Pentax lenses are weird but wonderful

This topic discusses the strange and wonderful world of Pentax lenses, especially those of the past. We know that Pentax designers actively looked for 'character' in the images and less at the MTF curves, and I've got a few examples (no pics just yet)!

The idea for the topic came because I recently had someone return an FA 20-35 because it apparently had awful softness and terrible CA. My experience of the lens shows that it's pretty sharp in the center with awful edges, improving after stopping down. There is significant CA towards the edges too. But somehow the images produced by the lens have a brilliant appeal to them. They're not for pixel peepers at all, with superb colours and microcontrast.

Does anyone have stories or experiences to share about these weird things called Pentax lenses?

If you've used lenses like the DA15, FA20-35, F24-50 and FA43 then please share your thoughts!

The lenses have a certain indefinable quality about them, but don't necessarily have the highest resolution of all available lenses. The FA-J 75-300mm is a good example - not the sharpest of lenses, but sharp enough and having the most glorious bokeh. I picked up a new one from SRS when they were clearing the last few and use it extensively on the K-1 for flower studies and wildlife. At £100 it was a fantastic bargain.

You're the second person to praise that lens in the last couple of weeks - it must be one of those hidden gems

I’ve been deliberating between a cheaper x-300mm ish lens for a bit of reach on the K1. Toss up is between this, the Sigma 70-300 APO and the FA 80-320mm... decisions!

Or I save up and buy a PLM like the one I recently sold, ha.

One of the most under-rated Pentax offering is (IMO) the F 80-200 f4.7-5.6 - one of the cheapest lenses you'll find - slow, limited zoom range, plasticky, light - not pin sharp all the time - but stopped down it can deliver.

https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/don-t-underestimate-your--lesser--lenses-...

If you want to travel light you could do a lot worse

DA* 300 mm - 97/100
DA* 200mm - 99/100
D FA HD 150mm - 450 mm - 97/100
DA 18-135mm Al IF Ed DC - 93/100
DA 55-300 HD DA PLM WR - 98/100

ALL IRREPLACEABLE

Personally, I think that designing a lens for extremely high levels of sharpness tends to eliminate character, good rendering and that 3D/pixie-dust look. Striking a balance between those two things is an art that I think has declined and at which I suspect Pentax has been better at than most, though even they have caved to the market and seem to value sharpness over all other aspects of lens design (rendering, size, weight, cost etc etc).

Of the lenses I've used, the two that immediately come to mind as being extremely sharp while retaining fantastic rendering are the DA 35mm Limited and the Fujifilm 35mm f/1.4. Some others to a lesser degree - the Sigma and Tamron 17-50/2.8s, the DA 70mm Limited, the Auto Revuenon 50/1.4, the old Minolta 50/1.7 (though there are several versions and I don't know if all have the same formula as mine). I'm sure there are others.

I’d add the Flektogon 35/2.4 into the sharpness/rendering mix too.

I have accumulated a number of Pentax primes with focal lengths between 50 and 55mm. All have their virtues, and vices, but that with the most distinctive and pleasing character, particularly, to my eyes and at apertures of f/4 and below, is the K-series 55mm f/1.8

For bokeh I love the FA80-320 which also produces glowing, rich colours. For "cheapo" old glass they are generally on the expensive side like the FAJ 75-300.

DA 16-45mm. I like the images it produces. But any lens that is a lot, lot longer at 16mm than it is at 45mm has to be regarded as weird. In the words of a well known comedian from the 1960s/70s "Ooh, you are awful ... but I like you!"

Steve

I have to jump on the K55 bandwagon too. It's essentially the same lens as the Takumar 55/2 that I had. There was a point where I thought it was actually better than the DA50!

From the old Taks you could also add the 135/3.5 as an example of a weird but wonderful lens. It's built beautifully and has top quality rendering to boot.

That makes three of us. I’ve been tempted to grab a Tak 135/3.5. I’ve heard on numerous occasions that it’s a step up from the M135/3.5 I currently own.

I would add the 35-70 SMC F to the list - super lens and can act as a replacement for a couple of primes at a pinch.

The Tak 55/1.8 is a great lens, maybe not so weird.