 | Review Date: January 29, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $45.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | Sharp, good color and compact for its range and cheap | Cons: | None for its price | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| | I bought this lens at ebay for $45 brand new plus $10 shipping, arrived in 3 days. Great deal!
Build quality is OK for a plastic lens, silver color does not go well with my K5(in my opinion). After a few test shoots, I was so surprised by the picture quality, very sharp for a long focal lens especially at f8, good color. Even at 100% crop, the picture still looks decent. Auto focus is surprisingly fast, and it handles really well.
At this price, I have no complaints at all.
I have been looking for a long focal everyday lens for a while, I am so glad I found this lens at a great price. I will recommend this lens to people who wants a decent budget long focal lens.
| | | | Veteran Member Registered: November, 2009 Location: Iowa Posts: 2,275 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: March 19, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $99.00
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | Sharp for a superzoom, Reasonably sharp even at 210mm, good color, very compact, wide focal length range, lightweight, decent build quality (for a plastic lens), cheap. | Cons: | Some purple fringing under certain conditions, manual focus ring has short-throw, zoom creep, kinda slow. | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| | This is the first lens I bought for my K100D when I made the switch to digital. I bought it because it was cheap, and I needed an all-purpose lens to get me started until I could acquire more lenses. I figured after I got some better glass, I'd sell this one on eBay. After I picked up a few more lenses, I rarely used this one anymore.
One day I decided to see how it would fare stacked up against my Pentax 18-55 SMC DA "kit" zoom, a lens I've always had very good luck with. After comparing the shots I took in broad daylight at various focal lengths from 18-55mm at various apertures with the same shots (mostly of architectural details) at the same settings with the Cosina, I was very surprised to find there wasn't a huge amount of difference in the images.
Shots taken with the Cosina were properly exposed, with excellent color saturation, and excellent sharpness and contrast, for a superzoom. Detail rendering at full resolution was also surprisingly good for a zoom at this price level. Honestly, I was expecting this lens to be noticeably inferior to the Pentax. But it surprised me. They were pretty similar.
Here are a few sample shots: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/members/gibbythemole-albums-cosina-28-210...5-af-lens.html
Build quality is fairly decent for a plastic-bodied lens. The lens is plastic and the silver finish looks cheesy (in my opinion), but it has a generally solid feel. The zoom and focus rings work smoothly, with no grinding or uneven friction. The aperture ring action is dodgy, but it gets the job done. And you can set the aperture ring to "A" and set the f-stop with the camera, so no biggie. It also has a metal lens mount, which I like. Supposedly, it's also the shortest 28-210mm zoom on the market, which makes it a good walkaround lens. At it's 28mm setting, it's less than an inch longer than the Pentax 18-55 DA. That's pretty compact for a lens that goes to 210mm!
There is a manual focus ring, but it goes from minimum distance to infinity in about 1/3 of a turn. That short-throw isn't great for a manual focus shooter, but it's doable. It would have been nice if there was more throw on the ring, and a rubber grip on it would've been a nice touch as well. But... eh...
Cosina makes this lens in Japan, and it's sold under a bunch of names.. Vivitar, Promaster, Phoenix, Voigtlander.. An rare black version was even sold with the Minolta name on it. All are exactly the same lens.
To sum it up, there might be better superzooms out there... but this one is capable of taking some excellent, sharp photos. It's range, size, and weight make it a good walkaround lens for general purpose shots of the kids, vacation, etc. I was gonna sell it, but after putting it through it's paces, I like it better than I thought. And it's even reasonably sharp at the long end. You can't say that about many superzooms.
| | |