Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-28-2010, 12:59 AM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
K135mm/2.5 good price?

I came across a seller trying to get rid of his K135/2.5 with hood and case, in very good condition (seen pics). Asking price is £135. I'm not a long(ish) shooter but this legendary piece of optic is tempting... is that a good price?

09-28-2010, 01:39 AM   #2
Site Supporter
knyghtfall's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 348
the prices in the market place are abt US$250-ish, so I would say that this is a good price.

If you're asking whether its a good price for you taking into account your shooting preferences... the answer is a qualified yes. I have a piece, and its a great piece in my collection. I like shooting at 135mm (both on film and digital). If I did not already have it, I would jump at the one you found. I don't think you would be disappointed.
09-28-2010, 02:31 AM   #3
Veteran Member
blende8's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bremen, Germany
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,484
For Europe the price is a little high, normally they go for 100-120 Euro.
But if the condition is excellent, why not.
It is a great lens!
09-28-2010, 03:19 AM   #4
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
Original Poster
thanks guys, but I decided to pass on it...
Partially because I promised to "finance minister" that for the time being I'm done with LBA, partially because I rarely shoot long (even 77 doesn't get used too often these days) and partially because I know one day I'd love to swap it for A*135/1.8 so I'll just wait until one of those comes up

09-28-2010, 05:42 AM   #5
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,399
was it an SMC-Pentax or a Takumar Bayonet?

I thought I wopuld pose this question, because K mount lenses actually did not have any designation, they were simply labelled SMC-Pentax.

Later mounts or series had lables like SMC-M, or SMC-F etc.

There were both Takumar Bayonet and SMC Pentax 135mmF2.5 lenses, the SMC Pentax being far the superior. Actually one of the best 135's ever. I paid $125 3 years ago for my SMC Pentax 135F2.5 which at the time seemed like a lot but in hindsight was a real bargon considering the prices today.

As for being a longish shooter, this lens is an ourdoor portrait lens, and does a great job of it.
09-28-2010, 05:58 AM   #6
Site Supporter
gofour3's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 5,299
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
I thought I wopuld pose this question, because K mount lenses actually did not have any designation, they were simply labelled SMC-Pentax.

Later mounts or series had lables like SMC-M, or SMC-F etc.

There were both Takumar Bayonet and SMC Pentax 135mmF2.5 lenses, the SMC Pentax being far the superior. Actually one of the best 135's ever. I paid $125 3 years ago for my SMC Pentax 135F2.5 which at the time seemed like a lot but in hindsight was a real bargon considering the prices today.

As for being a longish shooter, this lens is an ourdoor portrait lens, and does a great job of it.
Yeah you even see some eBay sellers trying to pass off the Takumar Bayonet as the K135/2.5.

Yes the K135/2.5 is worth £135 if it's in good shape.

You also get more bang for your buck with the K135/2.5, the A135/1.8 may be a better lens but it’s not a better buy because of the huge difference in price.

Phil.
09-28-2010, 06:01 AM   #7
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,777
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
I thought I wopuld pose this question, because K mount lenses actually did not have any designation, they were simply labelled SMC-Pentax.

Later mounts or series had lables like SMC-M, or SMC-F etc.

There were both Takumar Bayonet and SMC Pentax 135mmF2.5 lenses, the SMC Pentax being far the superior. Actually one of the best 135's ever. I paid $125 3 years ago for my SMC Pentax 135F2.5 which at the time seemed like a lot but in hindsight was a real bargon considering the prices today.

As for being a longish shooter, this lens is an ourdoor portrait lens, and does a great job of it.
That is a very good question that must be asked every time someone starts a thread on this FL. The non-SMC K135/2.5 is very cheap, and not as well regarded.

I really like the SMC version, as its FOV for digital is about equal to the longest lens I used regularly on film, and being able to use a lens this fast and sharp with that FOV is a real treat for an old film shooter who could never afford exotic glass. It's still darn nice on film, too.
09-28-2010, 08:10 AM   #8
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,399
QuoteOriginally posted by gofour3 Quote
the A135/1.8 may be a better lens but itís not a better buy because of the huge difference in price.

Phil.
not to mention weight, where people already complain the 135F2.5 is too heavy, compared to the M135F3.5

09-28-2010, 09:38 AM   #9
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
Original Poster
Lowell....
thanks but I know my stuff. It was the so called "K" series, officially labeled SMC Pentax 1:2.5/135 with 58mm thread. I wouldn't think of buying Takumar bayonet 135/2.5 for any price, period....
09-28-2010, 09:42 AM   #10
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,399
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
Lowell....
thanks but I know my stuff. It was the so called "K" series, officially labeled SMC Pentax 1:2.5/135 with 58mm thread. I wouldn't think of buying Takumar bayonet 135/2.5 for any price, period....
No insult intended, but you see so many Kmount 135F2.5's advertised if I don't see it spelled out, I ask.

Don't say you wouldn't buy the tak bayonet, however, I am sure although it is no where near as good, if you found it for 20 quid in a store, you'd be tempted
09-28-2010, 09:54 AM   #11
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
Original Poster
There is one from reliable source available as we speak for £35. No thanks, I have learned my lesson with cheap glass
09-28-2010, 09:56 AM   #12
Pentaxian
cardinal43's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,369
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
I wouldn't think of buying Takumar bayonet 135/2.5 for any price, period....
Is it really that bad? I bought one off ebay last year for $12.00, and it is in pretty decent shape. However, I have never shot with it (don't know why), but figured for the price, it couldn't be all that bad. Why do you consider it to be bad? Just curious.
09-28-2010, 09:59 AM   #13
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,399
QuoteOriginally posted by cardinal43 Quote
Is it really that bad? I bought one off ebay last year for $12.00, and it is in pretty decent shape. However, I have never shot with it (don't know why), but figured for the price, it couldn't be all that bad. Why do you consider it to be bad? Just curious.
The lens design is somewhat different, I believe 5 element as opposed to 6 of the SMC-Pentax (aka K135) in addition, the takumar bayonet were a low cost pentax offering that lacked the multicoatings of the SMC lenses.

I believe it is more prone to flair, lower contrast and subject to more CA than the SMC pentax lenses
09-28-2010, 10:16 AM   #14
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,485
QuoteOriginally posted by cardinal43 Quote
Is it really that bad? I bought one off ebay last year for $12.00, and it is in pretty decent shape. However, I have never shot with it (don't know why), but figured for the price, it couldn't be all that bad. Why do you consider it to be bad? Just curious.
Put it on your camera and go take some pictures with it. For $12 it may have been a bargain. Yes, better lenses can be had. There are also 2 versions of this lens. An f2.5 and an f2.8. Don't really know the difference, they rate about the same in the lens review database.

09-28-2010, 12:26 PM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 359
Yes

The K135/2.5 is worth more than £135.
Personally I would pay up to $275 USD for a copy in Ex/Ex+ condition.

Kind regards
.lars
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, pentax lens, price, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Price too good to be true?? happygodavid Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 5 09-13-2009 11:25 AM
Is it a good price to pay for the K10D?? alexeyga Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 01-08-2009 05:32 PM
Is this a good price? Raybo Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 12-20-2008 08:42 PM
Good price for ZX-L and 28-80? FastPhotography Pentax Film SLR Discussion 0 05-22-2008 11:19 PM
What is a good price for a Spotmatic SP II? germar Pentax Film SLR Discussion 4 05-15-2008 02:03 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:53 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top