Pentax SMC Fa 80-320 fits a Kx?


ElRazur

Link Posted 15/09/2010 - 18:10
Anyone know if the Pentax SMC Fa 80-320 will fit the Kx? Also will feature like auto focus work etc?

Dangermouse

Link Posted 15/09/2010 - 18:20
Yes, it should work exactly like a DA lens.

I know there have been some problems with some examples of this lens on DSLRs, these usually seem to be the black versions as opposed to the silver ones. This is a fault with the individual lens though rather than the system.
Matt

Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.
Last Edited by Dangermouse on 15/09/2010 - 18:21

Helpful

ElRazur

Link Posted 15/09/2010 - 18:49
Thanks. Should pick one up over the weekend.

Frogfish

Link Posted 15/09/2010 - 20:15
Yes I had one and it worked perfectly on my K7 - however I ditched this one fast. It's not a great lens - not at all sharp. You are much better off with the DA 55-300 which is a brilliant lens for the price, or failing that, I also have the Tamron 70-300 macro and that's a fine lens with an excellent 1:2 macro mode I can recommend too.

Plenty of the Tamrons on EBay and even a new one will only set you back 115 pounds or so (some with a 5 yr guarantee) . A cheeky bid on one of the auction items could get you a real bargain - it's an excellent lens and not far off the 55-300.
http://frogfish.smugmug.com/ Pentax. Pentax DA*300/4, Cosina 55/1.2, Lens Baby Composer Pro & Edge 80, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0
Last Edited by Frogfish on 15/09/2010 - 20:16

Algernon

Link Posted 15/09/2010 - 21:13
You must have had a bad copy of the 80-320mm. Officially and I mean from published tests it was one of the best lenses Pentax ever made. Pity it wasn't a bit more robust and you don't get purple fringing with it like you do with the Tamron 70-300mm.
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi

Frogfish

Link Posted 15/09/2010 - 21:21
We ran some tests on another site (Tamron v 55-300) and the Pentax came out a fraction better on the PF and generally sharper. The PF has never been an issue unless shooting in very high contrast scenes - even then it's easily removed in PP.

However there is a reason why the 80-320 is so cheap and not ever mentioned as a good option in the longer zoom range. Having had all three, and a Tak 300, the 80-320 is the only one that has left the stable. Maybe as you say I had a bad copy - can't say now !
http://frogfish.smugmug.com/ Pentax. Pentax DA*300/4, Cosina 55/1.2, Lens Baby Composer Pro & Edge 80, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0

Mannesty

Link Posted 15/09/2010 - 21:59
Completely OT: Why hasn't your car got any registration plates?
Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream
Last Edited by Mannesty on 15/09/2010 - 22:00

Dangermouse

Link Posted 15/09/2010 - 22:23
Mannesty wrote:
Completely OT: Why hasn't your car got any registration plates?

Removed for the photo maybe?

I always blank out numberplates before uploading any vehicle photos. There have been credible reports of criminals either cloning cars from photos on the web or tracking them down in order to steal them in the case of more desirable machinery.
Matt

Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.

Frogfish

Link Posted 16/09/2010 - 16:52
User Ratings from a well-known site :

Pentax FA 80-320 : 6.93 (14 users)
Tamron 70-300 : 7.68 (21 users)
Pentax DA 55-300 : 8.92 (37 users)
Sigma 70-300 : 6.30 (11 users) - the APO version is 7.85 (13 users)
http://frogfish.smugmug.com/ Pentax. Pentax DA*300/4, Cosina 55/1.2, Lens Baby Composer Pro & Edge 80, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0

fatspider

Link Posted 16/09/2010 - 17:31
Err, 80-320 not sharp?

this one is sharper than a budgies beak;



My Names Alan, and I'm a lensaholic.
My PPG link
My Flckr link

Algernon

Link Posted 16/09/2010 - 17:45
fatspider wrote:
Err, 80-320 not sharp?

this one is sharper than a budgies beak.

I was just going to say I didn't realize that a sparrow had such good colouring when I saw the filename and it's a Spanish one

It's nice and sharp though and the bokeh is quite acceptable. Depending on the shot that lens is capable of outstanding bokeh, also very good in poor light.
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi

Algernon

Link Posted 16/09/2010 - 18:15
Frogfish wrote:
User Ratings from a well-known site :

Pentax FA 80-320 : 6.93 (14 users)
Tamron 70-300 : 7.68 (21 users)
Pentax DA 55-300 : 8.92 (37 users)
Sigma 70-300 : 6.30 (11 users) - the APO version is 7.85 (13 users)

I wish I had a pound for everytime I've been misled by user ratings of lenses. Case of garbage in garbage out I'm afraid Also the more they pay for a lens the more points they give it

My Old Aunt Agnes used to have a Kodak 126 Instamatic and she used to say it took absolutely brilliant photographs every bit as good as what a professional would do. 10/10 in her mind.

Joking aside the above ratings are understandable. The 80-320 is an old model and was replaced by the 55-300 which is a very good replacement. I'm suprised the Sigma APO is so highly rated I've got the AP test report here in front of me and at 300mm f/8 it couldn't even manage 100lpmm. The Tamron looks better getting 120lpmm at f/8 but I saw some recent MTF tests of that and the Sigma and at 300mm they were both poor. The Tamron's also famous for purple fringing, which would make me rate it at about 3. They both scored 21/30 on the AP test.

The only problem I have with the 55-300mm is that it isn't as good as the 80-320mm for MF. I still use the 55-300mm though. If I could buy a Brand New 80-320mm I would.
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi
Last Edited by Algernon on 16/09/2010 - 18:27

Frogfish

Link Posted 16/09/2010 - 18:27
All I can say mate is that having had all 3 (and the Tak 300mm) the 80-320 is the only one I got rid of. I have some nice shots from it, as the budgie shot above shows it's not incapable, but overall it is nowhere near as good as the other two where it matters ..... in the field.

As I've already said re. Tamron, the PF is rarely an issue and easily corrected in PP. I found a nice one on-line with a dealer going for just GBP69 and there are plenty to be had up to 100. If he has the cash it's a no brainer, 55-300's quality is way above it's price range, however the Tamron makes a nice alternative - especially with it's 1:2 macro, it's a very versatile lense.
http://frogfish.smugmug.com/ Pentax. Pentax DA*300/4, Cosina 55/1.2, Lens Baby Composer Pro & Edge 80, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0

Don

Link Posted 16/09/2010 - 18:29
Algernon wrote:
Frogfish wrote:
User Ratings from a well-known site :

Pentax FA 80-320 : 6.93 (14 users)
Tamron 70-300 : 7.68 (21 users)
Pentax DA 55-300 : 8.92 (37 users)
Sigma 70-300 : 6.30 (11 users) - the APO version is 7.85 (13 users)

I wish I had a pound for everytime I've been misled by user ratings of lenses. Case of garbage in garbage out I'm afraid Also the more they pay for a lens the more points they give it

My Old Aunt Agnes used to have a Kodak 126 Instamatic and she used to say it took absolutely brilliant photographs every bit as good as what a professional would do. 10/10 in her mind.

Joking aside the above ratings are understandable. The 80-320 is an old model and was replaced by the 55-300 which is a very good replacement. I'm suprised the Sigma APO is so highly rated I've got the AP test report here in front of me and at 300mm it couldn't even manage 100lpmm. The Tamron looks better getting 120lpmm at f/8 but I saw some recent MTF tests of that and the Sigma and at 300mm they were both poor. The Tamron's also famous for purple fringing, which would make me rate it at about 3. They both scored 21/30 on the AP test.

The only problem I have with the 55-300mm is that it isn't as good as the 80-320mm for MF. I still use the 55-300mm though. If I could buy a Brand New 80-320mm I would.

good points to be sure...
I have a sigma 400mm at f4, I can take a shot with my 100mm pentax macro, my 1.7 af converter and crop the final image to give the same fov as the 400 sigma and still get a better photo.
at f8-f16 the sigma performs better, but still the 200mm pentax would blow it away, even if I had to crop the final image...

so the 80-320 is one you need to try before you buy, but it is a good lens depending on cost... the 55-300 is a safer bet.....
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.
Last Edited by Don on 16/09/2010 - 18:31

Frogfish

Link Posted 16/09/2010 - 18:34
fatspider wrote:
Err, 80-320 not sharp?

this one is sharper than a budgies beak;

That's a nice shot, not tack sharp, but very nice - but the 55-300 is going to be sharper, no question.
http://frogfish.smugmug.com/ Pentax. Pentax DA*300/4, Cosina 55/1.2, Lens Baby Composer Pro & Edge 80, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.