[simbon4o]

I'm wondering about:
M 28mm 3.5
M 28mm 2.8 I
S-M-C Takumar 28 3.5
or I should look for something else.
The purpose for the lens will be macro shots and sharp wide angle shots on digital body, maybe on film too .
Did somebody tried them all?

[Zav]

28 f2 probably.

[simbon4o]

Well that's for sure but which one from those in the first post?

[Davidw0815]

I have the M28 2.8 and the F28. To me the F28 seems to be a lot sharper than the M28. Really love the F28, but the M for some reason doesn't really work for me. I think 28 mm is a great 'normal' FL but definitly no wide angle lens on APS-C. Even 24 mm is only a moderate wide angle on APS-C. Just compare the FOV on APS-C and on film.
What do you mean by macro? Do you plan on reversing the lens?

[simbon4o]

Do you plan on reversing the lens?

exactly!

[DaveHolmes]

I had an M28mm-2.8 and the FA28 it just as sharp if not sharper and much more usable

[gofour3]

I have the K28/3.5 and the K28/2. The 3.5 is better for reversing and the 2.0 is better for close distance shooting where the floating lens elements come into play. For landscapes they are equal.

Phil.

[gofour3]

I forgot I also have the K30/2.8, it fits in between the 28s for all types of shooting.

Phil.

[civiletti]

The lenses mentioned by gofour3 are superior to the lenses listed by the OP.

[Bob from Aus]

I have the M28 2.8 and compared with my ltds and even wide angle zooms, I don't like it on my digital camera. Maybe it's my copy but it's my least used lens. I am hoping Pentax will bring out a new 28. Looking at this thread, maybe I should give it another chance.

[DaveHolmes]

I am hoping Pentax will bring out a new 28

There are many that believe a 24mm more likely... I don't have any Ltd's (yet) but the FA28 is my most used lens on the K-x at the moment...

[RioRico]

If you only plan to use the 28 reversed for macro work, go cheap. Most reversed lenses (all but the cruddiest) give edge-to-edge flatfield sharpness. A reversed lens need not even be Pentax-compatible, as long as it's manual and has a working aperture ring. That means no Canon FDs; and Olympus OMs are a pain unless the stop-down button is jammed shut; but any Minolta MD or Konica AR or Nikon or Leitz or whatever should do just fine.

[dms]

I don't understand how the 28mm really fits into macro--unless reversed--in which case the normal (forward performance is not a gopd measure).

If the interest is as a general walk around/street lens (for which using a takumar and zone focusing is amazing) and scenery, but not very low light levels--then for me a smc takumar 28mm f3.5 is the best bargain--and for me likely the best independent of price. It is an excellent lens--good color, good resolution, low distortion, nice handling, etc.

I have limited experience specifically with other 28's but suspect I would want the 28mm f2 (K)--who wouldn't--but the cost is more than 10x's higher if you can find one, and would not work as well given the scenario I identified above. For low light levels--well that's another story.

[jimr-pdx]

You can get a 'something else' like my Rikenon-P 28/2.8 fairly cheaply, which often makes such lenses a good answer. I've not reversed it, but I like how it works the other way!

Another bonus - no worrying about the Ricoh pin

[dms]

To answer your direct question--of the lenses you asked about the m 28mm f2.8 is likely the highest measured resolution, the smc takumar 28mm f 3.5 is a close second (as I believe this lens is identical to the K 3.5) , and the M28 f3.5 third--based on one set of traditional resolution tests I have seen.

But overall the tester of the lenses (elsewhere) identified the 28mm f3.5 (K) and the K 28mm f2 as the best of the 28's.

I suggest you look at Stan's Pentax Photography for more about the various pentax 28's.