Is the SMC Pentax-M 35mm worth US$100?

Banitess · 08-29-2010, 05:52 AM

I saw one recently go over US$100 on ebay and there aren't that many out there. Yet it doesn't seem to be an outstanding lens based on the reviews on this forum. So why is it so pricey?

paperbag846 · 08-29-2010, 10:18 AM

Be aware that lenses on ebay regularly go for twice what you should expect to pay for a lens.

Marc Sabatella · 08-29-2010, 11:10 AM

If it's the 35/2, the "usual" price (to the extent one can find the lens - it's become rarer of late it seems to me) is around $150 - a little more or less depending on condition. Not sure about the 35/2.8; I don't tend to keep my eye on that one as it doesn't interest me. The 35/2 might be considered all that special optically, but hey - it's a nice small and light 35/2 you can get for under $200.

**ChrisPlatt** · 08-29-2010, 11:30 AM

Beware, the SMC Pentax-M 35/2.8 lens is prone to a sticky/slow diaphragm.
The same is also true for the -A version.
Helical grease liquifies and tends to deposit on the aperture blades.
Lens will work fine again once cleaned, however problem will inevitably recur after several years.
I have owned several of these and every one has eventually required service for this problem.

Chris

dragonfly · 08-29-2010, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

Beware, the SMC Pentax-M 35/2.8 lens is prone to a sticky/slow diaphragm.
The same is also true for the -A version.
Helical grease liquifies and tends to deposit on the aperture blades.
Lens will work fine again once cleaned, however problem will inevitably recur after several years.
I have owned several of these and every one has eventually required service for this problem.

Chris

For this lens, especially?

**ChrisPlatt** · 08-29-2010, 12:07 PM

Originally posted by dragonfly

For this lens, especially?

Yes, this model tends to exhibit this problem far more frequently than others.

Chris

Banitess · 08-29-2010, 06:09 PM

After considering all your inputs I've come to the conclusion that "it's not".

Thanks all for your feedback informed opinion.

**ChrisPlatt** · 08-29-2010, 07:02 PM

Any of the Pentax 35/2.0 lenses (K, M, or A) would be a good choice.

Chris

Marc Sabatella · 08-30-2010, 10:40 AM

Yes, hopefully you realize that the people talking about the aperture blades are referring to the 35/2.8 version. I'd definitely agree it's not worth the money - if you really want an f/2.8 prime, there are much better choices (including 28mm, 30mm, and 40mm options). But if you're talking about the f/2 version, I'd say go for it if you're looking for a budget fast normal prime. While it might not be the sharpest lens ever produced, it's not like there are any better options in the price range.

8540tomg · 08-30-2010, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

Beware, the SMC Pentax-M 35/2.8 lens is prone to a sticky/slow diaphragm.
The same is also true for the -A version.
Helical grease liquifies and tends to deposit on the aperture blades.
Lens will work fine again once cleaned, however problem will inevitably recur after several years.
I have owned several of these and every one has eventually required service for this problem.

Chris

Interesting Chris.

I bought the SMC Pentax M 35/2 over 20 years ago and I've never had any issues with gummed up aperture blades. I believe Ben Edict noted the M 35/2 had similar issues but no problems with mine so far. Perhaps he was thinking of the M 35/2.8. I hope so.

In any case, as I wrote in my review on this lens, the M 35/2 is a fine lens.

"Of the dozen or so Pentax Lenses I own this one is the smoothest and easiest to focus for some reason. It must be a finer thread, tighter tolerances or something but it works wonderfully well. Manually focusing a digital lens is like grinding pepper by way of comparison. "

A little soft at f2 but great from then on. As Marc suggests if you have a need/desire for this focal length it is a good buy for $200 or so.

Tom G

Tom G

pdxbmw · 08-30-2010, 10:58 AM - **1 Like**

I found this lens with the sticky aperture problem. I paid $15 bucks due to said problem. A few minutes with good screwdrivers and all is well. The 5 screws on the back need to be unscrewed and then screwed back in, but not at tight. It seems as though the mounting plate can squeeze down on the aperture lever, causing a sticky aperture. I have not come across any really dogs in the K/M/A world, it is just that some as though there are some real winners in that group, which make the rest pale in comparison. I really like the 35mm for close in portraits, like at the same coffee table...

Patrick

8540tomg · 08-30-2010, 01:44 PM

Not sure what this proves, if anything, but I did a quick comparison of the M 35/2 with my DA* 16~50 today. I used some of my DVDs as a subject. Not terribly scientific but I made the comparison at f 2.8, ISO 400 at 1/30 of a sec. I used the meter reading from the DA* 16~50 AV setting to establish the shutter speed. I suppose I should have used the tripod but I was just exercising my curiosity. In any case I used the same K10D for both shots and handheld both. I shouldn’t be surprised, I guess, as the M 35/2 is noticeably sharper as it is stopped down one step and the zoom is wide open. For what it’s worth, this copy of the M 35/2 compares quite favourably with the much more expensive zoom although to be fair this zoom is a little soft at f 2.8.

SMC Pentax M 35/2

DA* 16~50/2.8

I focused manually with the zoom as well and found it much more difficult to focus than the prime. I set the zoom as close to 35mm as possible for the exercise. The M 35/2 fared quite well in this little test and I'll have to use it more often.

Tom G

whojammyflip · 09-01-2010, 07:46 AM

I think with the old lenses there is a differentiation between what they are worth and performance for money paid. Due to relative scarcity, the 35mm is expensive. I guess you are really asking whether its value for money, though. Without having seen its performance, I can't comment, but its lens diagram looks related to the 28mm f3.5, in particular the rear group looks identical and the front elements look like they have been reordered. The 28mm f3.5 has a better reputation than the 28mm f2.8, although I can't tell the difference yet.

I watched the M 35 f2.8 lens for a while in a search on Ebay (a pain, as many people list all lenses with 35mm in the title, due to the format so you end up with many results!). I reckoned the average price was less than GBP 50. In the end, I picked up a M 40mm instead, due to the aforementioned sticky aperture problem of the 35mm. Although the 40mm is significantly more pricey, it has a Unar/Tessar design with fewer elements, higher contrast and better sharpness (my opinion) than the 50's from f/4 through f/8. It does have quite a long MFD though.

One thing to bear in mind with wide angles and slower apertures is that on a DSLR without a split screen, its unlikely you will get the focus correct.

Recercare · 09-01-2010, 08:27 AM

Originally posted by Banitess

I saw one recently go over US$100 on ebay and there aren't that many out there. Yet it doesn't seem to be an outstanding lens based on the reviews on this forum. So why is it so pricey?

I think the M 35/2 is worth $100-150, depending on condition. I have only tested it briefly but it seems like a good lens. Unfortunately it does not get the attention it deserves because of other old gems such as K35/3.5, K35/2, K30/2.8 and K28/3.5. However, that does not mean that the M35/2 is mediocre....it's just that the other ones I mentioned are truly excellent.

Kind regards
.lars

civiletti · 09-01-2010, 12:01 PM

The IQ star among old Pentax 35mm lenses [if you do not need speed] is the K 35mm f3.5.

08-29-2010, 05:52 AM	#1
Banitess Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Hong Kong Photos: Gallery Posts: 43	Is the SMC Pentax-M 35mm worth US$100? I saw one recently go over US$100 on ebay and there aren't that many out there. Yet it doesn't seem to be an outstanding lens based on the reviews on this forum. So why is it so pricey?

08-29-2010, 11:10 AM	#3
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	If it's the 35/2, the "usual" price (to the extent one can find the lens - it's become rarer of late it seems to me) is around $150 - a little more or less depending on condition. Not sure about the 35/2.8; I don't tend to keep my eye on that one as it doesn't interest me. The 35/2 might be considered all that special optically, but hey - it's a nice small and light 35/2 you can get for under $200. Last edited by Marc Sabatella; 08-29-2010 at 01:47 PM.

08-30-2010, 10:58 AM - 1 Like	#11
pdxbmw Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 218	M 35/2.8 I found this lens with the sticky aperture problem. I paid $15 bucks due to said problem. A few minutes with good screwdrivers and all is well. The 5 screws on the back need to be unscrewed and then screwed back in, but not at tight. It seems as though the mounting plate can squeeze down on the aperture lever, causing a sticky aperture. I have not come across any really dogs in the K/M/A world, it is just that some as though there are some real winners in that group, which make the rest pale in comparison. I really like the 35mm for close in portraits, like at the same coffee table... Patrick

08-30-2010, 01:44 PM	#12
8540tomg Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Waterloo, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,461	Not sure what this proves, if anything, but I did a quick comparison of the M 35/2 with my DA* 16~50 today. I used some of my DVDs as a subject. Not terribly scientific but I made the comparison at f 2.8, ISO 400 at 1/30 of a sec. I used the meter reading from the DA* 16~50 AV setting to establish the shutter speed. I suppose I should have used the tripod but I was just exercising my curiosity. In any case I used the same K10D for both shots and handheld both. I shouldn’t be surprised, I guess, as the M 35/2 is noticeably sharper as it is stopped down one step and the zoom is wide open. For what it’s worth, this copy of the M 35/2 compares quite favourably with the much more expensive zoom although to be fair this zoom is a little soft at f 2.8. SMC Pentax M 35/2 DA* 16~50/2.8 I focused manually with the zoom as well and found it much more difficult to focus than the prime. I set the zoom as close to 35mm as possible for the exercise. The M 35/2 fared quite well in this little test and I'll have to use it more often. Tom G Last edited by 8540tomg; 08-30-2010 at 06:00 PM. Reason: typo

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wanted - Acquired: SMC Pentax FA 35mm f2 AL / Samsung D-Xenogon 35mm f2	bcmjr	Sold Items	1	04-28-2010 03:21 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax SMC K 35mm/2 35mm F2 Rare Collector's Item, w/ Metal Hood (Worldwide)	frank	Sold Items	16	04-07-2010 05:03 AM
35mm-105 pentax f3.5 M $100?	kiwao	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	02-26-2010 07:38 PM
Pentax smc f 100-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 worth $60?	shaolin95	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	09-07-2009 11:24 AM
Is the Pentax 540 worth 100 more than Sigma 530 Sup	Okami	Pentax DSLR Discussion	14	02-17-2008 01:52 AM

08-29-2010, 10:18 AM	#2
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Be aware that lenses on ebay regularly go for twice what you should expect to pay for a lens.

08-29-2010, 11:30 AM	#4
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,694	Beware, the SMC Pentax-M 35/2.8 lens is prone to a sticky/slow diaphragm. The same is also true for the -A version. Helical grease liquifies and tends to deposit on the aperture blades. Lens will work fine again once cleaned, however problem will inevitably recur after several years. I have owned several of these and every one has eventually required service for this problem. Chris

08-29-2010, 12:02 PM	#5
dragonfly Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: on the wall Photos: Gallery Posts: 715	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt Beware, the SMC Pentax-M 35/2.8 lens is prone to a sticky/slow diaphragm. The same is also true for the -A version. Helical grease liquifies and tends to deposit on the aperture blades. Lens will work fine again once cleaned, however problem will inevitably recur after several years. I have owned several of these and every one has eventually required service for this problem. Chris For this lens, especially?

08-29-2010, 12:07 PM	#6
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,694	Originally posted by dragonfly For this lens, especially? Yes, this model tends to exhibit this problem far more frequently than others. Chris

08-29-2010, 06:09 PM	#7
Banitess Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Hong Kong Photos: Gallery Posts: 43 Original Poster	After considering all your inputs I've come to the conclusion that "it's not". Thanks all for your feedback informed opinion.

08-29-2010, 07:02 PM	#8
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,694	Any of the Pentax 35/2.0 lenses (K, M, or A) would be a good choice. Chris

08-30-2010, 10:40 AM	#9
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Yes, hopefully you realize that the people talking about the aperture blades are referring to the 35/2.8 version. I'd definitely agree it's not worth the money - if you really want an f/2.8 prime, there are much better choices (including 28mm, 30mm, and 40mm options). But if you're talking about the f/2 version, I'd say go for it if you're looking for a budget fast normal prime. While it might not be the sharpest lens ever produced, it's not like there are any better options in the price range.

08-30-2010, 10:53 AM	#10
8540tomg Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Waterloo, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,461	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt Beware, the SMC Pentax-M 35/2.8 lens is prone to a sticky/slow diaphragm. The same is also true for the -A version. Helical grease liquifies and tends to deposit on the aperture blades. Lens will work fine again once cleaned, however problem will inevitably recur after several years. I have owned several of these and every one has eventually required service for this problem. Chris Interesting Chris. I bought the SMC Pentax M 35/2 over 20 years ago and I've never had any issues with gummed up aperture blades. I believe Ben Edict noted the M 35/2 had similar issues but no problems with mine so far. Perhaps he was thinking of the M 35/2.8. I hope so. In any case, as I wrote in my review on this lens, the M 35/2 is a fine lens. "Of the dozen or so Pentax Lenses I own this one is the smoothest and easiest to focus for some reason. It must be a finer thread, tighter tolerances or something but it works wonderfully well. Manually focusing a digital lens is like grinding pepper by way of comparison. " A little soft at f2 but great from then on. As Marc suggests if you have a need/desire for this focal length it is a good buy for $200 or so. Tom G Tom G

09-01-2010, 07:46 AM	#13
whojammyflip Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 417	I think with the old lenses there is a differentiation between what they are worth and performance for money paid. Due to relative scarcity, the 35mm is expensive. I guess you are really asking whether its value for money, though. Without having seen its performance, I can't comment, but its lens diagram looks related to the 28mm f3.5, in particular the rear group looks identical and the front elements look like they have been reordered. The 28mm f3.5 has a better reputation than the 28mm f2.8, although I can't tell the difference yet. I watched the M 35 f2.8 lens for a while in a search on Ebay (a pain, as many people list all lenses with 35mm in the title, due to the format so you end up with many results!). I reckoned the average price was less than GBP 50. In the end, I picked up a M 40mm instead, due to the aforementioned sticky aperture problem of the 35mm. Although the 40mm is significantly more pricey, it has a Unar/Tessar design with fewer elements, higher contrast and better sharpness (my opinion) than the 50's from f/4 through f/8. It does have quite a long MFD though. One thing to bear in mind with wide angles and slower apertures is that on a DSLR without a split screen, its unlikely you will get the focus correct.

09-01-2010, 08:27 AM	#14
Recercare Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Sweden Posts: 359	Originally posted by Banitess I saw one recently go over US$100 on ebay and there aren't that many out there. Yet it doesn't seem to be an outstanding lens based on the reviews on this forum. So why is it so pricey? I think the M 35/2 is worth $100-150, depending on condition. I have only tested it briefly but it seems like a good lens. Unfortunately it does not get the attention it deserves because of other old gems such as K35/3.5, K35/2, K30/2.8 and K28/3.5. However, that does not mean that the M35/2 is mediocre....it's just that the other ones I mentioned are truly excellent. Kind regards .lars

09-01-2010, 12:01 PM	#15
civiletti Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Oregon Photos: Albums Posts: 1,435	The IQ star among old Pentax 35mm lenses [if you do not need speed] is the K 35mm f3.5.