Are you smarter than a 55-300? For this Bigmos, the answer is no.

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
paulkienitz
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,835Gear list
Like?
REDEMPTION! Sort of.
In reply to paulkienitz, 2 months ago

I redid some tripod testing, and whaddaya know, the Bigmos suddenly decided to start acting like a real lens. All the incredible smudging and mushiness that it was showing at the long end has suddenly vanished!

I also verified that there was a focus error, as I expected, in my previous test of the DA 55-300 at 300mm. By redoing both of these, I can now compare the long ends of both lenses much more fairly. Both are a little soft wide open, both start to suffer diffraction at f11. Instead of a big grid, I will simply put up a direct comparison of the sharpest shot from each:

Note that the Bigmos still underexposes, but the deeper blacks are not down to just that. It seems to be the winner in contrast.

Note 2: I zoomed the DA shot by only 150%, not 160, and it's still slightly more magnified. The 500 setting on this puppy appears to be less than 450 real millimeters.

Finally, I observe that though the Bigmos shot is significantly crisper looking, its resolution advantage is not obviously large. Along the bottom edge of the shot is about the only place where I can definitely prove it saw something the DA did not. (This may need I need to try the shot from farther away.) Also, the DA shot has some moire.

-- hide signature --

"A good photograph is knowing where to stand." -- Ansel

 paulkienitz's gear list:paulkienitz's gear list
Pentax Q Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED Pentax smc DA* 300mm F4.0 ED (IF) SDM Samyang 8mm F3.5 Aspherical IF MC Fisheye +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow