SMC A-Zoom 28-135 F/4


mark_ken

Link Posted 17/03/2008 - 07:59
G'day, first post newbie here and all that, so hello firstly

Through good luck and nefarious means, I'm now the keeper of an Pentax-A 28-135 f/4 lens. It has a bit of dust internally, and I'm thinking of taking in to the Sydney Pentax service people for a clean up, but to date I've been able to find virtually no information/feedback on the lens.

It seems to me to be a good zoom range to use for a walkabout lens, and the constant f/4 is also a good thing..

Anyone out there who might have used / seen / heard anything about this one?

johnriley

Link Posted 17/03/2008 - 08:07
It's a heavy beast though, isn't it?

A good zoom lens for its day, but I would expect modern zooms to be better.
Best regards, John

Clarky

Link Posted 17/03/2008 - 09:12
mark_ken wrote:
G'day, first post newbie here and all that, so hello firstly

Through good luck and nefarious means, I'm now the keeper of an Pentax-A 28-135 f/4 lens. It has a bit of dust internally, and I'm thinking of taking in to the Sydney Pentax service people for a clean up, but to date I've been able to find virtually no information/feedback on the lens.

It seems to me to be a good zoom range to use for a walkabout lens, and the constant f/4 is also a good thing..

Anyone out there who might have used / seen / heard anything about this one?

Welcome to the Forum Mark_ken. from a fellow Sydneyite.
Heres a bit of info on that lens of yours.

http://stans-photography.info/

I gather from what you are saying about the lens that you are sending it to Kennedy's for a service. I hope you have a thick wallet. He charges ridiculous prices
Camera:|K-7|
Pentax Lenses:|DA12-24/f4 ED AL|DA35Ltd Macro|FA31Ltd|FA77Ltd|FA50/1.4|F70-210|FA20-35 f4/AL|A*200/f4 Macro ED|A50/1.7|A50 Macro f2.8|1.7xAF adapter|
Voigtlander|125/f2.5SL Macro APO Lanthar|
Sigma Lenses:|EX DG 100-300 f4|2X & 1.4X TC|
Flashes:|AF540FGZx2|RingFlash AF160FC|

mark_ken

Link Posted 17/03/2008 - 21:37
Haha, yes. My most used lens is my Sig 24-70, which is no lightweight itself, but the 28-135 weighs in at about double that!

johnriley wrote:
It's a heavy beast though, isn't it?

A good zoom lens for its day, but I would expect modern zooms to be better.

mark_ken

Link Posted 17/03/2008 - 21:50
Thanks! Yes, I have some domestic duties in Glebe later this week, and I was going to trot across to Pyrmont to Kennedy's. I haven't dealt with them before, but I think the lens service should be straightforward, so I hope it's not going to hurt too much..

There is a w/site in the US sell two of these critters, one at 325 and one at 475 (USD)- both are in better condition that the one I picked up, but I can see the value in it as a use lens, but I think that it might gather some historical value over time as well.

http://kevincameras.com/gallery/pentax_k_mount?page=4

MK


Clarky wrote:
mark_ken wrote:
G'day, first post newbie here and all that, so hello firstly

Through good luck and nefarious means, I'm now the keeper of an Pentax-A 28-135 f/4 lens. It has a bit of dust internally, and I'm thinking of taking in to the Sydney Pentax service people for a clean up, but to date I've been able to find virtually no information/feedback on the lens.

It seems to me to be a good zoom range to use for a walkabout lens, and the constant f/4 is also a good thing..

Anyone out there who might have used / seen / heard anything about this one?

Welcome to the Forum Mark_ken. from a fellow Sydneyite.
Heres a bit of info on that lens of yours.

http://stans-photography.info/

I gather from what you are saying about the lens that you are sending it to Kennedy's for a service. I hope you have a thick wallet. He charges ridiculous prices

Mannesty

Link Posted 17/03/2008 - 23:38
Here's a page from our 'bible'. http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/zooms/short/A28-135f4.html
Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream

Donut

Link Posted 18/03/2008 - 15:22
Out of interest - what would people think is the "modern" equivalent to this lens? As stated before on the forums, I'm looking for a reasonably priced (<250) walk about lense and this range (although this one is not quite wide enough) would be ideal as I have an 18-55 kit, and 70-300 telezoom.
Ideal lens would be a 24-135 or 18-125 type of thing
Donut

amilner

Link Posted 18/03/2008 - 15:41
Tamron and Sigma do 24-135 lenses - the Tamron is pretty good though quite bulky (I had one for a while and got some good images from it - but I favoured the Pentax 28-105 once I go it as it was smaller, slightly faster [3.2-4.5] and even better quality). Sigma also do an 18-125 but it has had mixed reviews. Tamron also do an 18-250 which is the best of the crop of superzoom, and also comes with Pentax badging for an extra 50 or so.
Tony Milner
Super A, ME Super, MZ6, K5II, Ricoh GR & lenses from 8-500mm
www.amilner.org www.flickr.com/photos/tonymilner

MattMatic

Link Posted 18/03/2008 - 15:44
Donut - I use the Pentax SMC-FA 24-90 which is just lovely beyond belief
A truly great lens and superb at 90mm for portraits with a lovely soft bokeh.

You might just get hold of one at around 250 second hand.

There may be other lenses around in that range, but I don't think by Pentax. Tamron do a 24-135 which is around 320 new, while Sigma do an 18-200 at around 220. I did have a Tokina 24-200 which was excellent on film, but didn't do too fantastically on digital (Think it wasn't well collimated). That was around 300 new but it went on ebay for around 60

Having tried quite a few lenses, I still wouldn't get rid of the Pentax 24-90
Matt
http://www.mattmatic.co.uk
(For gallery, tips and links)

Donut

Link Posted 18/03/2008 - 16:37
Thanks for that guys.
How much should I be able to pick up a Pentax 24-90 for?
Also how good it the Sigma 18-200. Someone has a secondhand one on the forum

MattMatic

Link Posted 18/03/2008 - 17:17
As I said...
Quote:
You might just get hold of one at around 250 second hand.

New price was around 350 when I got mine.
There's one on ebay in the US at the moment without hood... but check out MXV, Ffordes, LCEgroup, Park Cameras, and even BH Photo Video in the US.

They don't come up often - and for good reason

Matt
http://www.mattmatic.co.uk
(For gallery, tips and links)

Reuben0

Link Posted 18/03/2008 - 23:05
I would agree with Matt's recommendation of the 24-90. Optically superb, but compact and lightweight.

The only negative is the cheap plastic build quality - I think if you dropped it it would be toast

R

JohnMcD

Link Posted 19/03/2008 - 09:49
The 24-90 that is, it was toast, the filter was smashed to bits and all the insides came loose. Fortunately it was insured and I got a new one. One thing I did learn from that was, never attempt to change lenses when walking through a small French village at 2am when you've had FAR too much to drink at a friends party. Put the FA50 on before you leave the house you know you'll need it's low light performance at some point under the street light.

Flink

Link Posted 19/03/2008 - 14:51
Hi!

I cannot stress enough just how powerful the 24-90 is. I've had quite a few lenses on my Pentax for comparison, and I'm also the incredibly happy owner of a 31mm and 77mm Limiteds.

For me, the 24-90 is simply amazing; it's really a zoom with a soul. The bokeh and rendition is just beautiful. I goes for crazy prices on eBay, but I don't think anyone could have one for a few days and say "people over-hype the 24-90". Carl Zeiss glass, on the other hand, is also going for crazy prices but it IS over-hyped to death, methinks.

Have fun,
--
Flink

iceblinker

Link Posted 19/03/2008 - 16:23
Is the 24-90 sharper than the Pentax 16-45?
~Pete
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.