Budget Maxxum part II: the Quantaray 28-90

<p>While the Quantaray 28-90 f3.5-5.6 won't warm the cockles of a pro's heart, I did find my copy surprisingly good. I picked it up for peanuts a couple of years ago, but didn't do much with it until recently. I included a wide to tele comparision shot of the same subject to check for distortion. As expected the 28mm end does show some barrel distortion, but not terrible. At closer range it might be worse, though. For my tests I used my 2xi again with Portra 160 VC processed and scanned at CVS.</p><div></div>

<p>Same building now at the 90mm setting.</p><div></div>

<p>The barber shop, which I posted a black and white photo of a while back belongs to a friend of mine who graduated from the same high school as I did, but a year earlier. I sometimes kid him about graduating the same year as cartoon character Homer Simpson.</p><div></div>

<p>A few more to finish out the series.</p><div></div>

<p>The Chinese restaurant is so close to McDonalds that I can access McDonalds's free WiFi on my iPod touch and visit Photo.net while I wait on my food. I taught the restaurant owner's two oldest sons (one Chemistry and the other Physics) during the last couple of years.</p>

<p>Okay, here's more.</p><div></div>

<p>Like most Quantaray lenses, this one appears to have been made by Sigma (which is a good thing, of course.) Sigma has made some very capable budget lenses for sale under their own name as well as others. Ritz Camera sold the Quantaray lenses separately or with kits as an alternative to the camera makers' lenses. Even in Sigma trim the lenses were almost always less expensive than the OEM lenses. Sometimes (I won't call names) the Sigma actually performed better than OEM lenses of comparable specs.</p><div></div>

<p>There's not much I can see wrong with the Quantaray, <strong>Mike</strong>, and thanks for filling in the details of their history and manufacture. I don't see them for sale very often, and I've wondered where they sprang from. Excellent colour in these images, and impressive detail. I assume you have some religious/patriotic event happening in your town? Thanks for the post.</p>

<p>Mike --<br>

<br /> I have the same lens, mine came with a <a href="../modern-film-cameras-forum/00Yc04">Pentax ZX-7</a>, I was buying the camera and not the lens. At first the lens seemed to work great and I was happy, until I started to use it outside and for some reason, not as great? Doing research on it, I was surprised the mount was plastic, didn't notice until I read about it. It mounted nice and tight, so I never gave it a thought.<br /> <br /> You can view a few macro shoots <a href="../pentax-camera-forum/00Ya5f">HERE</a>.<br /> Glad to see your copy works!</p>

<p><br /> ~Jack</p>

<p>Rick- painting is part of the Growth Alliance (a youth organization) called "Paint the Town Patriotic." Local merchants can have their windows painted. Different groups worked with Growth Alliance (church youth groups, school clubs, etc.) to do the work.<br>

Jack- I've had some reservations about plastic lens mounts. Fortunately the 28-90 for Maxxum and the Sigma 28-80 that I have for Pentax KAF mount seem to work fine. My Sigma 24-70, though, wasn't so lucky. After five years of service, the AF coupling makes a grinding sound. It still autofocuses but the noise is too much. I replaced it with a Tamron of the same range that has a metal mount. I'm wondering if over time the close tolerances required "drift" and possibly the lens loses its centering. Your macro shots with the lens look pretty good. Limited depth of field is difficult to deal with but it looks like you used it effectively.</p>

<p>In firm camera which model do not big problem.Lens is all.I use 404si .Lens have minolta 35~70 F4,28~80 F4, SIGma 24~70 3.5 and 28~200. Normally useing 35~70 or 24~70 for snap. 28~200 is a power zoom however the colour tone is green and no nock for the lens body.</p>