Pentax A 24mm/28mm

MrCynical
Posted 20/05/2010 - 10:14 Link
I'm looking to get something faster than my kit lens in the normalish range, and thought an A-series prime (either the 28mm or 24mm) would be a fun and cheap option. What I was wondering is whether these lenses will offer anything over modern zooms - the DA16-45 or Tamron 17-50, one of which (likely the latter) I will probably end up getting eventually.
Mannesty
Posted 20/05/2010 - 10:31 Link
Shameless plug:-

I have an SMCP-A 24mm 1:2.8 lens for sale at only £149 including postage.

There are three important differences between the two lenses you mention, and zooms covering the same range.

1: The wider 2.8 aperture which can render OOF areas much better than a zoom.
2: Better low light performance.
3: The IQ from primes, even old ones, is generally superior to that from a zoom due to the compromises made in the design of zooms.

Of the two ( 24/28 ), the 24mm is held in higher regard.
Peter E Smith - flickr Photostream
Edited by Mannesty: 20/05/2010 - 10:31
MrCynical
Posted 20/05/2010 - 10:46 Link
Mannesty wrote:
1: The wider 2.8 aperture which can render OOF areas much better than a zoom.
2: Better low light performance..
The Tamron is f2.8 Still, that 24 does sound tempting...
Mannesty
Posted 20/05/2010 - 11:40 Link
MrCynical wrote:


The Tamron is f2.8 . . .
It may well be, but you know you really want the image quality of a prime lens

Besides, I haven't sold enough for the new microawave my wife wants yet .
Peter E Smith - flickr Photostream
mikew
Posted 20/05/2010 - 12:21 Link
Tesco do a very good Value microwave at £25 so would you take either my microwave (which is the Tesco Value) or £25 for the lens?
---------------------------------------------------

You can see some of my shots at my Flickr account.
Mannesty
Posted 20/05/2010 - 13:26 Link
mikew wrote:
Tesco do a very good Value microwave at £25 so would you take either my microwave (which is the Tesco Value) or £25 for the lens?
Peter E Smith - flickr Photostream
Dangermouse
Posted 20/05/2010 - 13:42 Link
Neither of those will be cheap though. If you can put up with stop-down metering (and it really doesn't bother me for general photography) then what about the M 28mm f3.5? It's incredibly sharp, compact, handles nicely and doesn't seem to have been recognised as a superior lens to the f2.8 versions as you can pick them up for £30-£50. I use mine for giant landscape panoramic shots as it has very little distortion, so the images are a good fit when stitched together.
Matt

Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.
MrCynical
Posted 20/05/2010 - 13:56 Link
Dangermouse wrote:
If you can put up with stop-down metering (and it really doesn't bother me for general photography) then what about the M 28mm f3.5?
Stop-down metering doesn't bother me either (I have a Helios and an M42 Vivitar), but I was looking for A or newer so that I can use flash in auto mode.
mecrox
Posted 20/05/2010 - 17:21 Link
Mannesty wrote:
Shameless plug:-

I have an SMCP-A 24mm 1:2.8 lens for sale at only £149 including postage.

There are three important differences between the two lenses you mention, and zooms covering the same range.

1: The wider 2.8 aperture which can render OOF areas much better than a zoom.
2: Better low light performance.
3: The IQ from primes, even old ones, is generally superior to that from a zoom due to the compromises made in the design of zooms.

Of the two ( 24/28 ), the 24mm is held in higher regard.
Why is the 24mm held in higher regard, out of interest? Anything specific?
Mannesty
Posted 20/05/2010 - 18:10 Link
Colour rendering, contrast, saturation, close focussing. Sharpness is excellent if stopped down a bit from wide open.
Peter E Smith - flickr Photostream
womble
Posted 20/05/2010 - 19:34 Link
Mannesty wrote:
Colour rendering, contrast, saturation, close focussing. Sharpness is excellent if stopped down a bit from wide open.
Not that the A28 is a slouch...
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
robbie_d
Posted 20/05/2010 - 20:00 Link
womble wrote:
Mannesty wrote:
Colour rendering, contrast, saturation, close focussing. Sharpness is excellent if stopped down a bit from wide open.
Not that the A28 is a slouch...
Plus you can pick it up for a very good price.
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.

Apparently.
womble
Posted 20/05/2010 - 20:07 Link
I'd be very tempted by Peter's 24 if I didn't already have the K version...
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
axl
Posted 23/05/2010 - 19:58 Link
I can only attest that Pentax 24/2.8 (K and A versions are optically identical) are very good lenses. Very well controlled distortion, great colours and great contrast straight from f2.8.
I used to own K series, Kris is the proud owner now
I used to have Sigma 24/2.8 AF and despite it being sharper than K24, I always preferred the rendering from Pentax.
AFAIK £149 for A version that has been offered to you is good deal!

BR
Peter
my PBase --- PPG
K-7 + O-ME53, K-x blue, AF280T, AF240Z, AF160SA
SMC: FA*24 - FA31ltd - DA*55 - FA100/2.8

Add Comment

To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.



Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo