SMC-F 35-70mm

Marktax · 04-25-2015, 12:13 PM

Had one in the old days, and couldn't resist getting one bundled with an old SF10 body for $40 complete. Turns out to be cleaner that I expected. I'm struck by how similar the zoom range is to the 20-40mm Ltd, in terms of film days. Full frame eq. of 30-60mm is not far off from 35-70mm, just pushed a little to the wider end. People complained about the short zoom range of the 20-40, but I never heard that way back when about the 35-70.

**jatrax** · 04-25-2015, 12:46 PM

Very nice lens, and quite useful on digital IMHO. Despite my having a good number of modern lenses the F 35-70 is always in my bag. Solid, sharp, reliable.

Dlanor Sekao · 04-25-2015, 12:52 PM

A lot of the reason why you never heard of it back then...... it was the middle lens of a 3 lens system a lot of photographers used ! The Holy Grail of the three lens kit consisted of a 17-28 or a 24-50 , the 35-70 , and a 70-210.

shhh · 04-25-2015, 01:03 PM

I really like my bargain f35-70. Bang for buck its a stellar little lens. Nice range for general use and fairly sharp for the cost these are going for.

Adam · 04-25-2015, 01:08 PM

Originally posted by Marktax

I never heard that way back when about the 35-70

Was it as cheap as it is now? Because if so, I'd never complain!

normhead · 04-25-2015, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by Dlanor Sekao

A lot of the reason why you never heard of it back then...... it was the middle lens of a 3 lens system a lot of photographers used ! The Holy Grail of the three lens kit consisted of a 17-28 or a 24-50 , the 35-70 , and a 70-210.

I have the 70-210, I wonder if I should be trying to collect the whole set. We paid $40 for the 70-210 so I'd only have to eat mac and cheese for couple of weeks. I'm kind of amazed you know that. When I bought the 70-210, my first thought was, "what goes with this?". I used my old Program Plus right up until 2004. None of that modern AF nonsense for me.

Dlanor Sekao · 04-25-2015, 02:02 PM

Originally posted by normhead

I have the 70-210, I wonder if I should be trying to collect the whole set. We paid $40 for the 70-210 so I'd only have to eat mac and cheese for couple of weeks. I'm kind of amazed you know that. When I bought the 70-210, my first thought was, "what goes with this?". I used my old Program Plus right up until 2004. None of that modern AF nonsense for me.

I have all 4 and they are all quite good. The 70-210 and 35-70 usually goes for about $45-$65 and the two widest from about $175-$250. My favorite is the F 24-50 followed by the 35-70.....BOTH are very good......Read the reviews and just get one !
In all honesty if I was stuck with these three lenses and nothing else.... I could live the rest of my photography life with no regrets at all.
If put it in a priority purchase it would look like this...24-50 , 70-210 , 35-70.......the last acquired would be the 17-28 and I might pass that up if shooting FF or film.

Last edited by Dlanor Sekao; 04-25-2015 at 02:08 PM.

originalwinger · 04-25-2015, 02:19 PM

I'm in agreement with Jatrax, is it a prime, no, is it the sharpest, no, is it well rounded , definitely, just one of those I not sure what I need so get out the 35-70. I just picked up a F 70-210 and if it's as versatile as the 35-70 I will be happy.

Marktax · 04-25-2015, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

Very nice lens, and quite useful on digital IMHO. Despite my having a good number of modern lenses the F 35-70 is always in my bag. Solid, sharp, reliable.

Maybe I'll post a shot soon and you can tell me what you think compared to your sample. I've not shot with this lens for a long time, so I'm no longer sure what to expect.

bassek · 04-25-2015, 11:55 PM

A really fine lens, however I prefer the F35-105 over the F35-70 for some reason.
Maybe just a better copy?

Almost all the F-series lenses are good.

Seb

npc · 04-26-2015, 02:06 AM

Originally posted by bassek

A really fine lens, however I prefer the F35-105 over the F35-70 for some reason.
Maybe just a better copy?

Almost all the F-series lenses are good.

Seb

My copy of 35-105 is also better than my 35-70

I think most people complained more for the price/speed/resolution/size vs zoom range ratio for the 20-40 rather than the zoom range alone

bassek · 04-26-2015, 02:23 AM

Maybe a comparison between the DA20-40 and the F24-50 would be possible? And include the FA20-35...

Seb

zzeitg · 04-26-2015, 02:37 AM

Originally posted by Dlanor Sekao

If put it in a priority purchase it would look like this...24-50 , 70-210 , 35-70.......the last acquired would be the 17-28 and I might pass that up if shooting FF or film.

While it's not difficult to find a 17-28 or 35-70, it's getting hard to discover 24-50, 70-210 or 35-105 and 35-135. I don't know if preparation for FF is the reason, but the limited amount of these lenses spoiled the prices already. I personally gave it up and bought 24-50 in A version, 35-105 as Porst and 70-200 (non smc version).

**jatrax** · 04-26-2015, 07:59 AM

Originally posted by bassek

A really fine lens, however I prefer the F35-105 over the F35-70 for some reason.

Originally posted by npc

My copy of 35-105 is also better than my 35-70

I would agree except that the minimum focus distance on the F 35-105 is about 58 inches and on the F 35-70 about 24 inches. Which makes all the difference in the world for what I mostly shoot. For just walk around the F 35-105 is very nice and the extra range appreciated.

I always wondered if they were experimenting with zooms with this series: 35-70 = 2x, 35-105 = 3x, 35-135 =4x.

bassek · 04-26-2015, 08:29 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

the minimum focus distance on the F 35-105 is about 58 inches

That is the downside of this lens, troublesome indoors sometimes.

Seb

04-25-2015, 12:13 PM	#1
Marktax Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Washington DC Photos: Albums Posts: 610	SMC-F 35-70mm Had one in the old days, and couldn't resist getting one bundled with an old SF10 body for $40 complete. Turns out to be cleaner that I expected. I'm struck by how similar the zoom range is to the 20-40mm Ltd, in terms of film days. Full frame eq. of 30-60mm is not far off from 35-70mm, just pushed a little to the wider end. People complained about the short zoom range of the 20-40, but I never heard that way back when about the 35-70.

04-25-2015, 01:08 PM	#5
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,608	Originally posted by Marktax I never heard that way back when about the 35-70 Was it as cheap as it is now? Because if so, I'd never complain! Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

04-26-2015, 02:06 AM	#11
npc Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 313	Originally posted by bassek A really fine lens, however I prefer the F35-105 over the F35-70 for some reason. Maybe just a better copy? Almost all the F-series lenses are good. Seb My copy of 35-105 is also better than my 35-70 I think most people complained more for the price/speed/resolution/size vs zoom range ratio for the 20-40 rather than the zoom range alone Last edited by npc; 04-26-2015 at 02:13 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
submission, Pentax K200D, SMC Pentax-F 35-70mm f/3.5-4.5mm	micromacro	Post Your Photos!	4	07-26-2018 02:20 PM
SMC Pentax F 35-70mm F 3.5- 4.5 Focus Ring Problems (It' s jammed)	K5_Ltd_User	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	06-30-2013 08:55 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax SMC-F 50mm F1.7 AND SMC-F 35-70mm F3.5-4.5	harryc	Sold Items	12	11-21-2011 08:42 PM
Wanted - Acquired: Wanted SMC Pentax F 35-70mm Macro / F 35-105mm Macro	Pentax Bob	Sold Items	6	04-19-2010 06:56 AM

04-25-2015, 12:46 PM	#2
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Very nice lens, and quite useful on digital IMHO. Despite my having a good number of modern lenses the F 35-70 is always in my bag. Solid, sharp, reliable.

04-25-2015, 12:52 PM	#3
Dlanor Sekao Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 1,457	A lot of the reason why you never heard of it back then...... it was the middle lens of a 3 lens system a lot of photographers used ! The Holy Grail of the three lens kit consisted of a 17-28 or a 24-50 , the 35-70 , and a 70-210.

04-25-2015, 01:03 PM	#4
shhh Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 66	I really like my bargain f35-70. Bang for buck its a stellar little lens. Nice range for general use and fairly sharp for the cost these are going for.

04-25-2015, 01:17 PM	#6
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by Dlanor Sekao A lot of the reason why you never heard of it back then...... it was the middle lens of a 3 lens system a lot of photographers used ! The Holy Grail of the three lens kit consisted of a 17-28 or a 24-50 , the 35-70 , and a 70-210. I have the 70-210, I wonder if I should be trying to collect the whole set. We paid $40 for the 70-210 so I'd only have to eat mac and cheese for couple of weeks. I'm kind of amazed you know that. When I bought the 70-210, my first thought was, "what goes with this?". I used my old Program Plus right up until 2004. None of that modern AF nonsense for me.

04-25-2015, 02:02 PM	#7
Dlanor Sekao Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 1,457	Originally posted by normhead I have the 70-210, I wonder if I should be trying to collect the whole set. We paid $40 for the 70-210 so I'd only have to eat mac and cheese for couple of weeks. I'm kind of amazed you know that. When I bought the 70-210, my first thought was, "what goes with this?". I used my old Program Plus right up until 2004. None of that modern AF nonsense for me. I have all 4 and they are all quite good. The 70-210 and 35-70 usually goes for about $45-$65 and the two widest from about $175-$250. My favorite is the F 24-50 followed by the 35-70.....BOTH are very good......Read the reviews and just get one ! In all honesty if I was stuck with these three lenses and nothing else.... I could live the rest of my photography life with no regrets at all. If put it in a priority purchase it would look like this...24-50 , 70-210 , 35-70.......the last acquired would be the 17-28 and I might pass that up if shooting FF or film. Last edited by Dlanor Sekao; 04-25-2015 at 02:08 PM.

04-25-2015, 02:19 PM	#8
originalwinger Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Oro Station, Ont. Canada Posts: 169	I'm in agreement with Jatrax, is it a prime, no, is it the sharpest, no, is it well rounded , definitely, just one of those I not sure what I need so get out the 35-70. I just picked up a F 70-210 and if it's as versatile as the 35-70 I will be happy.

04-25-2015, 02:41 PM	#9
Marktax Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Washington DC Photos: Albums Posts: 610 Original Poster	Originally posted by jatrax Very nice lens, and quite useful on digital IMHO. Despite my having a good number of modern lenses the F 35-70 is always in my bag. Solid, sharp, reliable. Maybe I'll post a shot soon and you can tell me what you think compared to your sample. I've not shot with this lens for a long time, so I'm no longer sure what to expect.

04-25-2015, 11:55 PM	#10
bassek Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 706	A really fine lens, however I prefer the F35-105 over the F35-70 for some reason. Maybe just a better copy? Almost all the F-series lenses are good. Seb

04-26-2015, 02:23 AM	#12
bassek Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 706	Maybe a comparison between the DA20-40 and the F24-50 would be possible? And include the FA20-35... Seb

04-26-2015, 02:37 AM	#13
zzeitg Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: South Bohemia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,017	Originally posted by Dlanor Sekao If put it in a priority purchase it would look like this...24-50 , 70-210 , 35-70.......the last acquired would be the 17-28 and I might pass that up if shooting FF or film. While it's not difficult to find a 17-28 or 35-70, it's getting hard to discover 24-50, 70-210 or 35-105 and 35-135. I don't know if preparation for FF is the reason, but the limited amount of these lenses spoiled the prices already. I personally gave it up and bought 24-50 in A version, 35-105 as Porst and 70-200 (non smc version).

04-26-2015, 07:59 AM	#14
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by bassek A really fine lens, however I prefer the F35-105 over the F35-70 for some reason. Originally posted by npc My copy of 35-105 is also better than my 35-70 I would agree except that the minimum focus distance on the F 35-105 is about 58 inches and on the F 35-70 about 24 inches. Which makes all the difference in the world for what I mostly shoot. For just walk around the F 35-105 is very nice and the extra range appreciated. I always wondered if they were experimenting with zooms with this series: 35-70 = 2x, 35-105 = 3x, 35-135 =4x.

04-26-2015, 08:29 AM	#15
bassek Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 706	Originally posted by jatrax the minimum focus distance on the F 35-105 is about 58 inches That is the downside of this lens, troublesome indoors sometimes. Seb