|
Author
|
|
Denis
Pentaxian
Registered: January 2007
Location: St-Albert, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 315
|
|
Review Date: Sun January 7, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp images
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
I have this lens for the past 12 years. Has good color correction and always gave me sharp images. It works well so far on my K10D giving me 42mm. More testing required before I can pronounce judgment in a DSLR.
|
|
|
|
|
DSgaijin
Junior Member
Registered: December 2006
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 27
|
|
Review Date: Mon January 8, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $75.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Reasonably priced on the used market, compact and lightweight, excellent image quality, only a wee bit soft at f/2.8.
|
|
Cons:
|
Some vignetting but not dramtically so.
|
|
A good performing lens wide open becoming outstanding at f/4 and smaller apertures. If you have a choice between the 28/2.8 or the 28/3.5, if the price difference is reasonable then go for the f/2.8. If there is a big gap in the price go for the 28 f/3.5 because it too is an excellent performing lens if you don't need the additional speed.
|
|
|
|
|
Photo Tramp
Pentaxian
Registered: September 2006
Location: Lancaster, PA.
Posts: 2036
|
|
Review Date: Thu January 11, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $28.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp image good little wide angle prime
|
|
Cons:
|
Can be a little soft wide open
|
|
I picked this lens up as a used lens. The glass was clear and the lens was in mint condition. It was one of the first Manual lenses I bought for my DL. I like the way it preforms. In shadowed light of fading light this lens can be a little soft wide open. Other then that most of my shots with this lens have been crystal clear, and Spot on for focus. This lens works well with any Pentax DSLR.
|
|
|
|
|
roy
Pentaxian
Registered: September 2006
Location: D/FW area, Tx.
Posts: 1713
|
|
Review Date: Wed January 17, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, light weight, small design
|
|
Cons:
|
can't think of any
|
|
never had a bad pic from this lens. i'ts very sharp and with Excellent contrast. easily fits in a large pocket. that's usually where i stow it. i've had this lens for 29 years..
|
|
|
|
|
pentaxkat
Member
Registered: January 2007
Location: UK/Canada/wherever work takes me
Posts: 92
|
|
Review Date: Sun March 4, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $50.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Small size, good build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Better on film, no A setting
|
|
This was my favourite lens on film (on my Super A) but on my DS I'm not so fond of it. I've had some quite bad CA and images don't have the same feel as my 50mm f1.7 A (admittedly a very good lens) and 21mm limited.
That said, its still a very sharp lens and nice and pocketable. I won't sell mine yet, but it doesn't get as much use as it used (mainly because of the different angle of view on digital). If on a budget its a nice lens and still preferable to a plasticky zoom in my opinion but if I had some money I might be tempted by an A or FA version.
|
|
|
|
|
Alvin
Pentaxian
Registered: December 2006
Location: Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2532
|
|
Review Date: Sat April 7, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $30.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
I bought this lens about a month ago along with a K28/3.5. I don't know why I let go of this lens (gave it to a friend) and kept the K instead but I think it was because I liked handling the K. Both lenses are very good in terms of IQ, in fact I can't tell the difference between the two yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Available Light
New Member
Registered: February 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA USA
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Fri April 20, 2007
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $40.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice wide angle, sharp, good color
|
|
Cons:
|
Extra steps to use on digital, but works great
|
|
Fun wide angle for film - had it since the early 1980's. Great for landscapes. Have also used some on digital (DS) and it works great.
Sharpness 8
Bokeh 7
Color 8
Handling 9
Build 9
Distortion 8
Aberations 8
Value 9
A nice compact wide angle (film) or near normal (digital). Don't hesitate to pick one up.
|
|
|
|
|
8540tomg
Site Supporter
Registered: February 2008
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Posts: 1507
|
|
Review Date: Mon February 25, 2008
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $100.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, contrasty, light
|
|
Cons:
|
Fully manual
|
|
Pentax must have made a million of these lenses and they are easily found on EBAY. I bought mine new in the early 1980s for use with my Pentax MX. It cost a bit over $100 at that time but can be had for much less now. It came in two incarnations - a version 1 and 2. Boz Dimtirov provides insights to the production history of this optic:
Version 1 - original M-series 28mm data
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/prime...M28f2.8-i.html
Version 2 - late run history of M-series 28mm
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/prime...28f2.8-ii.html
Quote from Dimitrov site:
"This lens is extremely interesting. Its lens mount is of the "original K-mount" type, and its name associates it undoubtedly with the M-series of K-mount lenses. On the other hand, the lens shares its most important characteristics with the later SMC-A lens: the linear aperture mechanism and the updated optical formula. Even the focusing ring is of the A-style.
Guesses can be made that in 1982 Pentax was already hard at work developing the A-series bodies and lenses, and when parts for the "original" M 28/2.8 lens were depleted, it was decided to switch to production of the new lens, but without exposing the externally visible A-series features — electrical contacts on the lens mount and "A" position on the aperture ring. Still, this lens with its low production numbers is a rather unique piece of K-mount history."
I have the "extremely interesting" version 2 Boz Dimitrov describes above. With film it was great for small group shots and landscapes. All in all a very competent performer. The lens is reasonably fast at 2.8 and is very light like most M-series glass. In terms of build quality it resembles the A-series 28mm f 2.8 and has some plastic bits where the M-series has metal. The distinctive M-series chrome banding around the top of the focusing ring is missing. As a result it looks a little "cheaper" and less "substantial" than my other M-series optics. This is not a knock on this particular lens - I feel the same way about most A-series lenses. I just prefer the look of the M-series lenses. On a performance level I doubt there is a noticeable difference between the two series. This prejudice aside, the lens performed quite well on my MX and K2 film cameras. On the K10 it requires the usual adjustments that have to be made to permit a 25-year-old lens to function on a modern camera. There will be no AF, metering will be stop down with no f stop information in the viewfinder. If you are used to twisting dials and setting aperture it will be no problem. The lens will serve you well. Those who were weaned on auto everything point and shoot cameras might not want the added effort. Here is a recent sample from this lens:
 Click on the image to view it in a larger size |
|
|
|
|
ntlg
New Member
Registered: February 2009
Location: Greece
|
|
Review Date: Wed February 4, 2009
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $80.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
compact (while not compact as the da 40mm), really good performance, great built
|
|
Cons:
|
practically none if its limitations are understood
|
|
Have recently purchased it and I have found it to be more handy than the A 50mm f1.7 (and better built)
Quite fast, very compact (smaller than the flash socket at the k100d) and a total satisfactory optical performance both at film and at the k100d
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Sabatella
Moderator
Registered: September 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 5779
|
|
Review Date: Wed March 4, 2009
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $15.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
plenty sharp, nice contrast & color, great solid feel in a small package for a nice price
|
|
Cons:
|
flare is more common than with some lenses
|
|
I use this lens as a "wide normal" on APS-C, to complement my "long normal", the DA40. The M28/2.8 (I have the more common version 1) performs very well and is surprisingly (to me) sharp at f/2.8. Indoors, 28mm is a great focal length for capturing people in their environments, and f/2.8 is a big improvement over the kit lens for low light use. Outdoors, 28mm is great for a lot of landscape uses, and while the kit lens is fine at f/8 (which is where I shoot a lot outdoors), the M28/2.8 is enough better and more fun for me (at all apertures) that I'll often choose it even though landscape is the situation where I'm most likely to consider a zoom instead of a prime. I do have to watch out for flare on sunny days, though. I tried a collapsible rubber hood, but the one I have does not appear sized well for this lens. I actually get better results just using my hand to shield the lens from the sun.
Considering that this lens usually sells for $50 or less, and is a more generally useful focal length on APS-C than 50mm, one could make a case for this as the best inexpensive introduction to the world of prime lenses.
Here's a shot at f/2.8 showing that sharpness is pretty good and DOF can actually be interestingly thin even for 28mm at f/2.8. Click on the picture below for a larger version:
|
|
|
|
|
Pentaxviking
New Member
Registered: February 2009
Location: Bodø
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Thu March 5, 2009
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $30.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp and nice to work whit
|
|
Cons:
|
Manual
|
|
Its sharp, its werry nice to use, its tough it gives werry good quality pictures.
Buy it if u can. Now i am using it whit my new K20D, and its excellent in every respect.
Use a hood and u get even better pictures from it.
Maybe a little soft sometimes thats all
|
|
|
|
|
InKeepingSecrets
New Member
Registered: February 2009
Location: Toowoomba, Australia
Posts: 22
|
|
Review Date: Mon March 30, 2009
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $50.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
great contrast, 42mm on dslr
|
|
Cons:
|
CA, softness
|
|
I bought my copy over the internet from a second hand camera store in Adelaide, which i noticed was one of the very few stores in Australia that keep a record of their second hand inventory on the net.
Anyway, back to the lens. First off i really like the fact that it converts to 42mm on my k20d which on occasion makes it more useful than smc 50mm 1.4 which converts to 75mm on the digital (IMHO a bit long for everyday photos). In saying that this lens has nothing on the depth of field and bokeh of the 50mm prime. From reviewing the photos i have taken with the 28mm i think the contrast and colours are actually better - it exceeded my expectations completely. I did notice however, in a few shots purple fringing on light coloured objects taken in bright sunlight.
Compared with the sigma 18-50 3.5-5.6 kit style lens that came with my k20d the 28mm prime is just leaps and bounds ahead in terms of contrast, sharpness and overall photo quality. If i had a choice of the 28mm or the sigma there is no way i would choose the sigma!!!
For the price i thinks this lens is a bargain and I would definitely recommend it.
|
|
|
|
|
titrisol
Pentaxian
Registered: December 2007
Location: ROTTERDAM/Quito and anywhere in between
Posts: 574
|
|
Review Date: Fri June 12, 2009
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $40.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
quality of build and image
|
|
Cons:
|
soft in corners wide open
|
|
Worth every penny
This is a great 28/2.8 lens, worth competitor for the Nikkor 28/2.8 AIS
|
|
|
|
|
Pentaxviking
New Member
Registered: February 2009
Location: Bodø
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Thu July 23, 2009
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $50.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp and easy to use
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
Werry sharp and nice to use. On my K20D its like a 42mm. Just get it, it is much lens for the money
|
|
|
|
|
nodretep
New Member
Registered: January 2009
Location: paris
Posts: 13
|
|
Review Date: Wed September 30, 2009
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): $10.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
its luminous for a widish angle
|
|
Cons:
|
none really except manual is a pain
|
|
I just picked this up 2nd hand for nothing and its worth several times more. What I liked over my wider angle zooms is that I can use it in low light due to the wider aperture. I recently shot some pictures on the metro and they were adequately lit and open.
|
|
|
|
|
GeneV
Site Supporter
Registered: October 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posts: 586
|
|
Review Date: Fri January 8, 2010
|
Would you recommend the lens? Yes |
How much did it cost? (U.S. Dollars): None indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, compact, well built
|
|
Cons:
|
No automatic metering for Digital
|
|
I'm rating this as a film lens, because I have never used it on a digital body. When I bought my LX in the 80s, I replaced this lens with a Kiron f/2 to get the auto aperture, and then it left with my former wife. I took more photos with this lens than any lens other than the 50mm/1.4. It is sharp, small, well buit and easy to use. I don't know what its quirks might be on a digital body, but it was a super performer in the days of manual film.
|
|
|
|
|
;)
;)
