Thanks for the replies.

I don't think that there is a concensus about which version has the best IQ or even that there is a significant and consistent difference between versions.

I have seen some convincing examples showing reduction in flare when shooting into the light for lenses having the latest multi-coating compared with SMC. Maybe I should consider buying either the WR or PLM versions for shooting sunsets, especially if there are any decent deals offered in the run up to Xmas.

If I do use the longer focal lengths more frequently, I'll think again about buying a DA* 200mm or 300mm.

My sample of non-WR 55-300mm does seem pretty good, even at 300mm from about f/7.1 onwards - so, for now, I am happy to stick with it.

Andrew

Ever since the PLM version of this lens was launched, I have been wondering if it makes sense for me to buy one and pension off my early (non WR) version of the lens.

I use my 16-85mm on a K70 for maybe 80-90% of all the photos I shoot (more landscapes than anything else), with only a few percent each for the 55-300mm, 100mm f2.8 macro and 35mm f2.4 that I carry in the same Lowepro backpack.

I don't shoot sports or BIF, at the moment, but might want to in the future - so the PLM's improved AF, although attractive is not vital. I would, though, buy a PLM if I were convinced that its IQ is significantly better.

I guess that there must be a number of PU readers/members who have upgraded to the 55-300mm PLM version who will have a better handle on its IQ, especially from around 150mm and longer, than I have been able to glean from reading online reviews, which seem less than wholly enthusiastic. So .... a question for you - in your opinion would it be worth buying a 55-300mm PLM just for the improvement in IQ?

I have pondered about buying a DA* 200mm f2.8 or 300mm f4 as well - or the 60-250mm f4 as a replacement, but given how infrequently I shoot at 200-300mm and how much bigger and heavier they all are, maybe, for me they do not make much sense.

So, should I stick or twist?

Andrew

I did the same test this morning of the DA 55-300mm against a XR Rikenon 300mm f4.5 APO prime that I have had lying around for years. Interestingly, the DA 55-300mm zoom at 300mm f/8 is significantly sharper than the Rikenon. The Rikenon also has lots of blue/purple fringing which is difficult/impossible to remove without leaving evidence all over the frame.

I think the bottom line here is that it just isn't worth bothering with old primes. I have been considering buying the new PLM version of the 55-300mm - but I seem to have a very good copy of the older lens and, despite its focussing eccentricities, I am not convinced that it is worth the risk of pensioning it off just yet.

Andrew

Not my first 35mm camera, which was some Russian device whose name I cannot remember, but my first SLR was a Ricoh KR10. I had wanted to buy a Pentax ME Super, but I couldn't really afford it, so bought the Ricoh instead. I was relieved of the KR10 by a burglar in the late 1980s - but after a brief foray with a Canon Megazoom, bought a used KR10 Super which I still have in a cupboard and which still works. It was 2008 before I bought my first real Pentax - a K200 in 2008.

This is a shot I took using my (4 day old) K70 and (4 hours old) DA 16-85mm, without flash at a camera club studio evening, at ISO 12,800, purely as a test. I have seen it projected on a large screen and no one noticed or commented about noise.




I would have no qualms about using the K70 routinely at ISO3200 - and maybe higher. The sensor you want just might be here already.

Andrew

Just pulled the trigger on a Pentax 16-85mm for the K70 - so problem solved (hopefully).

Andrew

On reading DNGs into Lightroom, it does recognise the Tamron correctly from the EXIF.

ANdrew

Possibly, but I doubt that I would be offered much for it. In any case, buying another lens to use on the K30 could be opening just a different can of worms. Why do that when the Tamrom works so well on it. I s'pose that one option could be to buy a second Tamron and have that calibrated to match the K70.

Ponder .........

Andrew

I have used a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 with a K30 without issue for about a year, but only after having the Tamron lens recalibrated, under warranty, by Intro2020 so that it would focus properly on the K30. This involved a change in the firmware board, as firmware updates cannot be uploaded to the lens for the Pentax version. I have just bought a K70 and the Tamron now front focusses substantially. At f/2.8, it still does, even with the AF fine adjustment set at -10, though it is obviously better than if it is set at zero.

There is a possibility that the Tamron could be recalibrated to focus properly with the K70, but there is a real possibility that it would no longer focus accurately on the K30 which I had intended to keep as a spare. I have a number of possible solutions for this ........

* Have the Tamron lens recalibrated again for the K70, but risk it becoming unusable on the K30
* Buy a new normal zoom for the K70, such as the Pentax 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6
* Losing the K70 could be a solution too, but I would be reluctant to do that.

Do any of you have any sudden bursts of inspiration that might offer me a simple solution to this? Has anyone used both a Tamron 17-50mm and a Pentax 16-85mm om the same camera? Has anyone got any thoughts about how good the (much slower) Pentax lens would be on a K70?

Andrew

Not a lot, to be honest. If I remember correctly, I spent some time on Google trying to find out about how to dismantle the lens. One or two web sites had some interesting info, such as this:

http://forum.mflenses.com/tair-3-300-4-5-part-of-the-photosniper-repair-guide-t2...

In the end, I only partially dismantled the Tair lens. The result was far from perfect and it is still quite stiff to focus.

The Tair 300A that I have is in decent nick (no scratches or fungus), but I do not use it. The Pentax 55-300mm zoom is just as good at 300mm and is way easier to carry and to use.

Andrew