Pentax's 28-105 lenses
David Oswald
I have the old Power Zoom version (SMC Pentax FA 28-105mm f/4-5.6 PZ -
Black). I'm considering acquiring the newest version (SMC Pentax FA
28-105mm f/3.2-4.5 (IF) - Silver) -- This is the latest one. There was also
an intermediate one that I'm not considering which was sold as a Pentax but
at least in part manufactured by Tamron (SMC Pentax FA 28-105mm f/4-5.6 IF -
Silver).
Can anyone tell me about the results they're getting with the 3.2-4.5
version, as compared to the original black power zoom f/4-5.6 version?
Thanks,
Dave
--
David Oswald -- dav...@pacifier.com
Stefan Ittner
> Can anyone tell me about the results they're getting with the 3.2-4.5
> version, as compared to the original black power zoom f/4-5.6 version?
Hallo Dave,
I own the new 3.2-4.5 lens but have never used the Power Zoom Lens, so I cannot
tell you how they actually compare. I can only tell you that I am very
satisfied with my lens: It shows a remarkable contrast performance and color
saturation, is very sharp and has no problems with vignetting (I shoot slide
film). The only disadvantage I see is the distortion, but this may be normal
for this zoom range. The Power Zoom 28-105 has a great reputation, so I don't
think the new 28-105 will be any better optically. For _me_ the 3.2-4.5 is
better because it is much smaller and lighter and also a bit faster than the
Power Zoom - and it has internal focus. It really depends on your
preferences...
Stefan
David Oswald
ebay. I already have the 4-5.6 PZ version. My thought was I would bench
test both of them and re-sell on ebay whichever one proved inferior to the
other. My hope is that the f/3.2-4.5 model performs well enough to keep,
because I like the fact that it's a half-stop faster, and lighter, and
smaller.
Dave
"Stefan Ittner" <suga...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:1103_10...@news.uni-erlangen.de...
Stefan Ittner
wrote:
> Well, perhaps I'll be able to comment soon. I just picked up a 3.2-4.5
on
> ebay. I already have the 4-5.6 PZ version. My thought was I would bench
> test both of them and re-sell on ebay whichever one proved inferior to
the
> other. My hope is that the f/3.2-4.5 model performs well enough to keep,
> because I like the fact that it's a half-stop faster, and lighter, and
> smaller.
Hallo Dave,
I would really be interested to hear about your test results - I've always
wondered how the old PZ performs as compared to the new model. If you like
you can post your results in this newsgroup or mail me directly under
XYZstefan...@yahoo.com (remove all 'XYZ'). Thanks!
Regards,
Stefan
Bill Cory
bought it used ad love every aspect of it for parties, vacation and
general photography. I have over a years exp. with this lens and no
complaints. If you gert a chance and have no problems buying used give
it a try.
Bandicoot
Here's a vote for asking Dave to post rather than email his results -
because I'd like to see them too.... Please...
I have the Power zoom and the Tamron based 'second generation'. The PZ is
better and I'm selling the other one - but I've wondered about the new one
as a lightweight travel lens. I already use the excellent 28-70 f4 FA AL
for that, but there are times when a bit more 'reach' would help. (And the
24-90 is not small.)
Peter
David Oswald
"David Oswald" <dav...@pacifier.com> wrote in message
news:v9k69i9...@corp.supernews.com...
I've now compared the two lenses side by side and have this to say:
SMC Pentax FA 28-105mm f/4-5.6 PZ Black - Less barrol distortion at wide
angle.
SMC Pentax FA 28-105mm f/3.2-4.5 (IF) AL - Similar sharpness and bokeh.
Much more barrol distortion at 28mm. Doesn't focus as close. Possibly more
pleasing color balance. Slightly sharper at long end.
Bandicoot
[SNIP]
>
> I've now compared the two lenses side by side and have this to say:
>
> SMC Pentax FA 28-105mm f/4-5.6 PZ Black - Less barrol distortion at wide
> angle.
>
> SMC Pentax FA 28-105mm f/3.2-4.5 (IF) AL - Similar sharpness and bokeh.
> Much more barrol distortion at 28mm. Doesn't focus as close. Possibly
more
> pleasing color balance. Slightly sharper at long end.
>
Thanks for posting, and so sharing. This is the first such comparison I've
seen.
Peter
David Oswald
It does have more barrol distortion at 28mm than the old PZ version, but the
color rendition seems more pleasing; warmer, and more in keeping with the
rest of my Pentax lenses. I always thought the old PZ version of teh 28-105
seemed kind of cold. I also really really really like the small size and
light weight. It's less than half the weight of the PZ version. Image
quality seems quite good. And it's 2/3rds of a stop faster than the PZ
version. Build quality is a little more like Pentax's newer zooms (lighter,
maybe not as solid), but comments i've seen on the Pentax mailing list
indicate that the lens still stands up quite well.
Dave
"Bandicoot" <"insert_handle_here"@techemail.com> wrote in message
news:105184446...@ersa.uk.clara.net...