So far I like it. After I get some time to use ...
30 August 2014
Summary: I haven't really used it. I've only handled it and "played" with it a bit. Mostly to get the feel. So far I like it. After I get some time to use it seriously, I'll have a more definitive answer.
Summary: The clarity and sharpness are on par with lenses around this price. I dropped mine from about 6 inches onto concrete with the lens barrel fully extended and it still works great, no more than cosmetic damage.
Summary: This lens is a replacement for my DA 50-200, which was too soft and too short at 200mm for what I needed. The HD DA 55-300 fills the bill. Even though a zoom is a jack of all trades and makes sacrifices in IQ for the convenience of an adjustable focal length for a variety of occasions, the 55-300...
Summary: This lens can deliver nice sharp photos, even at 300mm and wide open, with minimal chromatic aberration. It is a great portrait lens around 85-135mm too, and is also good at 55mm. My copy has no zoom creep and is solid when mounted on my K30.
Summary: I already took a lot a pictures with the 55-300 and image quality is good. For amateur photography it is quite good; I expected it to "hunt" focus far more than it has done. Just in some very specific situation It hunted for a short while, but it always got focus at the end. Worth the money.
Summary: Results with the lens are quite clear. It's supposed to have the same optics as its twice the price alternate, but it is not as durable in construction. The trade off in price is worth it to me.