SMC Pentax-M 100 2.8 - impressive

I recently bought one of these and took it out at the weekend for the first time.

It's surprisingly sharp wide open, with vibrant colours and smooth bokeh, similar to the M85/2 but less prone to purple fringing. I'll work on some postable pictures (mostly portraits of my kids so far).

Definitely one to look out for if you're in the market for a short telephoto prime, as it's significantly less expensive than the 85mm options.

It is one of the better M Series lenses. Very compact as well.
Also underpriced

This is one of my favourite lenses. It has a superb balance of proprties and is, IMHO, much better than the 85mm f2.

It's a very good lens, although I have the A-version now. Had the M-version too but sold it since the A-version is more convenient. But considering the price difference between the A and M-version I think the M-version is the best option. Optically these lenses are the same and the M-version is less rare and easier to come by.

£100-£150 last time I looked. I'd love one for my collection of M series bodies and lenses as it sounds like a handy pocket telephoto, but I'm not prepared to pay that much for it!

It is a lovely lens, Matt. One of the very best non-starred Ms.

When you think what a 77mm will set you back, £150 is a mere bagatelle.

G
(Happy owner of an SMC Pentax-M 1:2.8 100mm)

I was lucky and didn't pay that much for it; while it is not cheap for an M series lens, it is good value compared to the other Pentax short tele options.

The K series 105/2.8 is allegedly better and I've added it to my LBA wishlist, but am not sure I've ever seen one for sale...

Well, I can comment on the K 120mm f2.8 which is a very sweet performer. Seems seriously rare as I haven't seen another advertised anywhere in the two years or so since I bought mine.

I have the M 100 2.8, but it´s been superceded by the 85/2 since I got that. I should give the 100mm more of a chance.

Someones done a quick and dirty Shootout between: M100/2.8, M120/2.8, M135/3.5 on the other forum. He found the M100 to be the sharpest, which is what I would have expected link

I'll have to try some comparisons between the K 120/2.8 and M 135/3.5, see where it fits into that table. I think more in terms of where I'll be using the lens when choosing which to take on the day - if there's a risk of it getting soaked or bashed I take the 135mm, if it's a dry sunny day and I won't be venturing near anywhere hazardous to lenses I take the 120mm as it would be almost impossible to replace for the same money. Both my examples are pretty minty with little or no dust and no evidence of abuse by previous owners.

Interesting; the M120 fares pretty well too. It will be worth cheking back in to see if they have a chance to do the Bokeh shootout.

If you do test them Matt, it would be better to keep the image size the same for each lens. I usually just put two blobs of Blu-Tak at the edge of the frame that I can see through the viewfinder and then with the 2nd lens move back and forth until the Blu_Tak is in the same place in the frame.

I recently tried the 135mm f/3.5 M against a 135mm Jupiter f/3.5 (37A) and the Jupiter was much sharper as well as having much better Bokeh. Not bad for £25. It focuses OK preset to f/8 as well.

The 120mm f2.8 is a portrait lens and is designed with residual aberrations at full aperture. This should give nice portrait effects. It's as sharp as the other two when stopped down.

The M100/f2.8 is a dream of a lens and one of my favourites. There are quite a few images on my Flickr account taken with it including this one:




I got it at John's recommendation and have never regretted it. The K135/2.5 is lovely too but much bigger and heavier and as a result I often take the 100mm in preference.

K.