DA 35mm F2.4 - review


simonkit

Link Posted 06/02/2011 - 10:46
The new 35mm certainly seems to be receiving some interest and rightly so based upon my own short ownership experience. Coincidentally I just came across a link to a review, as well as other Pentax lenses, which I'm not sure I've seen posted on here...

http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/

Simon
My website http://www.landscapephotographyuk.com

My Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/landscapephotographyuk

Find me on Google+ link

Algernon

Link Posted 06/02/2011 - 16:46
Excellent test/review site Simon. I'm surprised that no one's commented on it..... then again maybe not tests tell the truth and Pentax users prefer to make it all up as they go along!

I see that he's spotted another K-5 fault with regard to PF

Also nice to see some of the old junk that people think is the bees knees and pay ridiculous prices for tested. Such as the 'K Series' 35mm f/3.5 that went for about £120 just over a week ago Lousy edge performance, PF and low contrast Yeah! that's worth £120

The 50mm shoot off is interesting.
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi

Dangermouse

Link Posted 06/02/2011 - 17:04
Algernon wrote:

Also nice to see some of the old junk that people think is the bees knees and pay ridiculous prices for tested. Such as the 'K Series' 35mm f/3.5 that went for about £120 just over a week ago Lousy edge performance, PF and low contrast Yeah! that's worth £120

I'll give them £50 for it?

I think the K series prices are due to collectors rather than people who actually want to use them. Anything rare and old will eventually gain a following of that nature - look at the people paying £500 for Wrenn model trains when you can buy a modern model which is more accurate and a better runner for around a fifth of that.

I like K series lenses for their build quality and the fact that they can still produce top-quality images for comparatively little money, but I draw the line at paying the prices now demanded for some!
Matt

Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.

Algernon

Link Posted 06/02/2011 - 17:33
I couldn't believe it when I saw a Practica go for £350 last week. Mind you it was the most advanced M42 camera ever made. It didn't even have the proper lens for that price.... it only had a cheapo The proper lens would have been a CZ Pancolor 50mm f/1.4 and they go for £350 on their own..... so £700 camera and lens
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 06/02/2011 - 17:37
Interesting to have the lens compared to Nikon's budget 35 -

Quote:
Compared with the DA 35mm, the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 DX AFS has slightly better central sharpness, slightly worse corners, much worse distortion, is about 2/3 of an f/stop brighter (based on histograms), and is better built.

Kind of confounds the critics of this lens when it was first released...
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

Dangermouse

Link Posted 06/02/2011 - 18:27
Algernon wrote:
I couldn't believe it when I saw a Practica go for £350 last week. Mind you it was the most advanced M42 camera ever made. It didn't even have the proper lens for that price.... it only had a cheapo The proper lens would have been a CZ Pancolor 50mm f/1.4 and they go for £350 on their own..... so £700 camera and lens

Meanwhile I paid 99p this morning for a dead ME Super (which may well revive with some lighter fluid flushing/fresh oil). I've found minty, working examples for £30 with a lens before now.
Matt

Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.

Algernon

Link Posted 06/02/2011 - 18:36
This is the camera that went for £350 Pentacon Super. It had interchangeable finders.... years before the LX...... Fully open metering.... years before the Spotmatic F + a lot of cheap Practica parts

Edit: If anyone really wants one and has £994 to spare link
Still not the f/1.4 lens though
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi
Last Edited by Algernon on 06/02/2011 - 18:47

Dangermouse

Link Posted 06/02/2011 - 19:03
I can't help but think this might be another collector...

I do, however, have a use for scruffy but functional M series bodies. Fitted with a similarly cheap lens they're very good for taking into places I don't fancy risking my K-m or one of my nicer condition film bodies.
Matt

Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.

cher-cher

Link Posted 10/03/2011 - 13:06
Hi, did anybody make some photos using this lens? I would highly appreciate if I can see some example, but without any correction / intervention with Photoshop or similar. Just the original version. I am very interested to see the sharpness capability. Is it comparable to Pentax M 50 1.7 ? I own this kind of lens, and I want to know it it worth to buy the new 35 in terms of sharpness.

Thank you

chrissinkpen

Link Posted 10/03/2011 - 13:45
I think it is sharper than the M50.
This was taken indoors with the KR
http://flic.kr/p/9oeL3b
Apologies if I goof up-not used to flickr yet
Regards
Chris

Dangermouse

Link Posted 10/03/2011 - 13:48
Yes, I'd say it's equal to the old M 50 f1.7, in fact I think it's the modern equivalent. It's a sharp, fairly fast, standard prime lens at a price most people can stretch to. I prefer it to the old 50mm on digital as it's a more useful focal length and auto focus, as well as offering simpler metering.
Matt

Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.

chrissinkpen

Link Posted 10/03/2011 - 13:50
cher-cher wrote:
Hi, did anybody make some photos using this lens? I would highly appreciate if I can see some example, but without any correction / intervention with Photoshop or similar. Just the original version. I am very interested to see the sharpness capability. Is it comparable to Pentax M 50 1.7 ? I own this kind of lens, and I want to know it it worth to buy the new 35 in terms of sharpness.

Thank you

There are other images in my flickr account with images taken with the 35 f/2.4
Regards
Chris

gartmore

Link Posted 10/03/2011 - 14:01
cher-cher wrote:
Hi, did anybody make some photos using this lens? I would highly appreciate if I can see some example, but without any correction / intervention with Photoshop or similar. Just the original version. I am very interested to see the sharpness capability. Is it comparable to Pentax M 50 1.7 ? I own this kind of lens, and I want to know it it worth to buy the new 35 in terms of sharpness.

Thank you

Here is a picture taken with mine: link
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -

Offertonhatter

Link Posted 10/03/2011 - 19:03
It is a fair review. Both the DA and FA 35's come out well. And the comparison with the Nikkor and Sigma is what I expect.
The Sigma is best wide open (like their 50mm), the Nikkor best in some areas, the pentax better in others.

At the end of the day though, are YOU happy with the results. The one who uses the lens. As indeed that is all that matters

Me? I love the 35mm, yes it's no Sigma wide open, and not quite as sharp as the 31mm I tested at Focus, but am I happy with it? Yes of course.
Some Cameras

cher-cher

Link Posted 10/03/2011 - 23:48
chrissinkpen wrote:
I think it is sharper than the M50.
This was taken indoors with the KR
http://flic.kr/p/9oeL3b
Apologies if I goof up-not used to flickr yet
Regards
Chris

Chris, if you can let it public, it would be nice Anyway, I just saw the other photo. Quite nice, I guess I'll get one of this as soon as I can.
Thank you all
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.