Pentax DA 55-300 PLM lens

[Benoz]

I will go as far as saying this is an excellent lens for the money. Silent focusing, fast auto focusing, small size, very good IQ, good walk around zoom range, sharp, decent sharpness in continuous focusing, as well as WR.

I have been very pleased with my copy straight out of the box.

Used with front mounted Raynox 250 TC it delivered very good macro images.

Overall one of my favourite lenses, especially when attached to my KP.

 

[TomWret]

Benoz, I agree with what you said except I have not tried any macros. I have the K-3ll, BTW my copy is a little stiff when zooming but that's OK.

Tom W(ret)

 

[ozdean]

My sister bought one Ben and it is very good.

 

[Benoz]

Benoz, I agree with what you said except I have not tried any macros. I have the K-3ll, BTW my copy is a little stiff when zooming but that's OK.

Tom W(ret)

Hi Tom, my copy is also a little stiff but I don't mind at all.

I really recommend trying macro with the Raynox TC (250 or 150), great combination.

Ben

 

[Benoz]

My sister bought one Ben and it is very good.

Hi Dean, I read in another thread very bad report about this lens. I can't understand it! The guy must have gotten a 'lemon' copy. Hope he gets it fixed or replaced because it really is a nice lens.

Cheers,

Ben

 

[flektogon]

My sister bought one Ben and it is very good.

Hi Dean, I read in another thread very bad report about this lens. I can't understand it! The guy must have gotten a 'lemon' copy. Hope he gets it fixed or replaced because it really is a nice lens.

Cheers,

Ben

 

[Alex Sarbu]

My sister bought one Ben and it is very good.

Hi Dean, I read in another thread very bad report about this lens. I can't understand it! The guy must have gotten a 'lemon' copy. Hope he gets it fixed or replaced because it really is a nice lens.

Cheers,

Ben

--
Ben.
C&C are welcome.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/benoz/
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/8665818321/photos

Well, his thread disappeared! Apparently complaining about the (Pentax) quality is not welcomed :-(

If you're talking about Barbu's thread - it was deleted for good reason, and at his request.

See, the review was actually for the 18-135mm; not for the 55-300mm RE. He posted it by mistake for the wrong product. When he realized, he didn't know how to get the review deleted faster - not wanting to tarnish the reputation of a (probably) very good product.

Thanks to the moderating team for handling the situation.

Alex

 

[awaldram]

Yes read his report and most say if gave me a Mmmm moment.

If your remember when the orginial 55-300 was released I though it was over rated for a middle of the pack consumer zoom , IMO the Sigma 70-300 APO was a better all round lens and the Tamron DC 70-300 was sharper despite it awful CA.

Pentax obviously put some though into the weak areas of the original (CA, Sharpness and AF speed) and upgraded them all.

The lens now matches all comers for CA and Sharpness and beats them all in AF speed this makes it IMO a very good value lens that should be in every bodies Kit bag .

 

[JNR]

Yes read his report and most say if gave me a Mmmm moment.

If your remember when the orginial 55-300 was released I though it was over rated for a middle of the pack consumer zoom , IMO the Sigma 70-300 APO was a better all round lens and the Tamron DC 70-300 was sharper despite it awful CA.

Pentax obviously put some though into the weak areas of the original (CA, Sharpness and AF speed) and upgraded them all.

The lens now matches all comers for CA and Sharpness and beats them all in AF speed this makes it IMO a very good value lens that should be in every bodies Kit bag .

 

[Benoz]

My sister bought one Ben and it is very good.

Hi Dean, I read in another thread very bad report about this lens. I can't understand it! The guy must have gotten a 'lemon' copy. Hope he gets it fixed or replaced because it really is a nice lens.

Cheers,

Ben

 

[Moto Fotoe]

I have been very pleased with my copy straight out of the box.

Used with front mounted Raynox 250 TC it delivered very good macro images.

Nice to know you're getting good results paired with your Raynox DCR-250. I'm waiting for my 55-300 PLM to arrive and plan on using my Raynox 250 lots.

--Jeff

Loading…

www.flickr.com

"..So long and thanks for all the fish..."

 

[ASR45]

I have the lens and it exceeds my expectations lovely light weight lens.

 

[robbo d]

In my recent thread I used the old DA L version and when it hits at closer range and you lock the focus in the right place, it punches above its weight.

I remember a time when the Aussie dollar was higher, that the original was able to be bought new on ebay for just under $200 Aud.

I am interested to know from people with the old DA L and the PLM if there is any difference in the image quality of the PLM.

The AF on the later bodies sure looks tempting and perhaps would assist in locking onto the right part of the image for birding and therefore enhance image quality in a round about way.

 

[Benoz]

I have been very pleased with my copy straight out of the box.

Used with front mounted Raynox 250 TC it delivered very good macro images.

Nice to know you're getting good results paired with your Raynox DCR-250. I'm waiting for my 55-300 PLM to arrive and plan on using my Raynox 250 lots.

--Jeff

Hi Jeff, I am sure you will love that combo too!

Ben

 

[Benoz]

I have the lens and it exceeds my expectations lovely light weight lens.

 

[Benoz]

In my recent thread I used the old DA L version and when it hits at closer range and you lock the focus in the right place, it punches above its weight.

I remember a time when the Aussie dollar was higher, that the original was able to be bought new on ebay for just under $200 Aud.

I am interested to know from people with the old DA L and the PLM if there is any difference in the image quality of the PLM.

The AF on the later bodies sure looks tempting and perhaps would assist in locking onto the right part of the image for birding and therefore enhance image quality in a round about way.

Hi Rob,

I had the DA L as well as the DA.

I changed from DA L to DA mainly because of the quick shift in the DA. IQ wise I could not see any noticeable difference.

I then bought the PLM and I just loved it and sold my DA.

I think there is some IQ improvement with the PLM.

What I mostly liked immediately though was the faster AF, silent AF and compactness of the PLM.

Also the PLM paired with the Raynox 250 delivered much better results than the DA.

Regards,

Ben

--
Ben.
C&C are welcome.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/benoz/
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/8665818321/photos

 

[karoly7603]

I will go as far as saying this is an excellent lens for the money. Silent focusing, fast auto focusing, small size, very good IQ, good walk around zoom range, sharp, decent sharpness in continuous focusing, as well as WR.

I have been very pleased with my copy straight out of the box.

Used with front mounted Raynox 250 TC it delivered very good macro images.

Overall one of my favourite lenses, especially when attached to my KP.

Hello there

I am a Nikon shooter but bought a Pentax K-70+55-300 PLM lens.

Something I don't understand they have a huge difference in image quality. Both photos are jpg. The first is Nikon D7200+Nikon AF-P 70-300 the second is Pentax K-70+55-300 PLM. I shot handheld at 300mm f8. The Nikon has a lot details on the roof but the Pentax is extremely soft, like a butter. Why? What is the problem with the PLM? I am diasppointed but I beleived it is a serious lens, but seems not. The Nikon even sharper at f6.3 than the Pentax at f8. Thank you for the help.




Nikon 300mm f8




Pentax 300mm f8

 

[DougOB]

I will go as far as saying this is an excellent lens for the money. Silent focusing, fast auto focusing, small size, very good IQ, good walk around zoom range, sharp, decent sharpness in continuous focusing, as well as WR.

I have been very pleased with my copy straight out of the box.

Used with front mounted Raynox 250 TC it delivered very good macro images.

Overall one of my favourite lenses, especially when attached to my KP.

Hello there

I am a Nikon shooter but bought a Pentax K-70+55-300 PLM lens.

Something I don't understand they have a huge difference in image quality. Both photos are jpg. The first is Nikon D7200+Nikon AF-P 70-300 the second is Pentax K-70+55-300 PLM. I shot handheld at 300mm f8. The Nikon has a lot details on the roof but the Pentax is extremely soft, like a butter. Why? What is the problem with the PLM? I am diasppointed but I beleived it is a serious lens, but seems not. The Nikon even sharper at f6.3 than the Pentax at f8. Thank you for the help.

You are shooting jpg straight out of the camera? This could be the difference, not the camera/lens combo. Pentax default jpg tends to be conservative / under sharpened. Either try adjusting the settings (try Bright, Contrast +1, Fine Sharpness -1) or try shooting RAW and post-processing.

Also you could check to see if the focus is properly calibrated.

Doug

 

[karoly7603]

I will go as far as saying this is an excellent lens for the money. Silent focusing, fast auto focusing, small size, very good IQ, good walk around zoom range, sharp, decent sharpness in continuous focusing, as well as WR.

I have been very pleased with my copy straight out of the box.

Used with front mounted Raynox 250 TC it delivered very good macro images.

Overall one of my favourite lenses, especially when attached to my KP.

Hello there

I am a Nikon shooter but bought a Pentax K-70+55-300 PLM lens.

Something I don't understand they have a huge difference in image quality. Both photos are jpg. The first is Nikon D7200+Nikon AF-P 70-300 the second is Pentax K-70+55-300 PLM. I shot handheld at 300mm f8. The Nikon has a lot details on the roof but the Pentax is extremely soft, like a butter. Why? What is the problem with the PLM? I am diasppointed but I beleived it is a serious lens, but seems not. The Nikon even sharper at f6.3 than the Pentax at f8. Thank you for the help.

You are shooting jpg straight out of the camera? This could be the difference, not the camera/lens combo. Pentax default jpg tends to be conservative / under sharpened. Either try adjusting the settings (try Bright, Contrast +1, Fine Sharpness -1) or try shooting RAW and post-processing.

Also you could check to see if the focus is properly calibrated.

Doug

Hi Doug

I shoot always RAW+jpg and I just copied the jpg from the memory card.

Yes, you are right, I had to AF Fine tuned by +5 value but impossible to get sharper photos. For me at this moment is Bright, Contrast +1 and Fine Sharpness is +4

Thank you, I will try your suggestion.

Regards,

Karoly

 

[Mark Ransom]

I am a Nikon shooter but bought a Pentax K-70+55-300 PLM lens.

Something I don't understand they have a huge difference in image quality. Both photos are jpg. The first is Nikon D7200+Nikon AF-P 70-300 the second is Pentax K-70+55-300 PLM. I shot handheld at 300mm f8. The Nikon has a lot details on the roof but the Pentax is extremely soft, like a butter. Why? What is the problem with the PLM? I am diasppointed but I beleived it is a serious lens, but seems not. The Nikon even sharper at f6.3 than the Pentax at f8. Thank you for the help.

I don't see a difference in sharpness between these posted pictures. What I see is a difference in contrast, possibly caused by the Nikon being shot at 1/800 while the Pentax is shot at 1/500. If you took both at 1/800 I'll bet they'll be much closer.