Pentax Lens Review and Specification Database

Return to the Forum · Database Index · Third-Party Lenses

Advanced Search

Pentax Lens Review Database » Pentax K-Mount Bayonet Lenses » DA Series Zooms

SMC Pentax-DA* 50-135mm F2.8 ED [IF]

Reviews	Views
42	34017

Recommended By	Average Price	Average Rating
98% of reviewers	$805.97	9.7

supersize

Description:

Like all current DA lenses, the SMC Pentax DA* 50-135mm is designed only for Pentax DSLR cameras. It was announced in late February, 2007. It auto-focuses with an SDM ultrasonic motor on the K10D (firmware 1.30) and newer cameras. On older cameras the lens will auto-focus with the 'screw drive' mechanism.

Weight	Length	Filter Diameter	Min. Focus	Max. Magnification
765 g	13.6 cm	67 mm	100 cm	0.17x
Diagonal FOV (APS-C)	Horizontal FOV (APS-C)	Max. Aperture	Min. Aperture	Optical Construction
31.5-11.9 degrees	27-10 degrees	f/2.8	f/22	18 elements, 14 groups, 9 blades

Weight with hood: 765g

Author

volosong
Pentaxian

Registered: September 2006
Location: Laurentia
Posts: 537

Review Date: Mon October 29, 2007

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $850.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	SDM, fantastic construction quality, WX seals, SMC
Cons:	none

Original review, October 2, 2007

Only purchased this lens last week and haven't had much chance to give it a workout yet. Will revise this review when I've had it out in the field a few times.

From a static test, what do I like and dislike about it?

The SDM is fantastic. Automatic focusing is very silent. You feel it more that hear it. Doesn't hunt much either (mid-day under the trees in the photo store parking lot). This is on a K10D body. Have not tired it on a K100D Super, so have no idea how the screw-drive focusing will perform with AA batteries.

The construction quality is among the best I've seen from Pentax. It doesn't match that of the FA limiteds, which are constructed from metal, but for a composite lens, it is the best I've seen.

Not really a negative, but I wish the lens had an aperture ring. But, it is a DA, so won't have one. I also wish it had a bit of a longer maximum focal length.

Under the category of neither being a positive nor a negative...I can not recommend using this lens with a teleconverter. In the parking lot of the camera store, tried it out with my Tamron 1.4x tc. The one that has the power-zoom contacts, which also function as the SDM contacts.

With the Tamron, the lens will focus using the SDM circuitry, but will not achieve focus lock very easily. It gets very close, very quickly, then will micro adjust for a few seconds until it achieves lock...if it ever does. Even then, it will still hunt if you move the camera slightly. The image quality, as shown in the viewfinder was also not as good as the lens by itself. Yes, this is not a "good test", but just looking through the viewfinder, I could tell that the quality was degraded.

Bottom line...if you need a longer reach...use a longer lens. Don't waste your time using a teleconverter with this lens. (However, sometime soon, I will try using my Pentax SMC Rear Converter-A 1.4x-S and the Rear Converter-A 2.0x-S with this lens. I'll lose autofocus capability, but just to see if the image quality is "okay", will give it a quick go.)

If this lens performs as well as I expect it to do, I'll get rid of all my older Pentax zooms and just keep this one (and the 16-50/2.8). Again, will edit this post when I've had a chance to give the lens a workout.

- - - - -

Review update, October 17, 2007

Well . . . I've took this lens on an outing last Friday (to Disneyland). Took this one, along with the DA*16-50/2.8 and FA50/1.4, (the 50 didn't get used and the short zoom only a couple of times).

This lens has lived up to my expectations. Look to see a variety of older lenses for sale soon. The bokeh is great. The color renderings are perfect. I couldn't ask any more from a lens.

One comment on the lack of a tripod mount . . . I don't miss it. The lens is small enough in physical size, balanced well enough in weight distribution, and light enough in weight that a tripod/monopod won't be needed for most applications.

If you can find one . . . purchase it! You won't regret having one.

Sample image:

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/5011/imgp7960ato0.jpg

Click here to Send this user a Private Message

*isteve
Pentaxian

Registered: November 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1157

Review Date: Thu December 27, 2007

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated | Rating: 10

Pros:	Sharpness, colour, contrast, bokeh, weatherproof, silent
Cons:	Size and weight

Overall: 10/10
A class act

Usefulness: 10
The APSC equivalent of the classic 70-200. Everyone should have one. great for candids, gigs, portraits....

Sharpness: 9
Wide open, it tails off in sharpness as you approach 135mm but overall its very sharp at F5.6 at all focal lengths. It really shines from 50 - 100mm. There are very few compromises here.

Colour/Contrast: 10
What really gets me about this lens every time is the quite exceptional colour and contrast. Stopped down a bit its hard to separate from a top ranking prime lens like the 77LTD, and even wide open its not too bad.

Bokeh: 9
The bokeh is exceptional for a zoom. Really nothing to choose between it and many primes in the same range.

Handling: 9
The focus ring is enormous - much larger than the zoom ring which is close to the body. Not really an issue but I sometimes grabbed the focus ring instead of the zoom when I first got it. However despite the size and weight it only needs 67mm filters and is well balanced with the C of G well towards the rear of the lens. A tripod collar is not really necessary.

Build Quality: 10
Excellent. Smooth and with very tight tolerances. Internal zoom.

CAs and Flare: 8.5
There is a bit of CA as reported but although its noticeable at the extreme focal lengths its not that bright and not an issue most of the time. Flare is minimal.

Distortion: 10
Not an issue at any focal length.

AF speed: 9
AF without USM is quite OK, but a little sluggish is low light. With USM it hunts less and is therefore faster although rotation speed is no different.

Lance B
Pentaxian

Registered: November 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 480

Review Date: Sat January 12, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $1,000.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Image quality. Build quality.
Cons:	none, really.

A superb lens on all accounts. Handling is excellent as is build quality and the image quality. I cannot priase this lens highly enough and it is as good as the FA*80-200 f2.8 but a hell of alot lighter!

I rate:
Sharpness: 9
Bokeh: 9 for a zoom
Colur rendition: 9
Handling: 10
Build quality: 10

TomInJax
Site Supporter

Registered: December 2007
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 531

Review Date: Sun February 17, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $900.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Sharpness, build quality, color.
Cons:	None.

This lens is one of my favorites. The sharpness and color compare to some of the best prime lenses made for the Pentax camera. When I ordered this lens, I expected great results but I was pleasantly surprised after examining my first shots!

Other lenses have trouble comparing in IQ to this lens. I am sure that this lens will join in the list of legendary Pentax lenses. Definitely a keeper!

christinelandon
Loyal Member

Registered: January 2008
Location: Seattle, Washington, USA
Posts: 807

Review Date: Sun March 9, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $800.00 | Rating: 9

Pros:	Image Quality, SDM, build quality, handling
Cons:	if only the top FL were a bit longer and the hood a little shorter!

I've shot this lens for a couple of months now, and it is on my K10D about 90% of the time. Its color, contrast, sharpness and bokeh rank with the best primes I've ever shot (a modest but pro-level assortment of Zeiss, Schneider, Pentax, Canon and Nikon glass). No CA problems noted thus far, but I try to avoid extreme contrast situations (not very hard to do, here in Seattle).

Its flexibility as a zoom far better suits my current shooting style and subject matter in landscape and urban scene work, mostly. I shot a portrait session with it a couple of weeks ago, mostly using 50-90mm focal lengths, and was delighted with its quick handling, rapid auto-focus abilities, and the lovely way it threw the backdrop out of focus. It rendered very good files, easily prepped and printed with minimal fuss in CS3.

For a composite-bodied zoom, the DA* 50-135 feels good, with nice action in the zoom and focus rings. I shot it in the snow in Eastern Washington at below-freezing temperatures with no problems on its very first outing. It didn't chill my fingers the way a metal-bodied zoom has in the past. The usual solid K-mount directness in attaching and removing the lens is another tactile plus. I wish the lens hood bayonet mounted as positively, and as quickly. It's got a plasticky feel, the one slightly cheesy aspect of the lens, and it really can make replacing the lens cap a chore when it's being actively used.

Pentax has built a first-rate zoom here. I just wish it had a bit more reach, occasionally.

Buddha Jones
Pentaxian

Registered: September 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2553

Review Date: Wed May 7, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $700.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	SDM, Weather Sealing, Color and IQ are great
Cons:	None

This lens quickly shot its way up to the top of my list to be my favorite lens. I love every picture that comes out of it. The IQ is deathly accurate, the bokeh is just sweet, the colors and tones are superb. I love this lens more than any other.

jsherman999
Pentaxian

Registered: December 2007
Posts: 3719

Review Date: Mon May 12, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $800.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Everything, especially the sharpness and color
Cons:	nothing

If I were forced to keep only one lens, it would be this one. The best zoom I've ever touched.

bikee4
Junior Member

Registered: September 2006
Location: Spokane,WA
Posts: 25

Review Date: Sat June 21, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $680.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Sharpness,color,speed
Cons:	none

This is an wonderful piece of engineering and design!
A pleasure to use and own.

augustmoon
Loyal Member

Registered: March 2008
Location: Toronto & San Diego
Posts: 453

Review Date: Fri July 25, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $700.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Overall Image, Build Quality, Silent Focusing, Color, Contrast, Detail
Cons:	None!

I gave this lens a 10, because this is the finest zoom I've ever owned. And that includes my "L" zooms when I was with Canon. (24-105-L and the 70-200 2.8L)

I had and sold the DA70, because at 70mm, and at 100% crops and printed out on inkjet, I could not tell any difference what so ever.

Perfect for portraits or headshots, It would stay on my camera all the time in the studio if only it went down to 40mm.

Out and about, it's impossible to beat this with any other zoom in Pentax mount. (at this time the DA*60-250 is yet unreleased, and so is the Tamron 70-200 2.8)

It performs very well, focuses nicely and quietly, focuses fast enough for a zoom of this range. Haven't noticed any purple fringing yet.

I believe it's as good optically and image quality as the Limiteds. My only complaint is that the companion DA*16-50 isn't anywhere near this good. (The primes in that range ARE noticeably better)

Portman
New Member

Registered: August 2008
Location: Aalgaard, Norway
Posts: 2

Review Date: Wed August 20, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $1,300.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Terriffic color reproduction, razorsharp from edge to edge at all focal lengths, nice weight
Cons:	Range (perhaps)

I just recently received this lens after a rather unfortunate encounter with the DA* 16-50. Specifically, the DA* 16-50 was blurred on the right side (about 1/3 in from the middle) and I had to send it in for repairs (in Sweden). Additionally, the barrel was "sticky" at around 18mm (+/-), confirming other users' comments in this regard. AF seemed ok though. However, I desperately needed a quality lens for a trip to Valencia (shortly), so I gave the DA* 50-135 a try, although my expectations weren't high to be fully honest. Despite the many positive reviews, the DA* 16-50 experience lingered in my mind.

BUT BOY WAS I IN FOR A SURPRISE!

Subjective observations (with the K20D):
1) The lens is extremely bordersharp, even at 135mm. For example, in a shot on a cloudy but sunny day I could easily make out the details of powerlines in the distant horizon. These details were totally lost on my kit DA 18-55 AL II lens (at same focal lengths).

2) The colors hit like a bullet too, spot on. In fact some colors are so vibrant, using RAW settings (!), that increasing vibrancy or saturation through Photoshop gets a very low priority.

3) Weight with camera is great, only a hundred gram or so heavier than the DA* 16-50.

I have never used any L primes, and cannot do a direct comparison, but if I were to guess any of the focal lengths on this lens would compare very well. I think augustmoon's review above can fill in the blanks

I hearthly recommend anyone with even a slight interest in these focal lengths to buy this lense! It is dirt cheap compared to Nikkor 24-70 for example.

paulbw
New Member

Registered: September 2008
Location: Salford, Manchester UK
Posts: 1

Review Date: Sat September 20, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $900.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Stunning
Cons:	none

This lens is just stunning, awesome and exceptional.

It is fast focus (sdm with a K10D),
the bokeh is primelike,
it is razor sharp wide open.

I take shots with it,
they look OK on the camera ...
...then I am just blown away by the results when I view the real thing on my computer screen.

Just get one.

offertonhatter
Pentaxian

Registered: July 2007
Location: Stockport, Manchester. UK
Posts: 355

Review Date: Wed October 22, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated | Rating: 10

Pros:	Sharp, IQ, colour, silence, speed, etc etc
Cons:	Absolutely nothing and I mean it.

I will be brief here, you won't find a more perfect portrait lens anywhere.

Considering this is a zoom, you will find, that at any focal point, a perfect portrait lens. 50mm, 75mm, 100mm, 135mm, even primes will struggle to match the sheer quality of this lens.

When it was released, I thought, "what are Pentax doing bringing out such a short zoom?" How wrong I was.

I recently bought a K20D and the combo is nothing sort of sensational! I thought this lens with the K10D was a great combo, but with the K20D it is something else......

The sharp detail you get is fantastic!

Even none portraits it is still top dollar. And will cope with monsoons with ease.

I tried to be brief, but with this lens, I cannot help talking about it

Buy one! even if you don't buy another lens for the next year, you will be glad you did.

lawsonstone
Site Supporter

Registered: October 2008
Location: Wilmore, KY
Posts: 235

Review Date: Mon November 10, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $750.00 | Rating: 9

Pros:	Fast focus, sharp images, great color, handling
Cons:	Big, heavy, HUGE hood

This is the perfect lens for events like outdoor birthday parties, garden parties, picnics, etc. It's also a killer portrait lens. I find the colors vivid, contrasty--they "pop" out at you. Images are sharp through the whole range of focal lengths and apertures (to my amateur eye). The lens handles like a dream. Focuses quickly and quietly.

My biggest complaint is that it is a very long lens. If you attach the hood, you have a very formidable looking "thing" hanging off the camera. If you are maneuvering around people at a party or picnic, it can be a bit awkward.

The lens is also very expensive--right up there with the 31mm and 77mm Ltd Primes. But the image quality is very close, and so maybe that's okay.

benjikan
Site Supporter

Registered: January 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 3547

Review Date: Thu November 13, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated | Rating: 10

Pros:	Incredibly sharp and sweet bokeh
Cons:	None

I am not a long shooter. However, I have used this lens for specific applications between 50-80mm. It is better than any of the "L" lenses I used when I was a Canon user. For those that cannot afford prime 50's, 80's or 135 lenses, this lens will easily stand on it's own merits. I have no problem using it wide open. This lens is definitely a Pentax "Brutally Sharp" Classic.

spartan
Junior Member

Registered: December 2008
Location: NJ, USA
Posts: 26

Review Date: Sun December 28, 2008

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $725.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Great lens. Very fast. Excellent Build Quality
Cons:

Great lens for portrait work indoor and out. Great Bokeh (on my other lenses I don’t notice bokeh so I did not rate this charateristic). Fast. Well built and great weight. Easy to use and silent focusing. Only wish is a bit longer (like 150mm for shooting stage work). I did a comparison test (the old Newsprint test with K10D) against a 135A f2.8 (about 25 years old). The DA* sharpness was better at the center at all apertures above 2.8 and about qual at 2.8. However at the edge, the old 135A was better at 2.8 and 3.5. By f4 there was near parity at the edge. The DA* had better contrast and CA characteristics at all apertures. Note that the 135A f2.8 is not the best of the Pentax 135 primes so I was a bit surprised by this.

Build Quality: 10 - Try to buy a Nikon lens with this build quality and weather sealing at this price. (answer: You can’t. )
Utility: 9.5 - Just wish it were a tad longer
Sharpness: 9.5 - For a Zoom excellent and should be a 10. See above as to why the 1/2 point was deducted.
Color/Contrast: 10 - Wow
CA 9.5 - I have not noticed CA but it has not been used in extreme situations where it can show. Published tests show some so it held me back from a 10.
Bokeh: 9

maxwell1295
Site Supporter

Registered: January 2008
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 2687

Review Date: Sun January 11, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $750.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Sharp, fast, and incredible IQ.....did I mention sharp?
Cons:	Nothing I can think of other than a hood that's almost as big as the lens itself.

I cannot rave about this lens enough. I thought the A70-210 was the best lens I'd ever used.....until I picked up the DA*50-135. This lens is an absolute dream to use. From the very first image I saw in the viewfinder, I knew this lens was special.

Toshi
Moderator
Site Supporter

Registered: September 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 408

Review Date: Sun February 22, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $699.95 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Build-quality, IQ, Bokeh, Sharpness, Color Contrast, f/2.8, Useful zoom range
Cons:	Minimum focusing distance

Just as my DA*300, the sharpness, color contrast, and bokeh is superb. Sharp wide open and once you stop down, it takes it to another level. Straight from the camera (RAW), photos are sharp and the Pentax SMC coating gives it that special color contrast. Bokeh is smooth as well. I worried that I might not like the focal range, but find it very useful for day to day shots when you're not wanting wide angle. The overall build quality is top-notch and although focusing is not super fast, it's nice and smooth. I'm use to walking around with my DA*300 so size and weight are no big deal for me. Once you invest in fast quality glass, you get use to the weight. My only complaint is the minimum focusing distance - I wish you could focus a little bit closer.

john5100
New Member

Registered: May 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 8

Review Date: Tue March 24, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $749.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Smooth, Fast, Quiet, IQ
Cons:	None

I can't say it better than has already been said. This lens is AMAZING. I can't believe how much joy I have using this lens.

Get it!! Don't wait...

netrex
Senior Member

Registered: April 2009
Location: Alta
Posts: 114

Review Date: Mon April 13, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $1,045.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Sharpness, bokeh, colors, weather sealing, size and weight
Cons:

I've had this lens for over a year now, and it's become my favorite lens by far.

The sharpness and bokeh of this lens is outstanding. I get sharp photographs at any aperture I use, f/2.8 to f/16, I haven't tested f/22 as I haven't needed to use it and I know diffraction has a big impact on the sharpness at that aperture, so no need to verify.

The SDM focusing was weird at first since I only had lenses without a focus engine and the camera motor was used, the SDM is almost perfectly silent, and when you're outside alone in the quiet, you can hear it moving, but not otherwise. It could be a bit faster, but unless an animal or car is fairly close coming straight at you, you will get your shot with continous focus (I use the K10D). I've caught birds, dogs, cars, snowmobiles and dog sleds with this, and it works very well.

It's not a macro, but you can do flowers without any problems, and do it very well. The bokeh is just cream. I have yet to see anything do it better.

Strong light sources in the image renders very beautifully. I love photographing streets at night when the street lights turn into stars, and this does it perfectly. The 9-blade aperture works very well.

The size and weight is very good I think, it's balanced well for the K10D, and then also the K20D. I alwayse use the battery grip, and that works well as well. The Tokina version has a tripod collar, and I'm not sure if it does any good or not, it's not that big a lens, but it wouldn't hurt to have it if it could be taken off :P

Some photographs made with the DA* 50-135mm:

Hannican
Pentaxian

Registered: October 2007
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 395

Review Date: Thu April 30, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $620.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Spectacularly Sharp, Beautiful Colors
Cons:	Gigantic, Heavy, way too large with the hood on

I love this lens, but I don't have that many uses for it. I'm one hundred percent happy with it's performance in the limited purposes I've put it through (mostly shooting my car during her outdoor adventures).

Everything comes out of this thing sharp as hell and beautifully rendered, color-wise. You really couldn't ask for more- the IQ is outstanding.

I just wish I lived somewhere that telephoto lenses were more useful. I'm not sure I'd want to take this guy on long travels either, since it's so bulky, so I might have to move before I can really put it to good use, which might be worth it!

Mystic
Senior Member

Registered: February 2009
Location: Lithuania
Posts: 240

Review Date: Fri May 1, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $650.00 | Rating: 8

Pros:	Sharp, fast, good build quality, weather sealing, great colors, silent AF, bokeh, lens cap is nice.
Cons:	slow AF, not quite enough zoom at the long end, huge hood.

well since it's a DA* it's weather sealed, and the best of pentax. the photographic qualities of this lens concerning Image quality it's perfect.. it's reproduction of colors and contrast is amazing.. build quality is top class.

however: i do not like the speed of the AF, it's silent, but quite slow.

zoom range seems a little to short.. however the quality of the pictures says it all.

great for outdoor portraits.
not great for any action.
great for still photography, landscaping (if the focal range fits),
not so great for dramatic closeups, they are sharp, but not dramatic..

not close enough.

if the zoom range would be 50-150mm and the photographic qualities the same, and a faster AF it would be perfect.. however nothing is perfect... so this lens is also not perfect. but I like it.. i rarely shoot at f/2.8, more at 3.2 or 3.5 to get sharp the desired point.

mudnmoto
Junior Member

Registered: September 2007
Location: Buffalo NY
Posts: 38

Review Date: Thu May 7, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $749.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Silent focus, Sharpness, I think it balances well in hand
Cons:

I am going to do this review in two parts. First off, I just got the lens today, so my familiarity with the lens is limited. I purchased it for the main purpose of photographing motocross races and with the reviews I have read, and they were many, it seems most agree that it is not quick enough for action photography.

Well I have been using the kit lens for two years with great success and I find that so far this lens is neither faster, nor slower than the 18-55. This lens will get a complete workout in 8 days as I have 2 races to shoot.

Second part of this review will come after the races, hopefully with photo samples

kjelle
New Member

Registered: January 2008
Location: South of Sweden
Posts: 1

Review Date: Mon May 11, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated | Rating: 10

Pros:	Image quality, build quality, SDM, Color, Contrast, Detail
Cons:	slow AF

I've had this lens for only one week but it seemes be well up to my expectations.

Sharp, good color and contrast, This lens has quickly been my favorite lens.

K100Dave
Pentaxian

Registered: February 2007
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 111

Review Date: Tue May 12, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $760.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Sharp as a prime
Cons:	It's a big lens

This lens should be on all aspiring photographers want list. I had heard rumors of the prime like sharpness, and the overall smoothness of the images that were produced by this lens. However, I was totally blown away once I had seen first hand the images that were produced by the K20D/DA*50-135mm combo.

Kirei
New Member

Registered: May 2009
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 2

Review Date: Mon May 18, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated | Rating: 10

Pros:	Very very sharp
Cons:

Sharp, Stunning, Values, Awesome, It very good lens i have found. Thank you Pentax for created this!

tim71
New Member

Registered: February 2009
Location: the coasts of the Gulf of Finland
Posts: 24

Review Date: Thu May 21, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated | Rating: 10

Pros:	Image quality, build quality, silent AF, lightweight.
Cons:	SDM can be quirky, hard plastic of the hood.

Typical MTF tests (photozone.de etc) just fall short to give a real comparison between the possibilities of lenses in this range of quality.

First thing that surprised me was the color rendering - I just do not have to correct the colors on processing the images taken with this lens - there are only few rare exceptions...

It is just lightweight enough to be excellent lens for street photography - I have no problem to walk around having camera in the hand with grip and this lens attached for hours. FL range is also good for indoor (portrait) photography.

Only drawback from the excellent feel of this lens is the clunky, rattling and squeaking hard plastic of the hood - even Tamron can do better - but then... Pentax has this little opening in it for turning the polarizer etc. Very clever.

Here is the example illustrating the sharpness of this lens.

P.S. Quantity can not be of any substitute for quality - I had thoughts about Sigma 50-150 before (pentax having shorter FL range etc), now I do not

rei_vilo
New Member

Registered: June 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 24

Review Date: Fri May 29, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $900.00 | Rating: 9

Pros:	Lens and image quality and In-door versatibilty
Cons:	Weight and size

Pros

Build high quality
Silent and fast AF
Lens and image quality
In-door versatibilty

Cons

Some vignetting
Weight and size
Specific handling of the K10D + 50-135mm

Wrap-up

With this new lens, we're dealing with truly professional gear. I would say that the DA* 50-135mm is the lens the K10D was waiting for.
As always with Pentax, ergonomics and ease of use are great.
But this comes at a price, in term of weight and size, which may imply a learning curve, and also a stronger bag .
During my test today, I haven't felt the limitation to 135mm and haven't missed the extra zoom provided by the DA 50-200mm.
Most important, image quality is here and I had a lot of fun.

want2beyounger
New Member

Registered: October 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 7

Review Date: Sun June 21, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $943.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	stop up to 2.8
Cons:	The auto focus MIGHT be a little slow,

I rated this lens a 10, but really it should be rated 9.9999999 since nothing is perfect. I mentioned that the auto focus might be a little slow, but only because I have been influenced by other reviewers. Others have said it is not a good sports lens. I am totally satisfied with it for this purpose, and it can focus much faster than I can manually. I am just entering the world of digital. I would hope that earlier reviewers remember what it was like to "work" to get a good shot, before being too critical on equipment that will or won't do everything for them. Here are some shots from today. Hats and helmets play havoc with decent exposures. With a mixture of sunny and overcast conditions, WB set to auto. These are straight out of the K20, JPEG, no PP. Please comment, (settings, tweaks or tricks for my photos) positive or negative, all welcome

GLXLR
Site Supporter

Registered: February 2009
Location: Sugar Land, TX
Posts: 607

Review Date: Tue June 30, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $750.00 | Rating: 9

Pros:	Sharp, AMAZING color/contrast (compared to my other lenses), Great build quality, Nice big MF ring
Cons:	1st copy was defective (loose focus ring is a rare problem)

1st copy had loose MF ring. My review is based on the 2nd copy.

This lens is great. Before I purchased I had a Pentax K10D, 18-55mm kit, and FA 100mm macro.
Build: 9/10
Although this IS a DA* lens, don't assume this lens is made of solid metal, although this is not a bad thing at all. About 80% of the lens is covered by the soft, rubbery rings and the only part that isn't made of rubber is the golden DA* ring, green DA indicator ring at the bottom, and the medium between the MF ring and zoom ring. Don't make this a deciding factor though, because this lens is made of real high quality plastics and most of it is in rubber anyways.

Just FYI the 16-50mm is also made of the same materials, although the DA* 200mm, 300mm, and 60-250mm are made of metal. Not sure about the 55mm.

Auto-focus Performance: 9.2/10
The AF is relatively quiet compared to my other lenses, but it is about the same speed as them. The AF in poorly lit room isn't terrific, although to be honest, no lens really is (for the AF to be accurate, the room should have at least 2 80watt light bulbs) In broad day light however, this lens is a dream to use, with the speed of the FA 100mm on focus limiter and the quietness of Canon USM (almost but not quite

) Canon USM is still faster and quieter, but Pentax is getting ridiculously close... The SDM sound is comparable to the Sony 70-200mmG lens just for reference, speedwise and sound wise.

Manual Focus Performance: 8.5/10
The MF ring is very smooth and slightly damped and about equivalent to my macro lens (although not as precise due to the clamp that exists on that lens). It is not comparable to the old K/M/A/M42 lenses that have extremely damped rings, but compared to the Canon and Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses, this is about the same or better (according to user).

General Usage 9.5/10
I spent a lot of time debating whether to get this lens or the Sigma 70-200mm. After 5 months of constantly working I had enough money to finally purchase one of the lenses. For shooting events (in-door or outdoor), weddings, or in-door sports, this lens is a dream. Even the 50mm isn't wide enough for me sometimes (That's why I am going to purchase a used 35mm f/2) To be honest, if you compare 50mm to 70mm, I don't even know how I would survive. The 50-70mm is REALLY useful. For shooting outdoor sports or where you can't get real close, the 70-200mm lenses might suit you better, but even 200mm isn't really long enough for sports or birding and adding a TC would make them really bad quality (although from the Tamron TC shots that is subjective). The Sigma performs much softer at 200mm and especially with the 1.4X TC.
Also remember this lens weighs only about 1.5 lbs (700 grams) and about 1.7lbs (800grams) with hood on. The 70-200mm lenses weigh about 3 lbs (1300 grams). This lens, although quite big with hood on, is just small enough to where it doesn't scare your subjects. If this lens was any bigger width wise or length wise, some subjects would freak out and some of your pictures might look artificial. For those of you that don't know if you can or can't handle the weight, I recommend going to cameralensrentals.com and renting a 50-135mm AND 70-200mm for 3 or 7 days and see if you can handle the weight/ focal lengths. For most 135mm won't be long enough for wild life or out door sports, but at the same time, 70mm might be too much for indoor/ out door events and weddings.
Another awesome quality of this lens is the weather sealing. At first I was extremely skeptical of the weather sealing until a unfortunate turn of events forced me to use this lens under the rain. In the end, it was STILL working with no water ANYWHERE. I don't suggest putting this under a faucet or waterfall though because the weather seals can only handle light/medium rain, dust storms, snow, and sand. Anything more extreme will allow sand to scratch your elements, water to ruin the AF motor and cause fungus/mold, or make your elements "misty". This is also a big plus over the third party offerings (although they aren't bad at all from the images I have seen)

Image Quality: 10.5/10
Now this is where the lens REALLY shines. It is sharp as my macro lens even when it is set to f/5.6 and my 50-135mm is wide open (even more contrasty too!). If you stop it down it gets even MORE sharp, although there isn't enough head room because f/2.8 is already near perfectly sharp. The photozone review of this lens isn't great, but from user reviews and other online reviews, I can agree with them. This lens is unbeatable IQ wise.

Overall: 9.8/10

I'd say the only reason this lens isn't perfect is because of the FL. If they had the lens at 35-135mm or 50-200mm f/2.8, this lens would be perfect, although I suspect that a lens such as those would cost at least $1500.

Andrew Faires
Pentaxian

Registered: December 2006
Location: Ontario
Posts: 671

Review Date: Mon July 20, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros:	Solid, sharp, sealed and useful range
Cons:	Focus speed

Build quality: 9/10
I'm docking a mark because it's not metal, but in spite of that it's a solid lens. And the fact I can use it in the rain makes it that much better.

Handling: 10/10
This is a beautifully sized lens. It's not a monster but it's not petit either. When you're holding on to it, you can have a good, solid grip. The focus and zoom rings are also a good size, making adjustments easy. Also, having an internal zoom & focus makes it a pleasure to use, including using polarizing filters.

Bokeh: 8/10
Generally very smooth. Not quite 'FA limited' smooth, but still very well done.

Optics: 10/10
For the photos I've taken using it so far, it's what I expect from a pro-level lens. It's sharp, shows good contrast and the colours are natural.

AF: 6/10
This lens surprised me with just how slow it plods along to acquire focus. I knew it wouldn't be a rocket, but I thought it would be faster than this.

Having said that, once it acquires a target, it will track reasonably well. It could follow my daughter running towards me, so long as I had a lock on her before she started running and would yield an average of 8/10 keepers. That result dropped if I didn't have her in focus before she started running.

Conclusion: 8/10
For my purposes with this lens, AF speed isn't a major deal as it will be used for landscapes and some event photography, meaning it's a keeper. However, for a lens of this caliber, I expected better and this is where it looses points. In every other category, this lens meets my expectations of a pro-level piece of kit and if focus speed is not required, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend this lens.

truonganh
Senior Member

Registered: November 2007
Location: Bay area, CA
Posts: 154

Review Date: Fri July 24, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $700.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Sweet short telephoto zoom. Sharp wide open. water resistant. Silence focus
Cons:	plastic contstruction

This is my go-to lens for candid photos now. it's really very good. Scary sharp even wide open f2.8... This lens makes the Sigma 70-200 jealous, since it is just a tad shorter but much smaller / ligher, thus less 'intimidating' to people. Did i mention that it's sharp sharp sharp, with buttery smooth bokeh and great color.

philbaum
Pentaxian

Registered: October 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 571

Review Date: Mon August 3, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $795.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Excellent IQ, bokeh, FL range ideal, water resistant
Cons:	More difficult to use on a vertical oriented tripod head

I've had my DA 50-135 for 3 days now, and its everything folks said it was: great IQ, rendering, bokeh and nothing unusual in the focusing department (except that its extremely quiet)

I didn't have access to my computer equipment for the first day, so had to check image sharpness with the LCD. I noticed right away that i had to significantly increase my normal magnification to find a lack of sharpness. This seemed true till i reached the telescopic FL of 135mm.

Negatives from a few reviews:
a. There was one website review that observed on their copy that there was softness at 135 FL F2.8. I have a Pentax A 135 f2.8 which i think highly of so i took one handheld shot with the DA at 135mm and then 2 shots with the A135 f2.8 of a line on my deck 10 feet away. With 1:1 crops in Lightroom, i saw no difference in sharpness between the two lenses. With 2:1 crops in Lightroom, I could now observe that the A135 f2.8 images were sharper than the DA 50-135. (One review in Pentax Forums Database indicated that at F4 and above, the reviewer thought that the two lens were equal) In any case, i'm happy with 135mm focal length image quality.

b. One reviewer indicated that the hood was pretty flimsy in its attachment. I didn't notice that to be a problem. The hood attaches like a bayonet in the same way as the DA 300. It inserts axially, than rotates clockwise until it hits a partial stop, and then snaps into place. The action is lighter than in the DA 300 but adequate IMO.

c. One reviewer thought that the range should be higher than 135mm. Of course this is a personal thing. I spent one day walking along the shoreside of Port Townsend, taking architectural shots, and seashore scenes. In the long exposure nightime scenes that i enjoy doing, as well as the local playhouse stills that i take for them, this FL range is ideal for me. If anything, i would like to see a slightly wider FL.

d. The one complaint i have is that when i mount this on my tripod ball head, and then flip that ballhead over to a vertical orientation, i find that there is a tendency for the weight of the lens to loosen the camera body on the mounting stud. So this requires a firm tightening of the mounting stud collar and care in handling the camera body in the vertical orientation. Considering the many other virtues of this lens, its a small price to pay :-)

Here's one image of the DA 50-135 compared to the Tamron 18-250. The problem i had with using the Tamron for theater work, is that i often found myself at F5.6 and ISO speeds of 1600 and greater. With some F2.8 primes that i tried, one could work at ISO 800. Please note that on the first image, that i'm trying a 1 inch deep rubber hood from B&H instead of the provided plastic hood. Also note that the DA extends 5 1/4 inches from the mount to the end of the lens, not including hood. The Tamron, fully extended is about 6 7/16" long to the end of the lens. The Tamron weighs one lb while the DA is 1 1/2 lb. The reason for the comparison is that many Pentax folks have tried the Tamron or seen it and might be able to relate to the DA's physical size that way.

Click on the image to view it in a larger size

In the next image, the supplied DA hood is installed. Its 3 inches deep compared to the 1" depth of the rubber hood that i bought from another source:

Click on the image to view it in a larger size

The next image shows that the DA 50-135, installed on a K10 or K20 fits nicely into the Lowepro 200 AW slingbag with about 1/2 inch to spare. The rubber hood may be collapsed and left on the lens for storage while the plastic hood would have to be removed and stored in one of the pockets:

Click on the image to view it in a larger size

Finally, IMO, the following 3 lenses would make a nice light-weight walk around kit. Of course, many other light weight short FL lenses can be substituted for those shown.

Click on the image to view it in a larger size

Whether one likes to shoot with primes or zooms, i think we can all admire an excellently designed lens. The large shape of the DA 50-135 enables the lens to eliminate the normal telescoping 3 sleeves such as the Tamron design, which would be a nightmare to seal for water. The strong shell is likely to be more resistant to physical abuse than a telescoping design.

This lens is a class act all the way. The second day i had it, I used it to take portrait shots of 21 actors for a Shakespeare play brochure. The shots looked professional and got compliments.

RonMexico
Site Supporter
Marketplace Reseller

Registered: January 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 198

Review Date: Wed August 5, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated | Rating: 10

Pros:	Fast, Quiet, Sharp, Excellent Colors
Cons:	Yeah, right.

Nothing really to add here.
The other reviews have just about said it all.

Definitely worth it.

This lens is fast, accurate, sharp, great color rendering and awesome bokeh.

The only thing you could ask for is longer focal range, it's only 135 but this really is an awesome lens.

chicochongchu
New Member

Registered: November 2008
Location: Alabang
Posts: 24

Review Date: Thu August 20, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $650.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	everything! I kid you not.
Cons:	honestly the hood kind of snaps on/off loosely - not like the DA* 16 - 50's hood

This lens is like having a 50, 70, 85, 100 and 135 Prime in one zoom.

sharp at 2.8... and then insanely sharp at 5.6!!!

you can not go wrong. from build quality, to image quality this lens is just WICKED!!!

I think it's the perfect portrait zoom lens.

It also stands out in a crowd - try shooting with the hood on, it just looks so bad ass!

therion
Member

Registered: February 2009
Location: SLovakia
Posts: 65

Review Date: Fri August 28, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated | Rating: 0

Pros:	Very fast AF on K-7! Very sharp!
Cons:	missing tripod collar - kind a heavy lens

For direct sunlight performance look here

http://www.flickr.com/photos/41918127@N03/3863479373/

leopold
New Member

Registered: July 2008
Location: montreal
Posts: 2

Review Date: Sat August 29, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $719.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	Sharp,small size for me,Weather sealed
Cons:	None yet

Nothing bad to say here...what a lens,i love it

I tried it for landscape and some animals shots in a zoo and the shots are very sharp,thank you again Pentax.It will be great for shooting in the rain and snow here in Canada!

Buy one,you will have no regret.

iceemn360
Site Supporter

Registered: January 2009
Location: Hillsborough, Ca
Posts: 242

Review Date: Sat September 12, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $750.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	weight, sharpness,
Cons:	AF occasionally has issue but otherwise flawless

another review while im at it

My favorite lens. I wise the zoom range was a bit larger but thats only a small problem. This is an incredible lens and my favorite for portraits. The solid build and internal zooming takes away all fears of using this set up in rain (I did use it in rain very very regularly while in costa rica for 3 months). It holds up well and I've even had to wash it to keep it clean during several 14+km hikes through mud/forest.
For its size i think its rather light and at F2.8 very sharp.

put simply.... if you dont have this lens.... your missing out

axl
Pentaxian

Registered: March 2007
Location: London (just about but still), UK
Posts: 3604

Review Date: Fri September 18, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated | Rating: 9

Pros:	size, IQ, WR, SDM, weight
Cons:	some vignetting

I have been waiting with this review until I put the lens through it's paces. I finally had that chance during trip to Egypt.
First impressions:
the lens is well put together, with tight tolerances and with nice finish. The rubberized zoom and focusing rings are easy to handle and nice and wide. I'd love to have them swapped though, meaning zoom ring would be closer to the front and focusing ring closer to the body (being AF person I don't use MF a lot and lens + body combo would be easier to handle if you could zoom with your hand more forward). But that's just personal opinion. What could be better tough is, the space between the rings. It's really narrow and with hood mounted in storage position it's bit tricky to mount/dismount the lens. All in all 9/10
On camera:
This lens balances well on K100/K10D + grip/GX20. Even for the small K100D it's not intimidating. I like it best on K10D + grip. I don't miss the tripod collar as the lens isn't too heavy and the setup is reasonably stable on tripod. All in all 10/10
Performance:
I will start with negative thing. And that is vignetting, I have noticed it with hood attached but I have yet to do proper testing to see if it's general thing or only certain f stop/focal length combination.
Now to the positive things. This lens has exceptional colour rendition, is plenty sharp from wide open, especially from 1.5m and behind. Focuses very quickly and accurately. The SDM and WR are great and very welcome bonuses. Focal range is very good for streets and traveling. And for zoom it has nice bokeh. All in all 9.5/10
Conclusion:
Because of it's small(ish) size and weight, exceptional performance this lens represents great value. I have been quite a bit into the primes but this zoom makes you think twice. It's easily the best zoom I have tried to this date (09/09) and it's one fantastic lens to own.

studiocrocevia
New Member

Registered: April 2008
Location: italy
Posts: 12

Review Date: Mon October 12, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $1,200.00 | Rating: 10

Pros:	The perfect one.
Cons:	A bit, only a bit large and long (with hood)

What a lens!
It's very difficult for me change lens if DA* 50-135 is on, for me it's the perfect range.
from 50 to 135!
Pentax hasn't prime lens from 77 to 135 and this lens is a set of primes!

The only bad things are that it is a little long with hood and that i'm a bit scared about the dead SDM motors.

bc_the_path
Pentaxian

Registered: March 2007
Location: Ankara, Turkey
Posts: 343

Review Date: Thu October 22, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? No | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $800.00 | Rating: 0

Pros:	Optical performance
Cons:	SDM

Mine is not really a review, for now, that is!

This lens has the highest price tag among my set of lenses (too many to count).
It is also the only one that failed!

After about a year of infrequent use (I was busy shooting film!), I have started using/re-using this lens. It was "optically" perfect; almost like a prime at every focal length!

However, its SDM started to behave and since using the screw driven AF engine is actively blocked (read, forbidden) my lens turned into a manual one within weeks. The lens was used lightly (first on K10D, then on K20D). It is in "new" condition for all practical purposes. It was used just like all of my other lenses (Pentax and Sigma), of which I am happy.

There are only a few places in the world that are authorized to fix the SDM. And, there is no local representative or service, Pentax is not currently represented in my country.
I wrote two of them for paid repair. None replied!

I do not understand what my mistake was. Do you?

I am not thinking of buying another lens "with SDM" until Pentax either issues a satisfactory statement about the reported problems (and their solution) or publishes a firmware to allow usage of screw driven AF when needed.

I humbly advice Pentax to define a process where users living outside the countries it has representatives and/or services can apply for help.
What am I supposed to do if my equipment fails? Pray?
(The lens was bought in the US, by the way).

I also warn potential buyers (of lenses with SDM, especially second-hand) think thrice if they live in the remote & neglected corners of the world. For other lenses, there is not much reason to be extremely cautious; even my 40 or so years old Takumars work like magic!

MCR
Member

Registered: October 2008
Location: Torun, POLAND
Posts: 73

Review Date: Sat November 14, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated | Rating: 10

Pros:	Sharpness, colour, contrast, bokeh, weatherproof, silent
Cons:	No

Very well made zoom;

F8&Bthere
Junior Member

Registered: July 2008
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 25

Review Date: Thu December 3, 2009

Would you recommend the lens? Yes | How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $650.00 | Rating: 8

Pros:	Build quality/weather sealing, bokeh, colour rendition
Cons:	subpar AF system for pro lens, bad flare, CAs, soft at 135mm 2.8-3.2

I got a great deal on this lens through the Wolf/Ritz camera surplus via eBay, so I can't complain too much. But it may be that I got a slightly less than perfect copy because this thing flares really badly. Without any filter, and with the hood on, I get all kinds of flare with any strong light source in the background. I don't mean pointed right at the sun or anything, I'm talking about even indirect sunight through a window behind the subject. I have many other lenses and this one is by far the most flare prone. Yet googling around I can't find hardly any mention of flare being a problem with this lens.
Other than that, it focuses slow for a motorized lens, and tends to hunt quite a bit in less than ideal light. At least for a high end lens like this.
But on the positive side I'm still giving it a 9 because it is sharp, renders colours quite nicely, has wonderful bokeh for a zoom, and I don't feel my flare problem should bring down the overall score for this lens here.

Update: after further use of this lens, if anything I am more underwhelmed. I don't know how so many people can give it a perfect 10 rating. Even if my copy is subpar and most users are NOT experiencing the CA, flare and softness at 135mm that I am (wider apertures), just the slow focusing and AF hunting alone that is undeniably a characteristic of this lens should be grounds for demotion to a 9 at best. For the price, this attempt at a pro caliber lens from Pentax is okay, but far from great. I'm taking mine down to 8.5 but since I can't score halfs I'll go to 8 to counter some of the overzealousness of so many perfect 10s

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:50 AM.