SMC K (A) 24mm 2.8

Hi Pentaxians, I could use some of your advice. I currently own very good vintage Pentax 20mm/4, nice landscape lens and even good for some street photography, but with some small issues. It isn't very fast and I find it bit too wide for streets, too. 24mm lens as an equivalent of film 35mm FF lens seems to me appealing for street photography, so I started to look at K24/2.8 or its A counterpart (I believe they're optically exactly the same lens). I wonder how do they perform, but I suspect that 24mm lens design requires less corrections and compromises than 20mm, thus 24mm might be slightly better performer.
Do you have experience with either of those lenses...i could use some users feedback on those. Thanks....

Do you know this site?

link

There's some discussion there.

If you had loads of cash, I would suggest the 21mm Ltd, as being superbly discreet though still a bit wide. Are you going for old primes because they are not too expensive, or because you like them?

G

This was taken with the K24/2.8.




It is a very capable lens.

K.

A beautiful shot Kris, that lens works well in your hands.

Regards
David

nice shot Kris,
George yes I know the site, however i was under impresion that most if not all users there commented on lenses used on film...anyway thanks

Kingfisher, you are right.

I used to subscribe to the PDML, and I don't recall much criticism of Pentax film lenses on digital. However, I do remember vaguely hearing one or two adverse comments about the 24mm.

Since the early days, however, I have heard very little adverse comment about any Pentax film-era lens on a digital camera.

Kris, was your shot taken on film?

G

Digital this time, my K20D.

K.

Well, it would seem that you aren't having any problems with it.

It's a long time ago now, but the claim was that some lenses caused light to fall on the edges of the sensor at a sharp angle, causing a partial vignetting effect.

I can't see any evidence of that in this picture.

After a while, Pentax owners stopped talking about the alleged digital effect. However, people who owned cameras with larger sensors tended to report the effect more, as you would expect.

G

I use older manual glass on my K20D about 95% of the time and see no problems with it. I've read the comments on lenses needing to be "optimised for digital" but have not had any problems myself. The main issue is that pre-F series lenses do not report the focal length to the body which means you have to set the SR yourself. No problem with primes, but a bit of a pain with zooms.

K.

Out of my approximately 30 lenses, only two are "digital", and I have never noticed a problem either. The best film era lenses are still the best lenses today.

G

Kris, George...I too greatly approve of my K lenses....currently I have only K85/1.8 and K20/4 with my FA43 (only af lens I kept), but I tried K30/2.8, K55/1.8, K35/3.5 and some more....
If K24/2.8 or A24/2.8 performs similar to those mentioned, it would be worthy of seeking one.

You have/have had some classic K series primes there. I think "only have" a K85 and K20 is being modest. You'll get a 24mm version for less than either of those lenses. The K30 goes for silly money, sadly. I have the K35/3.5 and K55/1.8 amongst one or two other K series lenses...

K.

I was thinking exactly the same. It's a well-chosen collection. The 30mm and the 35mm are very highly regarded.

G

Kris, George thanks, your advice really makes me thinking I should give it a go and seek some nice K(A)24.
K30 is insanely expensive, I'm not really sure why, but it is excellent lens as well as K35.....it wasn't really my best decision to sell K30

The K30 is a combination of a rarish lens which is of an odd and unusual focal length and excellent optical quality. The three factors combine to make it expensive. I keep hoping to find one on the front of a cheapo film body in the same way I found my K50/1.2.

K.