What lenses were you dissatisfied with?

slackercruster · 04-08-2012, 05:52 PM

Pentax or 3rd party?

**jeffshaddix** · 04-08-2012, 06:11 PM

The FA43 oddly enough...to each their own for sure. Of course now I'm thinking about the FA77.

jimr-pdx · 04-08-2012, 06:14 PM

I had good copies of several lenses when I picked up a bad copy of the DA18-135. It never stood a chance, though I was certain it would be my go-to lens. I gave up several lenses to afford it, and it was not nearly worth the trade. Other copies clearly do better work now, but one did not.

**LaurenOE** · 04-08-2012, 06:15 PM

Zenitar 16. I think I have a good one, but it never lived up to the hype. I'll keep it as a momento.

stevebrot · 04-08-2012, 06:25 PM

Me dissatisfied? Never! I keep them all!

Seriously though...I don't know that I have ever not kept a lens that I had purchased with intent and which was not defective or damaged. I did "turn" a Tamron 28-70/3.5-4.5 (44A) that came with my Ricoh XR7. I was not pleased with its performance or build and traded it as partial payment for a CLA on the same camera.

Beyond that, I have taken delivery of several lenses that were either badly damaged or had fungus. In each case, the seller refunded or replaced. A short list includes:

Asahi S-M-C Takumar 50/1.4 (fungus)
Asahi Super-Takumar 55/1.8 (fungus and falling apart)
Tokina zoom (cannot remember details on this lens)
Jupiter-8 50/2 (Contax/Kiev mount) bad iris diaphragm
Vivitar 28/2.5 (Kiron) (damaged by seller...botched service)
KMZ MC Zenitar 16/2.8 Fisheye (badly defective mechanicals new from the factory)

Oh, I almost forgot the one lens that came new with my original Ricoh Singlex TLS purchased back in 1970 (my first SLR camera). It was a Rexatar 50/1.8 (bait and switch instead of the Rikenon I thought I ordered, courtesy of Bass Camera in Chicago) that never really performed very well.

Steve

normhead · 04-08-2012, 06:27 PM

Was that Pat Zenitar (hit me with your best shot?) (OK that was lame, I admit it)
The only lenses I want to get rid of are the 18-55 kit lenses, because I have 3 of them. We're keeping the white one that came with the white K-x. The other two I'd like to trade in on an 18-55 WR.

stevebrot · 04-08-2012, 06:28 PM

Originally posted by LaurenOE

Zenitar 16. I think I have a good one, but it never lived up to the hype. I'll keep it as a momento.

Too bad. I really like my Zen on both film and APS-C digital, though I found that it benefits from attention to focus (think split image focus screen) if you really want good results.

Steve

Julie · 04-08-2012, 06:30 PM

A cheap MC 70-210 Zoom- terrible purple fringe and a Kuminor 500 f/8. I didn't expect great results from them.

stevebrot · 04-08-2012, 06:30 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Was that Pat Zenitar (hit me with your best shot?)

No, it was MC Zenitar, the rapper...

Steve

(...can things get any worse?)

stevebrot · 04-08-2012, 06:33 PM

Originally posted by Julie

A cheap MC 70-210 Zoom- terrible purple fringe and a Kuminor 500 f/8. I didn't expect great results from them.

Come to think about it, there may well have been a no-name zoom in the mix at one point too with performance similar to the above. I think it was traded in exchange for service on a body...

Steve

v5planet · 04-08-2012, 06:56 PM

Originally posted by jeffshaddix

The FA43 oddly enough...to each their own for sure. Of course now I'm thinking about the FA77.

Another count for the 43. The 77, on the other hand, is a completely different story (for me, anyway).

littledrawe · 04-08-2012, 07:00 PM - **1 Like**

Tamron 10-24mm. I was really excited about this one but after testing it the sharpness on the edges was not good and it didn't match up, in that, one side was getting sharper before the other side as I moved through the apertures. I really despise the whole process of trying out several copies of a lens to get a "good one" it wouldn't be bad if I could buy them locally and return them to the shop but mailing them and waiting for another to be shipped is annoying.
I want a sigma 10-20mm but I don't want to go through the hassle.

lytrytyr · 04-08-2012, 07:14 PM

The DA-L 18-55/3.5-5.6 that came with my K-x
(and made it cheaper than the body alone, so perhaps I shouldn't complain).
However good the K-x is at higher ISO's,
I don't always want to have to shoot at f/8,
and then do all that PP afterwards.

Anvh · 04-08-2012, 07:21 PM

DA 18-250 simply didn't like to use it.

causey · 04-08-2012, 07:35 PM

Super-Takumar 28mm 3.5 (hard to focus), DA 18-55mm WR (but two copies of the DA 18-55mm AL II were fine), Sigma 10-20mm (border softness), DA 50-200mm (generally soft), Pentax 28mm f3.5 (maybe a bad copy--should I try another one?), Pentax F 35-135mm (not as sharp as the reviews made me believe), Tamron 17-50mm (two copies with BF on my K-x).

04-08-2012, 05:52 PM	#1
slackercruster Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: NE, USA Posts: 1,302	What lenses were you dissatisfied with? Pentax or 3rd party?

04-08-2012, 06:25 PM	#5
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Me dissatisfied? Never! I keep them all! Seriously though...I don't know that I have ever not kept a lens that I had purchased with intent and which was not defective or damaged. I did "turn" a Tamron 28-70/3.5-4.5 (44A) that came with my Ricoh XR7. I was not pleased with its performance or build and traded it as partial payment for a CLA on the same camera. Beyond that, I have taken delivery of several lenses that were either badly damaged or had fungus. In each case, the seller refunded or replaced. A short list includes: Asahi S-M-C Takumar 50/1.4 (fungus) Asahi Super-Takumar 55/1.8 (fungus and falling apart) Tokina zoom (cannot remember details on this lens) Jupiter-8 50/2 (Contax/Kiev mount) bad iris diaphragm Vivitar 28/2.5 (Kiron) (damaged by seller...botched service) KMZ MC Zenitar 16/2.8 Fisheye (badly defective mechanicals new from the factory) Oh, I almost forgot the one lens that came new with my original Ricoh Singlex TLS purchased back in 1970 (my first SLR camera). It was a Rexatar 50/1.8 (bait and switch instead of the Rikenon I thought I ordered, courtesy of Bass Camera in Chicago) that never really performed very well. Steve

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Do m42 lenses measure up to todays lenses?	Vantage-Point	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	25	05-14-2011 07:51 AM
Huge test on the influence of fungus in lenses (on 9 lenses)	CarbonR	Photographic Technique	18	03-14-2011 10:34 PM
For Sale - Sold: (3) Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm lenses + 3 Pentax lenses	JP_Seattle	Sold Items	13	04-23-2010 03:10 PM
For Sale - Sold: Yard sale: M lenses, K 300mm, DA 14mm, ME film body, Nikkor lenses and more	Nachodog	Sold Items	24	12-26-2009 12:03 AM

04-08-2012, 06:11 PM	#2
jeffshaddix Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Colorado Posts: 1,473	The FA43 oddly enough...to each their own for sure. Of course now I'm thinking about the FA77.

04-08-2012, 06:14 PM	#3
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	I had good copies of several lenses when I picked up a bad copy of the DA18-135. It never stood a chance, though I was certain it would be my go-to lens. I gave up several lenses to afford it, and it was not nearly worth the trade. Other copies clearly do better work now, but one did not.

04-08-2012, 06:15 PM	#4
LaurenOE Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Back in Florida, but worldwide gigs! Photos: Albums Posts: 3,690	Zenitar 16. I think I have a good one, but it never lived up to the hype. I'll keep it as a momento.

04-08-2012, 06:27 PM	#6
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Was that Pat Zenitar (hit me with your best shot?) (OK that was lame, I admit it) The only lenses I want to get rid of are the 18-55 kit lenses, because I have 3 of them. We're keeping the white one that came with the white K-x. The other two I'd like to trade in on an 18-55 WR.

04-08-2012, 06:28 PM	#7
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by LaurenOE Zenitar 16. I think I have a good one, but it never lived up to the hype. I'll keep it as a momento. Too bad. I really like my Zen on both film and APS-C digital, though I found that it benefits from attention to focus (think split image focus screen) if you really want good results. Steve

04-08-2012, 06:30 PM	#8
Julie Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Illinois Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,069	A cheap MC 70-210 Zoom- terrible purple fringe and a Kuminor 500 f/8. I didn't expect great results from them.

04-08-2012, 06:30 PM	#9
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by normhead Was that Pat Zenitar (hit me with your best shot?) No, it was MC Zenitar, the rapper... Steve (...can things get any worse?)

04-08-2012, 06:33 PM	#10
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by Julie A cheap MC 70-210 Zoom- terrible purple fringe and a Kuminor 500 f/8. I didn't expect great results from them. Come to think about it, there may well have been a no-name zoom in the mix at one point too with performance similar to the above. I think it was traded in exchange for service on a body... Steve

04-08-2012, 06:56 PM	#11
v5planet Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Seattle Photos: Albums Posts: 1,915	Originally posted by jeffshaddix The FA43 oddly enough...to each their own for sure. Of course now I'm thinking about the FA77. Another count for the 43. The 77, on the other hand, is a completely different story (for me, anyway).

04-08-2012, 07:00 PM - 1 Like	#12
littledrawe Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Red Rock Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,514	Tamron 10-24mm. I was really excited about this one but after testing it the sharpness on the edges was not good and it didn't match up, in that, one side was getting sharper before the other side as I moved through the apertures. I really despise the whole process of trying out several copies of a lens to get a "good one" it wouldn't be bad if I could buy them locally and return them to the shop but mailing them and waiting for another to be shipped is annoying. I want a sigma 10-20mm but I don't want to go through the hassle.

04-08-2012, 07:14 PM	#13
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	The DA-L 18-55/3.5-5.6 that came with my K-x (and made it cheaper than the body alone, so perhaps I shouldn't complain). However good the K-x is at higher ISO's, I don't always want to have to shoot at f/8, and then do all that PP afterwards.

04-08-2012, 07:21 PM	#14
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	DA 18-250 simply didn't like to use it.

04-08-2012, 07:35 PM	#15
causey Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Arlington, VA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,757	Super-Takumar 28mm 3.5 (hard to focus), DA 18-55mm WR (but two copies of the DA 18-55mm AL II were fine), Sigma 10-20mm (border softness), DA 50-200mm (generally soft), Pentax 28mm f3.5 (maybe a bad copy--should I try another one?), Pentax F 35-135mm (not as sharp as the reviews made me believe), Tamron 17-50mm (two copies with BF on my K-x).