Pentax F 28-80/35-80?

just mooching around to see what I can get hold of to play with really.

These 2 seem to be very reasonably priced. is that because theyre common? or because theyre no good?

namely the F 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 and the F SMC 35-80mm f4.5-5.6.

both £25-£40. seems a steal really.

how do they compare to the DA 18-55mm kit lens from my k100d super?

Those are the old 'Standard' lenses from the film days.

They're not in the DA* league, but if you just want to play then get and enjoy.

I have copies of both and use them only on my film cameras now. The 'short' end not being short enough for my taste on a DSLR.

ah ok, if the image quality isn't all that good, then i'll leave the cash til i can pick up something better quality.

just been reading some reviews, and it seems the F type isn't all that sharp. but the similarly priced FA versions are actually very sharp (according to review-ists). will do some more searching, maybe take a punt.

Pentax must have thought a lot of the 28-80mm f3.5-4.5 there
are about 6 versions of it inc. 'A' Series and Takumars.
The cheaper versions seem to have been made in the same
factory as the Takumars and have a red dot/wart near the
aperture ring.

The one to go for is the SMC (original) version which at the
time of release cost £200. Quite rare because of the original
cost, but they do crop up.

See also this thread.

The 24-90mm is also a very good lens.

-

haha, oddly enough i've just been reading that thread. some nice results there. i've seen an FA SMC 28-80 for cheap. that's just a slightly newer version,right?

My initial reaction is "Don't get these !"

Have a look at my thread "Lens weight and camera shake ?" where there was much discussion on the relative merits of the DAL 18-55 and other lenses in the 28-80 range.

I have a Sigma epsilon AF 28-70 f3.5-4.5 which I'm very pleased with.
However, the general advice was to go for the SMC F 35-70 and avoid the 35-80 and 28-80 in F or FA variants.

I now have an F 35-70 which I got for less than the sums you quoted and the Sigma only cost me £15 ! Keep looking !

Best of luck
Peter

thanks for the input peter. I will dig your thread out now.

From what I've read and heard, the 35-80 is the one to avoid. I've seen it described as the worst lens Pentax ever made. I have an SMC A 35-80mm and don't use it. I wouldn't describe it as bad, but it is no better than the 18-55mm kit lens over its common focal lengths.

The SMC F 35-70mm that I have spends a lot of time on the camera. I find it quite useful as a walk around lens. It was a little sharper than the kit lens at 50mm, f/5.6 before I used the AF micro adjust function on the K30. It previously front-focussed a little (the kit lens was spot on) - haven't had time to try it out "in the wild" yet.

Andrew

Not exactly "in the wild", but I did hurriedly blag off a few shots with the SMC F 35-70mm in the garden late this afternoon to check whether the AF micro-adjustment had been a success. Most of them are shots of gates, fence panels, clothes pegs in a row and so on - not of any particular interest.

I also took one leaning over the fence, of the view from the rear of the house.




Nothing of any artistic interest. This is a 100% crop from it.



Pretty sharp, but so what? The "so what" is that this is a photo taken by a 25 year old SMC F 35-70mm zoom at 50mm, that was WIDE OPEN at f/4.5. It is sharper than the kit lens, I think. As Algernon says in another thread - "Why carry a load of primes about when one zoom will do the job?"

Andrew