80-320 mm f/4.5-5.6 FA :
Ken Kuo - Good overall lens, but no significant change from the 100-300Élacks macro feature. . .
David (ZX5Lx) - . . . I had the chance to test the new 80-320 against the original 100-300 (both Pentax). . . tripod mounted, good contrasty lighting conditions with both print and slide film. . . they were extremely close in optical performance, virtually identical, with maybe a very slight edge going to the 80-320 in terms of contrast. . .
Roberto Burgos S. -. . . From 80 to about 250 is tack sharp, then it softens towards the 320 end. Flare is very well controlled . . .
Derrin Auerswald - . . . it is solidly built, and nicely balanced.
Pascal De Pauw - Better then FA100-300, but still soft above 200mm. Good build, reasonable. . .
Mark Cassino - . . . Main advantages -- it's sharp, contrasty, well designed, light, compact, and affordable. AF is reasonably fast. . . What I really like about this lens is the way colors get punched up - it delivers a very saturated and contrasty image. It's also nice and light, . . .
Bruce Dayton - . . .pretty good . . .
Alin Flaider - . . . It certainly delivers better optical quality than most consumer zooms . .
Treena Harp - . . . I get very good color and contrast from this lens . . ."
***
100-300 mm f/4.5-5.6 FA
Pål - one of the the two worst Pentax AF lenses made [ the SMC-FA 28-80 F3.5-4.7 and the infamous SMC-FA 100-300 F4.5-5.6].
Udi Efrat - I like my AF 100-300. . . the sharpness and contrast look good. . .
Steve Graham -. . . it is certainly not one of Pentax's better efforts. It's quite soft at the 300 end, and build is not great. It's still useable though.
fritz polesny - . . . this optic brings good results if you use it only between 100 and 200 mm. . .
wybór chyba jasny
Dołączył: 28 Maj 2006
