New and old kit objective

I tested my K-x's kit objective DAL 18-55 and older Pentax F 35-80mm objective which game with Pentax MZ-50. Older seems to be better on close-ups (manual focused), scharper pictures.

Comparison photos (Pentax F 35-80 photos are croppet to same size as DAL 18-55 pictures):



Picture 1. New DAL 18-55




Picture 2. Old F 35-55



Picture 3. New DAL 18-55



Picture 4. Old F 35-55

Hi Jukka, the focus seems a little off on 1 & 4, either that or a little movement induced blur.

John

Looks like the old F 35-55 performs better to me.

The first shot was f/7.1, 1/800th sec @ 55mm, not stabilized. While the second shot was f/8 1/400th sec @ 80mm, not stabilized. It could be that the newer lens would perform better at f/8, but I still think the focus is slighty off.

John

I think your technique is suspect. You shouldn't draw any conclusions from these pictures. None is as sharp as it should be.

G

I agree with George.

Tests like this need to be done using a tripod and using centre point focus and both lenses focused the same way, ie; AF or manually.

Yes, yor are right. I notised also that on pic. 4 the focus a little bit off.

I know that the test was "quick and dirty" test, but sometimes man take close up photos also that way.

Anyway, thatks for your comment. I neet to do more testing.

BW.

There was review on dbreview.com
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/pentax_18-55_3p5-5p6_p15/page3.asp

That wasen't exactly the same lens as my is, but quite close:

Reviewed lens: SMC Pentax-DA 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 AL
My lens: SMC Pentax-DAL 18-55 mm 1:3.5-5.6 AL

Review comment:
'Soft Focus Macro' at 55mm
This lens's only slight Achilles’ heel in terms of image quality is a distinct softness wide open at 55mm, with the lens set to shorter focus distances. Technically this is due to under-correction for spherical aberration, which results in a characteristic soft-focus, slightly 'dreamy' feel to the images, with highlights ‘smearing’ into shadows. It's not unusual to see this kind of effect in a lens of this type at close focus distances ...

That's the Mk1 lens. There's a review of the better Mk 2
on a K-5 at Photozone.de link

I think yours is the same as a Mk 2

The MkII was definitely superior on anything beyond istD series IMHO, I've had both.

John

There were some good Mk 1's I had one good one and one bad one.
The performance from the good one was identical to the Mk 2

Even the bad Mk. 1 wasn't all that bad.... just not as good as the Mk.2

I'm afraid this is correct, to my eyes, at least. I have both lenses, although the 18-55 is a mk.1, in my case, and they are both consistently easy to focus and sharp at moderate apertures, although I may just be lucky in having a well set-up example.

I'd have another go if i were you, before coming to any final conclusions.

Thanks gays

My lens is like that:



And the older one:



Anyway, I have to make new test and use smaller aperture (e.g.F11).

I was looking at my Mk2 today and doing a few test shots. I have been thinking about buying a 16-45mm, but the 18-55mm is excellent. It's supposed to be poor in the corners, but it seems very acceptable to me at f/8 which is about the aperture I would always use with it.

When I looked at it before it was better than my Pentax A 24mm f/2.8 so I sold the 24mm. I now want to test it against my CZ 35mm f/2.4 Flektogon.

Fairly quick test outside and the 18-55mm Mk2 easily beats the Flektogon particularly in the corners (test at f/8 only) where the Kit Lens has been reported to be weak. This one certainly isn't

The Flektogon does have nice out of focus areas (wouldn't call it bokeh) It goes OOF a lot quicker than the Kit Lens.

I'll have to step up a gear on the next test to the 43mm Limited