Undoubtedly I'm not explaining myself very well, sorry. I did have it set at "A." The aperture wheel on the lens was locked. I was used to this procedure because my Pentax 2.8 135mm locks up the same way, but the 135 has automatic focus and the 85 does not. I normally shoot in "Manual" and have my K3 set so the forward wheel operates the shutter speed and the aft wheel operates the aperture, but neither wheel would do that when I had the 85 locked at "A." The only way I could get the aperture to change was to use the green button and I never changed the shutter speed at all.

The information lights up in the OVF, but it only does so when the shutter button is half way down.

I had the camera set at ISO 400 and the white balance at automatic.

I tried a few times but wasn't able to set the shutter speed during the entire outing. I think I was able to change the aperture using the aft wheel, but now that I think more carefully about the outing, I'm not sure. I remembering not trusting myself to set the aperture on this strange lens, preferring that the camera by means of the green button do that my first time using this lens.

I felt as though I were blundering from one shot to the other, but I concentrated upon the focus. The light would come on solid and the camera would sound a little beep. Some shots were a little under-exposed and some a little over-exposed -- because I had no control over the shutter speed I assumed, but I shot in Raw and was able to fix the exposure with Lightroom later on.

If I am supposed to be able to adjust aperture and shutter speed with the K3s two wheels that would be a very good thing to know and would make the lens even more useful, but I tried that when I started the hike without success.

Lawrence

Unfortunately the K3 information-lighting goes off unless the shutter button is half-way down. This makes any sort of elaborate adjustment a very fiddly proposition.

Lawrence

Seemed to me this was a depth of field issue. In the shot of Ben staring off at something. I mention in the caption that I focused the lens on what he was staring at and he came out with a bit of blur. I was standing too close to get both of them in focus. That is one of the drawbacks of a longer focus lens it seems to me. I played with this on the levee where the nearby branches were in focus but the distant watermelon field was not -- or vice versa.

Lawrence

Actually, I don't think in 35 mm terms. But if I did, notice the post below describing the 85mm as being equivalent to the 135mm lens, a lens also missing from the Pentax lineup. No I was just trying to fill out my own prime line up. I have some 50mm lenses and the 70mm and then the 100mm. Seemed like I needed something in between and decided to give the Samyang a try. I have no problem with manual focus but the size of the lens cramps my style a bit. Hikers like to go light; which makes the LTD primes excellent. Also, if I take the Samyang 85mm and then want to change to another lens, I have to remember to take the camera out of manual focus. If I'm thinking of other things I'll probably forget -- not a bid deal but just one more thing that's different.

I satisfied my 135mm requirement with a very good used copy of the SMC Pentax FA 2.8 135mm. Someone suggested that I could do the same thing for the 85mm -- maybe, but the really good used Pentax 1.4 85mm's cost about $1200 and must be shipped from Japan. I've been burned on bad lenses in the past -- took a chance on the 135mm recently and was lucky & probably used up my luck.

Lawrence

https://lawrencehelm.smugmug.com/RiverPhotography/Dec-2015/

Why doesn't Pentax have an 85mm in their lens lineup? The thought occurred to me that perhaps Samyang under three names produced an 85mm so good, cheap and easy to use that Pentax didn't want to try to compete. I decided to pick one up (for $260 new) and give it a try. I just started the Dec 2015 gallery (above) and thus far have only the Samyang shots (using the K3) in it.

The lens was originally tested by Samyang using the Pentax K20D. I gave my copy of the K20D to my son a couple of years ago so didn't understand how the instructions applied to my K3. My LCD screen showed the images as being very dark, much darker than they were when I looked at them later in Lightroom; so perhaps some of the instructions pertained to increasing the light in the LCD screen, but I don't know.

I was more impressed with this lens than I thought I'd be. I paid more for a used (but near-new according to the seller) copy of a Pentax 135mm lens ($300).

I did start the day with a couple of too-dark shots because I forgot to push the green button to tell the K3 to pick the best aperture for the Samyang to use. I checked regularly from then on but the Samyang seemed to like an aperture of 8 -- until on the way back I forgot to check and got a couple of shots over-exposed. I was able to save them in Lightroom, but didn't think they were good enough to post in the Smugmug gallery.

The only downside to the lens is that it is much larger than the Pentax limited primes I've been using. It is even larger than the old Pentax 135. I use a Holster camera bag and if I decided to change lenses the 85mm would fill up the entire bottom of the bag. I took along a Pentax 40mm XS in case something went wrong with the Samyang, but nothing did.

I read a review a while back saying that Samyang, also producing lenses under the Rokinon and Bower names and that these lenses were of such quality that they would cost as much as $2000 if produced by a one of the better names in lens manufacturing. I have no way to judge that, but I was much, much more impressed by the results of this lens than I thought I'd be.

Lawrence

Not sure my experience will help -- went from K20d to K7 (both of which have been given to my son) -- went to K5 and then K5iis and finally the K3. I've complicated my life by trying to stick to primes for my hikes (where I take my photos -- see www.lawrencehelm.smugmug.com, especially the Nov 2015 gallery). In the Nov 2015 gallery I switched back to the K5 on one day and the K5iis on another -- can't remember the prime lenses I used but my impression was that the K3 handle the lenses, produced more keepers than the K5 and while I wouldn't say that about the K5iis I did note that the exposure worked a bit differently. So what I ended up doing was sticking with the K3 -- rather than go back and forth and have to rethink the settings. I shoot only in manual so it wasn't a huge thought-adjustment -- also the viewfinder on my K5ii has a bit of fog in it; which wouldn't apply to anyone else-- just a nuisance I have.

I considered the K3ii but it has no advantage I can see for a hiker who doesn't use a tripod. If I get the next iteration of the APS-C (if there is one) or the FF, I'll bequeath the K5 to my son. -- Can't really say the K3 is a huge improvement over the K5iis but sort of feel (without good evidence) that it will produce more keepers with more of my lenses a bit better.

Lawrence

I know something of what you're feeling. I lost my wife in July after a long illness. We'd been married 37 years, but knew each other for 40 years. I've been a writer and so have that outlet, or means to seek a resolution -- which has been slow in coming. But in getting my "stuff" squared away I decided to get all the lenses I could imagine needing. I don't need a new body. I've the K5, K5ii and K3, but I was "missing" a lot of lenses. I had in the past used mostly zooms, especially the 18-135, and started my buying spree with the 16-85; which I like a lot, but I have so often read about these zooms being "almost as good as" some prime at a given focal point that I decided I needed to flesh out my prime collection. I had the 35mm 1.4, 50mm 1.8, and 40mm xs but never used them much. My first "quality" prime was the 70mm ltd, but I'm a hiker and discovered it wouldn't do to expect one prime to cover an entire hike. I could use the "plastic" 35 & 50mm lens and probably should because they have good reps, but I wanted to try some better quality primes. I read a lot of reviews and forum comments and this past month acquired (all Pentax) the HD DA 15mm ltd, HD DA 21mm ltd, HD DA 35mm macro ltd, SMC X-FA 43mm ltd, SMC FA 1.4 50mm, and SMC DFA 100mm WR Macro. I looked for something a bit longer and lighter than the 100mm and found an excellent used copy of the now discontinued SMC Pentax FA 2.8 135mm. No other lens is tempting me at the moment. You can see the photos I've taken thus far in the Nov 2015 gallery within the River Photography folder in www.lawrencehelm.smugmug.com [if this system lets me post my web site]

The downside of a bag full of primes is that one is bound to fumble one of them into the dust sooner or later. I used to ride a motorcycle to work but had a car and if I woke feeling accident prone I'd take the car. I've resolved to take my 16-85 or 18-135 on hikes when I start the day feeling a bit accident prone -- haven't dropped anything but a hood thus far.

Lawrence

Just acquired a 15mm LTD and used it for the first time yesterday. Seems like I used to be able to upload photos from my website to a forum, but Smugmug doesn't seem to provide that capability any longer -- at least I couldn't find it.

The photos are in the last 35 or so in the Nov 2015 (as of 11-13-15 - will probably go hiking again tomorrow and add some more photos to this gallery) gallery which is in the "River Photography" Folder. My site is www.lawrencehelm.smugmug.com I didn't take the trouble to label them (should have) and so used the little "i" (information) and scrolled ahead until I found 15mm -- I think the date also helps -- only used three lenses (15, 35 & 100) on 11-12-15.

I was surprised by the IQ of this lens -- as seen on my 27 inch monitor. I do a lot of hiking as you will see if you look at my web site. I think most of the early shots in November 2015 were with the 16-85 zoom. I also remember using the 21mm prime, maybe the 50mm & 70mm as well. I can't say that I've done any serious comparisons -- just that I was surprised at how good the 15mm seems. I guess I always have doubts about a lens before I actually try it -- I didn't think I'd be surprised but I was.

Lawrence

An 100MB JPEG? I can't think of anything that would inspire me to use the pixel shift on either Pentax or Olympus cameras -- should I ever end up with a camera that had that capability. Thanks for the information.

Lawrence

Ah, there I go again, not being clear. I assumed something rather than writing it out. My sentence should have read, "I found the comment that Olympus was striving for higher resolution with their pixel shift, as opposed to striving after better color as Sigma and Pentax are, interesting . . ."

Lawrence