Pentax-A 35-105mm F3.5 vs AF 50-135mm F2.8?

[lbam]

Just wondering if anybody out there has owned/owns both of these lenses, and has an opinion on the I.Q. of each verses each other?

[lol101]

Originally Posted by lbam

Just wondering if anybody out there has owned/owns both of these lenses, and has an opinion on the I.Q. of each verses each other?

Well, I actually own both lenses but never tried to compare them....

They both have excellent IQ but I must confess I don't use the A lens that much anymore due to the conveniency of the DA*.

I'll try to get some pics with both and post them here to give you a better idea of their comparative performances.

One thing is clear though, the 35-105 "macro" capabilities are a big plus sometimes.

[NaClH2O]

I own only the older 35-105, but it is an excellent lens. I would say that it's greatest strength is it's color rendition, as good or better than any other lens I have. It's biggest weakness is that it is quite heavy. And of course it is MF, tho I mostly manually focus anyway even with AF lenses so this isnt a big thing to me. Here is a link I posted on it a while back.
LBA: Pentax A 35-105 F3.5 Macro

NaCl(and the older lens is not weather resistant)H2O

[lbam]

Thanks guys! that's food for thought..

[ChrisPlatt]

The SMC Pentax-A 35-105mm f3.5 zoom is excellent - as good as most fixed focal length lenses throughout its range.
I sold mine because it's just too massive. I use 35mm and 100mm fixed focal length lenses almost exclusively now.

Chris

[hinman]

I don't have DA *50-135 but I do have an older lens similar to the focal range but slower with f/4.0 -- Pentax K 45-125mm f/4.0. I bought it here in marketplace for $125 and I find the lens very good for portrait and it takes pretty sharp pictures with good bokeh. But it is on the heavy side

• Pentax K 45-125mm f/4.0 Test Shots - Hin's Tech Corner

A slideshow of test pictures on this K lens

• hin_man's slideshow on Flickr

It is another lens to consider.

Hin

[ddhytz]

Originally Posted by lol101

... One thing is clear though, the 35-105 "macro" capabilities are a big plus sometimes.

+1.
You can use this "macro" feature at any focal length between 35 and 105, not like some lenses -- their "macro" capability is only available at either wide or long end.

[lbam]

In terms of shake reduction, I think I read somewhere it's best to set the body the longest focal length (105mm or 125mm). Honestly I have no idea if this is true...

[Mike Cash]

I own and dearly love the 35-105/3.5, which I have used both on my K100D and on my ME (film). Here is a link to images taken with this lens.

As said earlier, it weighs in at about 650 grams and is not something you want to haul around for a walk-around lens unless perhaps it is the only lens you'll be toting.

The macro setting isn't really so much a true macro focus range. In my opinion the macro setting on the lens is only really there because at very close focus distances there is a breakdown on the focal settings across the 35-105 range. That is to say, the distance marks on the lens quit matching up. In the "normal" range, they match up very well. Still, it does a very nice job on close-focus photos. You just lose the distance markings on the lens.

[lbam]

Nice sharp pics Mike. I like the composition and use of shadows on some of those scary statues too.

Tokyo also looks like a great place to snap like crazy