[crewl1]

Now that I have a Pentax Q along with a K-Q adapter I have been trying out different lenses, finding that for decent results primes are absolutely a requirement.

I've never really had a need for a prime in this range before as I have a couple of nice zooms, but now would like to get a lens that when put on the Q will get me in the range of effective 750-1100mm

I do have a DFA100 and a DA*300 so would like something in between.

The DA*200 is an option but thinking that it probably won't get used other than on the adapter, I'd like to look into the possibility of an older manual lens if there are any that fit the bill to save some cash.

So if you have used anything in the 135-200mm range, K mount or m42 that is sharp and does not exhibit purple fringing wide open I would like to know about it.

Much appreciated.

BTW, for those of you who have not been converted into Q believers yet, here is an example with the Q and DA*300 for an effective 1650mm setup. No cropping required.

[Ex Finn.]

That is pretty sweet. Have you considered the DA*60-250, not a prime but more convenient.

[Just1MoreDave]

Fringing might eliminate the K135/2.5. I would ask John about the 165mm f2.8 for 6x7 in this post:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/199866-sale-j...-m42-more.html

I think I wouldn't mind a bit of adapting and maybe fringing for a fairly inexpensive 165/2.8.

[pinholecam]

Unfortunately the k135, F and FA135 will not make it.
Very bad CA that is amplified under the high pixel density of the Q.
I've already tried.


I suspect old lenses, many of them will either suffer CA or lack the resolution by f4.5.
Remember that diffraction starts after f4.5 on the Q, so going f5.6 will not be the best option if given a choice.
Personally, I have found f5.6 to be still OK, f8 'liveable' and f16 a confirmed no no.

Best success have been with FA200 and FA80-200.
DA lenses may be even better with better CA resistance.....

[pacerr]

It would be interesting to see the Tamron/Adaptall-2 SP 180/2.5 (63B) used in that application.

Tamron SP Adaptall-2 180mm F/2.5 LD-IF Model 63B

Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 180mm f/2.5 IF (63B) Lens Reviews - Tamron Adaptall Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

H2

[crewl1]

Thanks for the feedback on the 135's everyone and for that real world experience pinholecam.

Ex finn I thought I had some pretty good zooms in a 70-200 sigma hsm II and a Tamron 28-75 2.8 but they didn't work that great with the Q.
I may need to get another meet up going so I can try out some other folks zooms

Pacer thanks for the tips on the adaptalls I will keep an eye out, it sounds good from the reviews.

Dave I found that if the lens has a slight bit of ca on the dslr it is amplified on the Q so I'm trying to get it as well behaved as possible from the start.
It almost seems like there will be no getting around a *200 of some type.

[vladimiroltean]

So if you have used anything in the 135-200mm range, K mount or m42 that is sharp and does not exhibit purple fringing wide open I would like to know about it.

Jupiter 37A?

[Erd§]

I can strongly recommend the m42 Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 135mm f3.5. It's not particularly fast, and has a reputation of having dodgy aperture blades that can get stuck (I've had no issues with my own copy) but I've never seen it exhibit any CA, and is one of the sharpest lenses I've ever seen wide open.

[crewl1]

Thanks kcobain and erd I will check those out.
The local sellers want quite a lot for any carl zeiss lenses.
Doesn't seem I wil be able to get a deal as I had hoped so the da*200 may be my only option after all.

[rawr]

I have an A 200 /4 that I am very happy with. PF is not problematic, I also have a M 200/4 that is sharp, but does tend to PF. LR4 to the rescue, in any case, with PF.

[pacerr]

. . . the adaptalls

And there's an Adaptall SP 80-200/2.8 (30A) in the Market Place now that would be the IQ equivalent of a (manual focus) AF 70-200/2.8 -- but with a significant size and weight penalty over a prime.

Same review refs apply.

H2

[lytrytyr]

So if you have used anything in the 135-200mm range, K mount or m42 that is sharp and does not exhibit purple fringing wide open I would like to know about it.

Voigtlaender Apo-Lanthar 180/4.

It has replaced my M200/4,
and is even more compact (less than 3 inches long),
so it won't dwarf your Q.

[nmrecording]

Dave I found that if the lens has a slight bit of ca on the dslr it is amplified on the Q so I'm trying to get it as well behaved as possible from the start.
It almost seems like there will be no getting around a *200 of some type.

You've got me confused. You keep talking about wanted a cheaper alternative than the DA 200*, a pricey lens, but shoot down all the MF 200's suggested, which is what you asked for. THere's no way an old CZ MF is going to be even in the ballpark of the cost of the 200* lens. With the adapter you're using, you're right about throwing the af out the window.

There's tons of great prime options for 100-200 range in MF for a fraction of the 200* that have low CA.

My 200 CZ has been a top performer on digital bodies. The Tamron SP's are also very hard to beat in IQ/functionality/price.

Steinheil Auto-DTele-Quinar 2,8/135 mm German Lens

Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 3,5/135 mm MC DDR Lens

Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 2,5/200 mm MC Auto

FUJINON EBC 1:3.5-135mm

FUJINON EBC 1:2.5-135mm

ALl great performers, available on Ebay, and priced at fractions at the 200* lens.

[pinholecam]

I forgot mentioning the option of an older Canon or Nikon fast long lens.
But you will need to buy an adapter

[Zav]

I have the feeling that you want a Voigtlander 180 f4. On top of this, it's not a big lens.