All Forum Comments
Comment by Algernon posted on Sydney harbor bridge at night (4 pics) at 14/09/2010 - 08:43
to the 1.7x. Works well with the 55-300mm MF only. Loses slightly
less light than the 1.7x
Comment by Algernon posted on Any advice on choosing a AF teleconverter? at 14/09/2010 - 08:39
Comment by Algernon posted on SMC Pentax-FA 80-320mm 4.5-5.6 at 13/09/2010 - 21:13
I assumed it was. Perhaps Carol can find someone with a
Pentax body and just make sure the aperture shows up on the
camera display or lists it in the Classifieds and offers a
full refund if it doesn't work on the buyers camera. If it's
the silver version there should be a strong chance that it's
OK.
Comment by Algernon posted on SMC Pentax-FA 80-320mm 4.5-5.6 at 13/09/2010 - 20:39
if the lens works or not. At least Don has flagged it up for them.
It sounds like it's just a loose contact inside that has been there since manufacture.It is fixable, but that would cost extra. At least if it works now it's a fault that shouldn't emerge in the future. Pentax
should really repair it free if it's a manufacturing defect, although
they would probably say it wasn't designed for digital.
I always regretted not buying one of these from new. I did borrow one
once and was impressed particularly with the manual focussing. I'd be
interested in this one except that I've just bought ReubenO's Pentax DA* 300/4 and already have the FA* and A* versions plus 4 zooms that
cover 300mm
Comment by Algernon posted on SMC Pentax-FA 80-320mm 4.5-5.6 at 13/09/2010 - 18:55
Search Ricehigh's Blog he's done some testing on batteries and chargers.
The problem could be your charger.
Comment by Algernon posted on Contemplating on returning the Kx due to battery issues. at 13/09/2010 - 17:57
Some examples do suffer from wobbly barrels, but I wouldn't expect that from one that's like new. They still work with a wobbly barrel. All AF lenses have to be fairly loose for the AF to work.
When AP tested this lens the low light performance was so good that they thought they must have made a mistake.... so they scrapped the test and did it again and got the same excellent results.
The reviews on the other forum are at link
I don't think John likes comments in the classified section.
Comment by Algernon posted on SMC Pentax-FA 80-320mm 4.5-5.6 at 13/09/2010 - 17:46
generally the depth of field in front of the plane of focus is less than the depth of field behind the plane of focus, particularly when close to the subject. i think this is at play to a large extent in that link that you posted.
is identical.
Comment by Algernon posted on Focus Shift on Stopping Down at 13/09/2010 - 16:45
Comment by Algernon posted on I'm a proud father again: The New Arrival at 13/09/2010 - 16:40
Comment by Algernon posted on SMC Pentax-FA 80-320mm 4.5-5.6 at 13/09/2010 - 15:43


is well known the 4th could be anywhere, but it is an excellent shot.