Pentax F 35-135 Zoom Comments Please

Hi Folks!

A question about an older F Series zoom lens.

It's 35mm - 135mm (f 3.5 - 4.5).

I know the zoom range is quite a stretch, but has anyone had some experience with it that'd they'd care to share?

I'd really appreciate it!

Thanks

I have one. I'll download a pic shortly.

G

Here it is. Just a quick snap. No processing except for a little sharpening.




I hardly ever use this lens because it's not a particularly useful range on digital.

If you would like me to take a few more pics at different settings, let me know.

G

Interestingly, Stan's photography pages has no comments about this lens. I like mine but like George, I don't use it much any more, but I don't agree that it's not a useful length range for digital. I just have others that are better. It equates to roughly 50-200mm, a size that seems to sell well.

EDIT: That was dumb. The 50-200 = 75-300 on digital

I love the fact that George's quick test pictures are works of art compared to my best efforts!

Sure, my guru, if you would push the lens' short and long limits as well as maximum and minimum aperture, I'd be most grateful.

I'd be using the lens on 35mm film where I think it would be an ideal all-round range. I have an FA 28 - 80 presently and like it quite a lot.

Hi Mannesty!

Thanks for your input as always.

Getting some UK weather here for the last day or so - at least the rain melts the snow banks.

Cheers,

/me compares the resulting photo to his own demo shots of the phone on a table. Hangs head in shame.

I did have some rather lovely evening light streaming through the window.

Photography is 10% inspiration, and 90% illumination.

G

I gotta get me some of that "Lovely light". Or a house mounted on a turntable.

isn't it precious that someone would post such a nice test shot in response to to a humdrum request for info on an old lens ? ... a big thank you to you George!

i am googling to find info on this lens and really can't find anything useful until now.

i am seariouly looking for a cheapo lens in this range as my primary walk around lens for street photography (people candid shots, street scenes, architecture crops etc) and it seems that these 2 lens worth a closer look :
a) fa 28-105 / f3.2-4.5 AL IF (42 - 158mm on digital)
b) f 35-135 / f3.5-4.5 (53 - 202mm on digital)

I have seen a couple of decent shots with the fa 28-105 but not any from f 35-135 until now.

the shot here was taken at 60mm, f8, supposedly the sweetest spot of the lens ... and the result seems good enough for my purpose (albiet with some sharpening applied).

I would love to know how this lens behave at either end of the zoom with wider apertures.

Apart from sharpness, how would you comment on the color retention and contrasts compared to your better lens in this zoom range?

Is the boken pleasing ?

Purple fringing? Flare resistant?

AF responsive with this old model on your k10d?

build quality?

Sorry if all these questions are overbearing ... but it is likely that this thread would be the only usable info available on this lens.

PS ... if anyone has any experience with the fa 28-105 (a newer model by far with AL and IF), would love to know your comments on its performance as well !

Hi Peter ... I see that you have the fa 80-320 in your arsenal.

how would you compare it with the f 35-135 in terms of color and contrast?

is the sharpness comparable , say, in 80-100 range?

thanks!

BTW ... what's the filter size and weight of this lens ? thanks again

The FA 80-320 is a larger and heavier lens than the F 35-135 lens (550g v 485g) and is not an inconspicuous lens for street pics. I have a silver one but I think they are also available in black.

Sharpness in the 80 - 100mm range is about the same I guess. The 80-320 gets a bit soft wide open at the long end. I use the 80-320mm more than the 35-135.
I'll be having a clear out soon (moving house) and some of my unused lenses will be sold. I made an inventory recently and discovered I had 8 zoom lenses covering the 135mm focal length.

Thanks Peter for you precise and helpful response

i would jump on a black version of this lens but they are rare.

i have seen very good results of this lens at 200mm on the web and i have heard repeatedly that it softens beyond this range ... good enough for me though.

2nd hand value is more expensive than the new sigma/tamron in the 70-300 range (a bit crazy) but i am won over by the color rendered by this lens (maybe i should start a new thread asking for comparison).

i definitely would get this lens in addition to the 28-105/35-135 range to see me into the telephoto range.

the only thing is, i never see this lens coming with a hood ... strange.

can a good/effective hood be found relatively easy?

thanks

The later 28-105 together with the 80-320 makes a good combination. I have the older FA 28-105 with power zoom, a function I've never used.

AFAIK the 80-320 wasn't supplied with a hood, it doesn't have the internal focussing mechanism and needs a round screw on hood.

I bought one similar to this.

Black 80-320mm lenses aren't very common on the second hand market. It doesn't actually bother me, black or silver, it's the glass and the opportunity that counts.

As for lens comparisons, have a look here.

For general lens info. look here.

Happy hunting.

Thanks again, Peter.

You are most helpful

Here's a few pics of the hedge.

http://www.callikon.co.uk/Bits/35135/35-135.html

The thumbs link to full-size JPEGs converted in Silkypix from PEFs with no adjustments save SP's mild default sharpening.

The idea is that you can download them and play.

The f16 shots were taken with SR at very slow shutter speeds. I didn't want to go to f22 given the not very bright light. With higher speeds, the pictures might have been a bit sharper.

Being a bit stupid, I had it in mind that this lens had a max aperture of f4.5, so that's why there are no f3.5 pics. Sorry.

G