[GeneV]

But this thread's not really a AF vs. MF debate - I would say that its more of the joy of using old MF lenses, which i have long found a great joy that you can't get from modern lenses. There's just something abt using an MF lens with a buttery smooth focusing ring, watching the image sharpen in the viewfinder, and clicking one the focus is nailed. Pure joy. That's one thing I often find neglected - when ppl praise lenses they usually talk abt the IQ, but the ergonomics of the lens is very impt to me for getting great shots. Other than the ease of use, in a way I guess it adds to the 'wow factor' of the lens - when you feel good abt it, you take better pictures!

Well, when was the last Pentax MF lens made? There aren't very many "new" MF lenses. That buttery feel and much of the other joy of using the older lenses comes from the fact that they are MF.

[jolepp]

Hi another question for you knowledgeable folk, how difficult is it using the old lenses K stuff on the K5 or K7, what are the problems doing so? is the focus difficult to achieve? and do you have to set up the camera in some way to make it work, I only ask as I would like to buy a couple of smc lenses one the 50mm 1.7 and the other the 28mm 2.8

regards


Martin

It is not difficult at all IMO, see: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-lens-articles/110657-how-use-manua...7-k-x-etc.html

[robbiec]

Well, when was the last Pentax MF lens made? There aren't very many "new" MF lenses. That buttery feel and much of the other joy of using the older lenses comes from the fact that they are MF.

Probably in the last year or so
Its an A and it is seriously fast.

[stevebrot]

I own one "digital" lens, the 18-55 kit that came with the camera. It does a good job and I am a consistent fan of its value and capabilities.

My other lenses are designed for use with 35mm film and share time between my five K-mount film bodies and the K10D. A couple of those are computer designed and a couple are fairly crudely made from early 20th century designs in Russian factories. All are credible performers.

I am not super active in PPG, but of my 12 accepted images, 4 were with computer designed Pentax glass (FA 35/2 and FA 77/1.7 Limited), 7 were taken with Russian glass, and the last with a screw-mount Vivitar from the early 1970s.

So, the short answer is that the proof of the pudding is in the tasting. If a lens works for you, it is worth owning. I like several of the current Pentax offerings and may yet buy a DA 15, but if I do it will be because I was impressed with its build and its performance the one time I squeezed off a few shots with my camera and not because it was computer designed or "digital".


Steve

[stevebrot]

Pentax MF lens made?

Pentax brand or K-mount? Both Zeiss and Voigtlander made high quality manual focus K-mount lenses until just a month or so ago. Did I hear someone whisper Samyang? And of course, the Russian KMZ factory is still churning out K-mount and M42 Zenitars...


Steve


(Seldom uses AF even with his AF lenses...)

[abacus07]

I like several of the current Pentax offerings and may yet buy a DA 15, but if I do it will be because I was impressed with its build and its performance the one time I squeezed off a few shots with my camera and not because it was computer designed or "digital".
Steve

Are you impressed with the DA 15mm because of its build and performance? Or are you impressed with it because there isn't a comparable MF prime (performance wise) available at a fraction of the cost?

I am very impressed with the DA 15mm but the reason that it WILL be my first AF lens (other than the kit) is that it does something that my other lenses don't. And I love wide angles. But if money was no concern I would probably have several other AF lenses

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

I'm seriously thinking of selling my digital lens if my non-digital K mount set works out. It's a good lens but I'm just not bonding with the Tamron 28-200MM I have. I think I'll prefer the older non-digital lenses actually.

What exactly do you call "digital lens"? And it's strange that you are forming a general opinion based on a single experience with a consumer zoom. Are you aware that there are AF lenses with metal bodies, such as the FA77 and DA70? If you want MF, you can probably avoid the DA series, because they have short focusing throw, but the FAs can still be focused manually very well. Also, while the old MF lenses often have great build, they can also be disappointing on digital bodies - especially zooms - too much chromatic aberration wide open. Finally, modern MF lenses for digital cameras are produced by Samyang and Cosina (Cosina has stopped production for Pentax, but you can still find stock in stores).

[freewheeler]

For me there are only two issues in using old film lenses.
When you need to work fast at least an A version for multi pattern metering is needed,
at least, I do. My widest lens was a 24mm Sigma that I replaced with a DA16-45.
The DA16-45 is my only digital lens. Because it proved to be better than the Sigma and the FA28/2.8 I sold the Sigma and FA28. If I had an AF-correction on my body I might vallue AF lenses a bit higher, but also in the film days I focussed mostly manually.

[GeneV]

Pentax brand or K-mount? Both Zeiss and Voigtlander made high quality manual focus K-mount lenses until just a month or so ago. Did I hear someone whisper Samyang? And of course, the Russian KMZ factory is still churning out K-mount and M42 Zenitars...


Steve


(Seldom uses AF even with his AF lenses...)

If you want a Pentax brand lens designed primarily for manual focus, you want an older lens (expensive semi-custom work aside) . My next sentence was "there are not many...." not that there are none being made. Zeiss, Voigtlander, et all are a small part of the PKA market or they would probably still make lenses in the mount. Russian M42 lenses aren't Amazon.com top sellers, either. But this seems a bit nitpicky and beside the point.

My point was that most of the manual focus lenses circulating out there are older and much of what people like about "older" lenses has more to do with their being designed for manual focus than with their not being "digital." I think a lot of people would take similar pleasure in a new Zeiss or VL or other quality lens with the focus throw and damping designed for manual focus if they could be sold at a price in reach. I know I would.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

I think a lot of people would take similar pleasure in a new Zeiss or VL or other quality lens with the focus throw and damping designed for manual focus if they could be sold at a price in reach.

So far, it looks like only Samyang addresses that need (although the Voigtlanders weren't terribly expensive either).

I thought often about how nice it would be if the budget line of lenses, instead of being formed of cheaper and slower optical designs, it would consist or cheaper manual focus lenses. Dreaming, I know. MF users < prime lens users < zoom lens users, so we're not representing a segment worth investing in.

[Ira]

For me there are only two issues in using old film lenses.
When you need to work fast at least an A version for multi pattern metering is needed,
at least, I do. My widest lens was a 24mm Sigma that I replaced with a DA16-45.
The DA16-45 is my only digital lens. Because it proved to be better than the Sigma and the FA28/2.8 I sold the Sigma and FA28. If I had an AF-correction on my body I might vallue AF lenses a bit higher, but also in the film days I focussed mostly manually.

I don't understand this:

When I use my old manual Taks...which is all I use...multi-pattern mattering is still available to me, although I always use centerweighted in M mode anyway.

So is what you say not true about multi not working on manual lenses, or am I not getting true multi even though it says I am?

I just don't know because in M mode and with manually bracketing my shots, it's never been an issue. But I would like know.

[jolepp]

I don't understand this:
When I use my old manual Taks...which is all I use...multi-pattern mattering is still available to me, ...

Multi-segment metering is supposed to be available only with A lenses and later (with the aperture ring in the A-position). It seems to work this way on my k-x: with an A28 & aperture ring @A I can select and use it, powering off, setting aperture to position other than A and powering on I just have spot and CW available. Have you maybe shorted some mount pins for CIF?

[Canada_Rockies]

For me there are only two issues in using old film lenses.
When you need to work fast at least an A version for multi pattern metering is needed,
at least, I do. My widest lens was a 24mm Sigma that I replaced with a DA16-45.
The DA16-45 is my only digital lens. Because it proved to be better than the Sigma and the FA28/2.8 I sold the Sigma and FA28. If I had an AF-correction on my body I might vallue AF lenses a bit higher, but also in the film days I focussed mostly manually.

I find that the "green button" centre weighted metering works fine with my two M lenses. Set the aperture and ISO, then [Click Green Button], [Click Shutter Release]. One extra button push is all it takes, and is only half and inch away from the shutter release on my K10d.

[freewheeler]

In most situations the green button centre weight metering is no problem to me.
But when I take pictures of people and the right moment is only there one split second
I prefer the multi pattern metering wich is only available with A lenses.

[paperbag846]

In most situations the green button centre weight metering is no problem to me.
But when I take pictures of people and the right moment is only there one split second
I prefer the multi pattern metering wich is only available with A lenses.

I actually fine center weighted more reliable when I don't have time to think. he multi-segment ten's to get more confused with bright backgrounds, while the center-weighted tends to expose whatever I interested in quite well.