300mm M42 F4 lens

Has anyone evperience of this lens, please. Will it be effective with a Pentax 1.7 converter to change it into auto mode. How does it rate.

regards Thoramay.

Usually these older 300mm lenses suffer from a bit of PF and a converter makes it worse. Also be careful of the minimum focus distance. The 300mm A* for instance won't focus closer than 4m which is useless for birds. A converter or extension ring will let you go closer though.

Algi

If you are talking about the Taks, they weren't impressive, CZJ and Pentacon had at least better PF control I believe. The CZJ definitely better IQ overall from what I've seen.

A converter doesn't change the minimal focus distance.

Sorry I should have said a 2X converter will make the image 2X the size!! ........ Now I'm stating the Bleedingly obvious

The best extension tube to get is 6mm. I use a Ricoh one with the A* 300mm and it lets me focus to 3m rather than 4m and still get about 12m with the infinity setting. No contacts on the extension ring so I lose the A setting on the lens. I tend to use the excellent Pentax 55-300mm more because of these problems, especially if I can stop down to about f/11.

Algi

Thanks. I have three zooms to 300mm, plus the Tamron 500 mirror and the Pentax reflex 400-600. None of these produce the kind of result that I want with wildlife.

Having seen some of thbe results using a prime 300mm lens, I want one, be it Pentax or other, idealy the Pentax 300 f4.5 which can produce stunning shots coupled with the Pentax 1.7 converter.

I have trawled the internet to most shops in major towns in this country for three months without success.

I now know of a 300 TAK f4 and was just wondering!! I know Chris has a 300 f4 but it is just out of my present cash flow.

Thinking of trading the reflex 400-600 in mint condition should anyone be interested for a 4.5. Any takers??

regards thoramay

You also need to bear in mind that a lot of the older 300mm lenses were very big and heavy. I've got a 400mm M42 Tokina that's like that and it really takes some steadying. I don't have any problem holding a 300mm and converter though. Must a be a weight/mass thing.

Algi

Are you shooting RAW or jpg? I'm just thinking that the rsults may improve with a little post processing. I have a Tamron 70-300 LD Di and I'm surprised how good it can be with a little work, even at 300mm. What exactly are you not happy with? Maybe you could post a sample or two

Regards,

John

Decent long lenses are always expensive. That is one of the big arguments in favour of APS-C, rather than 135-format.

I find my M 400 1:5.6 quite hand-holdable in decent light, despite its size and weight, and it is sharp wide-open. Shake Reduction is a real boon here.

The only problem is that focussing is a bit slow compared to an AF lens, but probably no worse than using the 1.7x T/C on a 300mm.

So, if you can't afford a modern 300mm, try an old 400mm. Much cheaper, and you can always sell it again if you don't get on with it.

And if you go this route, there is not much advantage to the A version, rather than the M or K. You will usually be shooting wide-open, and if so, you can use Av mode.

But you won't be able to use it with the 1.7 T/C. There won't be enough light to focus properly.

G

John. Thanks for your interest. I have the Tamron 70-300 and am disappointed with it. I am judging my efforts against those that I see in the 300mm plus club on the Pentaxforum.com site.

I am aware that it takes a lot of practice to achieve those results but clearly a huge factor is a prime 300mm lens.

I find that my 100-300 lens achieves the best results. The 400-600 reflex is superb but not a wildlife lens.

I have just spent ten days holiday in Ireland and visited a wetland centre. I had my Tamron 18-250 lens with me. I was simply too far away to get any decent shots, even through cropping. There were others there with longer lens achieving very satisfactory results.

Maybe it is just the 'wants' within me but I lust after a 300mm lens that I can use with my Pentax 1.7 converter.

I see that you have the DA 300 f4 lens. Presumably you use this for wildlife rather than the 70-300.

I am shooting Raw with the K10. I hear good reports of the 55-300mm but as good as this might be, I cannot imagine that it would match a prime 300mm lens. Maybe good fortune will be kind to me. I shall have to keep searching.

How do you rate the Sigma 300 f4 APO?

regards thoramay

George. I appreciate your advice and it makes sense to a point, but can I ask a question. Would you use your 400mm against your F300 plus the 1.7 converter for wildlife shots?

To a point, the cost is not the issue. Finding a 300mm f4.5 or a F4 is, or any 300mm come to that.

regards Thoramay.

Sigma made an AF 300mm F4.
You also have the Tamron F2.8 A2 popping up more often then Pentax 300mm. They are soft-ish wide open, but I suppose by F4 it should be very good.
You could find one on ebay for £250-350 mark depending on condition.

Yes, almost always. The T/C doesn't focus particularly well on the 300mm in other than bright light.

It takes time to master a big, long, MF lens, but it can be done. I would love to have an AF 400mm, but it's not going to happen any time soon.

Genrally, the only time I use the 1.7 T/C is with the 400mm on a tripod, and I nearly always focus manually.

G

Hi again

I tend to use whatever I have on the camera at the time. But yes if I'm deliberately going birding the DA*300 + converters 1.5x & 1.7x, DA*200 and the Tamrom 90 Macro are in the bag, maybe one other lens, grip, spare batteries etc etc (it gets damned heavy after a couple of hours walking
The K20D gives me an advantage when I crop over the K10D, which was one of the reasons I bought it. However the following was shot with the K10D and Tamron 70-300 (£65 s/h) @ 300mm, f/11, RAW, slight levels adjust, sharpen 300%, 0.3 radius:

https://www.pentaxuser.com/photo/aliens-splash-down-on-local-lake-18129/large

I can't believe how good it is for the money, performs completely out of it's league IMHO. The DA 55-300 should do better, particalarly contrast wise.

The Sigma 300 APO is a lovely lens, I still keep it for back up, second only IQ wise to the DA*300 IMHO. I've had the F*300/4.5 but sold it because I preferred the Sigma APO. They made a 400/5.6 APO which I still desire but I'm undecided because of the 120-400 HSM OS job they now produce. Chris at SRS had a Sigma 400/5.6 APO AF a while back for £350, I'm still regretting not buying it

Regards,

John

As a possible alternative, I think SRS have a used Sigma 400mm f5.6 in stock - although not quite as long as a 300mm + TC it is likely to be both faster and better. Plus it's AF if that interests you.