Prinz 135mm F/2.8 [Any good?]


ikillrocknroll

Link Posted 25/06/2008 - 11:52
USED PRINZ 135MM
F2.8 TELEPHOTO LENS




Any good for 19 and a dabble in telephoto? (Longest lens I have is -55mm ) Will it fit okay and not break my camera?
http://www.behance.net/robbranigan
K20D, DA18-55II, FA50 1.4, DA10-17
To buy: Metz 58 AF-1, DA*50-135, DA12-24, DA100M

johnriley

Link Posted 25/06/2008 - 14:12
I've actually used one of these on film, a very, very long time ago. As I recall it was OK without being startling, but a bit on the bluish side as far as colour balance goes. The aperture ring and focusing ring work the opposiye way round to Pentax which was a bit of a nuiscance.
Best regards, John

hefty1

Link Posted 25/06/2008 - 14:25
There's a gallery of photos taken with the f3.5 version on a K10D here: http://www.pbase.com/niblue/prinz_galaxy_135_f35

Whilst it doesn't look a match for the DA*50-135 it doesn't look too bad either - certainly worth twenty quid for the odd times when you want a tele lens.

As for breaking your camera, check it doesn't have the "Ricoh Pin" (and remove if it does) and don't force anything - should be OK I'd have thought.
Joining the Q

johnriley

Link Posted 25/06/2008 - 14:30
The f3.5 lens is a totally different lens from a different manufacturer and is probably a better lens than the f2.8 one.
Best regards, John

hefty1

Link Posted 25/06/2008 - 14:42
Oh well, blows my theory out of the window then!

If you're after a cheap tele lens then why not have a look for a Pentax M200/4? There are plenty about, they're very compact and the IQ is reasonable (if not exactly stellar). I paid less than thirty quid for mine a couple of months ago and that was for a near-mint example with original caps and leather hard case.

Plenty of example photos here:

www.pbase.com/cameras/pentax/smc_m_200_40

It's not the sharpest lens I own, nor does it have the most pleasing bokeh, etc but I find it preferable (at 200mm) to my Tamron 70-300. Worth having for ocassional use.
Joining the Q

ikillrocknroll

Link Posted 25/06/2008 - 15:50
Im thinking 135 because I will at some point be purchasing a 50-135, so I want to consider the range.

I've been thinking of buying this for months, I'll probably just leave it.
http://www.behance.net/robbranigan
K20D, DA18-55II, FA50 1.4, DA10-17
To buy: Metz 58 AF-1, DA*50-135, DA12-24, DA100M

johnriley

Link Posted 25/06/2008 - 15:53
If you can find a Pentax 135mm it will be much better. Unfortunately they have been selling for Silly Money on eBay recently.
Best regards, John

niblue

Link Posted 30/06/2008 - 12:35
The 135mm F3.5 pictures mentioned earlier were some of mine. The lens I have isn't all that great - I've had a few no-name 135mm F2.8's in my time though and they've all tended to be at least reasonably ok for sharpness but sometimes without the best of colour renditions (perhaps less of a problem with digital than with film).

A Pentax 135mm will definitely be a safer, if more expensive, option however make sure you go for one that has SMC coating.

cabstar

Link Posted 07/07/2008 - 00:01
I have this lens, for the price I think it is great, I shot my nieces birthday with it, kept a distance so I could get lots of candids.




Have used it for gig photgraphy but did get some purple fringing, this could be down to the low light though, this was shot at ISO3200 on my pentax K100d, a very dark gig.






It has a long focus screw so is very forgiving which helps me with my poor eye sight.
PPG Wedding photography Flickr
Concert photography

Currently on a Pentax hiatus until an FF Pentax is released
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.