Sigma Antique Store Find

liquid85 · 04-08-2013, 01:28 PM

I just got my first camera. A brand new K-5 with the 18-55mm kit lens. I was in an antique store today and saw this Sigma lens for 25 dollars. It had a leather case as well. Its a 50-200mm lens. It says it's for a Pentax K. Is this a good lens? what would I need, as far as adapters, to get it to work on my k-5 Thanks.

Last edited by liquid85; 04-07-2014 at 05:15 PM.

heatherslightbox · 04-08-2013, 01:37 PM

I don't know anything about the lens itself as to whether or not the optics are any good, but it will definitely mount onto and work with your K-5 without an adapter. Since it's not an "A" lens, you'll have to use manual mode and the green button to get good exposures.

HTH.

**jatrax** · 04-08-2013, 01:39 PM

No adapter needed if it has K-mount. No idea about the quality of the lens itself. Looks like a mount adapter on the bottom, maybe YS?

Edgar_in_Indy · 04-08-2013, 01:42 PM

Modern zoom lenses have gotten pretty good, but when it comes to old lenses, zooms are usually not what you're looking for. If you can get it for next to nothing (or less!), it might be fun to play with, but otherwise my advise would be to save your money for old primes. I don't collect old lenses, but there are plenty of people on here who could tell you about some better uses for that $25 on eBay.

I did have an old Pentax-M 50mm 1.7 for my K-x at one time, and I got some really fantastic pictures from it. Kinda of fun to use too. I think the M 50mm 1.7 goes for $35 - $50 in good condition on eBay, and it's definitely money well-spent. I found that the images from that lens had a special quality, and it was pretty sharp too.

Docrwm · 04-08-2013, 01:46 PM

Welcome aboard! Buying old lenses can be thrilling and disappointing. As Edgar said, old zooms are more often than not disappointing (although not all) and older primes are more variable but more likely to be a cheap thrill. K mount is what tells you that it will fit on you dSLR. M42 is the older screw type mount and you do need an adapter for those lenses.

Lots of info here on this issue:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/99767-comprehe...s-reviews.html

I think this thread is the best of the bunch:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-lens-articles/59245-pawnshop-lense...ers-guide.html

VisualDarkness · 04-08-2013, 02:10 PM

Shoot with it and post pics here to show us what it can do and will likely we decent at least. Out and shoot with it, now!

**boriscleto** · 04-08-2013, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

No adapter needed if it has K-mount. No idea about the quality of the lens itself. Looks like a mount adapter on the bottom, maybe YS?

It wouldn't be YS. There was no K mount adapter for YS...

tvfd911 · 04-09-2013, 11:16 AM

I had that lens for a while that came in part of a package deal. It was significantly better than the Pentax M series zoom of the same era.

I say shoot with it. My copy was an above average performer for the era.

Edgar_in_Indy · 04-09-2013, 03:04 PM

Originally posted by tvfd911

I say shoot with it. My copy was an above average performer for the era.

I don't think the OP had already purchased the lens when he posted this, so the question is whether it's worth his $25. My vote would be to save his money.

**ramseybuckeye** · 04-09-2013, 05:53 PM

Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy

I don't think the OP had already purchased the lens when he posted this, so the question is whether it's worth his $25. My vote would be to save his money.

I would agree, most of those old zooms are a big disappointment. For that $25 you may find and old 135/2.8 or another old prime that will be much better.

Sagitta · 04-09-2013, 06:20 PM

I like to think I've been fairly lucky with my old zooms so far - I haven't hit one that's been truly bad.

In my experience though all these old vintage zooms need hoods, and badly. If you remember that the coatings aren't up to today's standards and that shooting in various lighting conditions can give you a wide range of effects, you should do OK with it if you think its worth the 25 dollar gamble.

I'd sooner spend a bit more and get a 'A' lens of that size though. Manual focus + varying aperture + manual/stop down metering = a juggling act. I never realized just how much until I started shooting with vintage A lenses instead of M ones. Primes are one ting since the aperture remains fairly stable, but as soon as you start having to adjust on the fly depending on how far you've zoomed? Ugh.

Having the lens do its own thing and meter properly is so handy when out and about its not funny.

Docrwm · 04-09-2013, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by Sagitta

I like to think I've been fairly lucky with my old zooms so far - I haven't hit one that's been truly bad.

In my experience though all these old vintage zooms need hoods, and badly. If you remember that the coatings aren't up to today's standards and that shooting in various lighting conditions can give you a wide range of effects, you should do OK with it if you think its worth the 25 dollar gamble.

I'd sooner spend a bit more and get a 'A' lens of that size though. Manual focus + varying aperture + manual/stop down metering = a juggling act. I never realized just how much until I started shooting with vintage A lenses instead of M ones. Having the lens do its own thing and meter properly is so when out and about.

+1 on the hood. I have a Pentax K45-125 that is a dream to use, but only with a hood. It's like a bag full of primes. It's two drawbacks are weight and a loose push-pull mechanism (common to this design). It's rendering is beautiful and it's range is fairly useful. At times I have had it in my bag when in a city with two small primes (15 & 35) and its been a very solid contributor.

Sagitta · 04-09-2013, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by Docrwm

+1 on the hood. I have a Pentax K45-125 that is a dream to use, but only with a hood. It's like a bag full of primes. It's two drawbacks are weight and a loose push-pull mechanism (common to this design). It's rendering is beautiful and it's range is fairly useful. At times I have had it in my bag when in a city with two small primes (15 & 35) and its been a very solid contributor.

I had to go in and make a custom setting for the 70-210mm I'm using for the Single In challenge I'm using it for this month. Lens is sharp as a tack, but when I shot it in daylight it screamed "Hey, get that 80's washed out effect without need of a time machine!"

That doesn't even touch on the fringing.

EJMzagsfan · 04-10-2013, 01:45 AM

You could always let it sit there a couple weeks and if no one buys it offer them 15 dollars they will probably take it. With the prices thrift stores and antique shops throw out on old camera equipment a lot of their stuff seems to sit, at least where im at.

Lloydy · 04-10-2013, 11:17 AM

I picked one of those Sigma's up in a bag of Minolta gear a while back, I tried it on a Minolta XD7 film camera and a Sony NEX, it was dreadful, I gave it away in the end. Save your $25 for some old primes is good advice. There are some good zooms out there, but those Sigma's are not among them.

04-08-2013, 01:28 PM	#1
liquid85 Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 58	Sigma Antique Store Find I just got my first camera. A brand new K-5 with the 18-55mm kit lens. I was in an antique store today and saw this Sigma lens for 25 dollars. It had a leather case as well. Its a 50-200mm lens. It says it's for a Pentax K. Is this a good lens? what would I need, as far as adapters, to get it to work on my k-5 Thanks. Last edited by liquid85; 04-07-2014 at 05:15 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Antique Store Pentax MG vs Flea Market Film	ratchet	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	8	09-10-2012 09:18 PM
Machinery Asahi Pentax Super-Takumar thrift store find!	burnie	Post Your Photos!	5	07-06-2012 04:07 AM
Wish I could find a local camera store...	LightMeter	Pentax DSLR Discussion	16	11-13-2011 10:18 PM
Antique Store Win	unixrevolution	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	2	08-31-2010 10:49 AM
Found an Albinar lens at the antique store...	skydragoness	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	03-05-2007 10:18 AM

04-08-2013, 01:37 PM	#2
heatherslightbox Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Gainesville, FL Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,599	I don't know anything about the lens itself as to whether or not the optics are any good, but it will definitely mount onto and work with your K-5 without an adapter. Since it's not an "A" lens, you'll have to use manual mode and the green button to get good exposures. HTH.

04-08-2013, 01:39 PM	#3
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	No adapter needed if it has K-mount. No idea about the quality of the lens itself. Looks like a mount adapter on the bottom, maybe YS?

04-08-2013, 01:42 PM	#4
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685	Modern zoom lenses have gotten pretty good, but when it comes to old lenses, zooms are usually not what you're looking for. If you can get it for next to nothing (or less!), it might be fun to play with, but otherwise my advise would be to save your money for old primes. I don't collect old lenses, but there are plenty of people on here who could tell you about some better uses for that $25 on eBay. I did have an old Pentax-M 50mm 1.7 for my K-x at one time, and I got some really fantastic pictures from it. Kinda of fun to use too. I think the M 50mm 1.7 goes for $35 - $50 in good condition on eBay, and it's definitely money well-spent. I found that the images from that lens had a special quality, and it was pretty sharp too.

04-08-2013, 01:46 PM	#5
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Welcome aboard! Buying old lenses can be thrilling and disappointing. As Edgar said, old zooms are more often than not disappointing (although not all) and older primes are more variable but more likely to be a cheap thrill. K mount is what tells you that it will fit on you dSLR. M42 is the older screw type mount and you do need an adapter for those lenses. Lots of info here on this issue: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/99767-comprehe...s-reviews.html I think this thread is the best of the bunch: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-lens-articles/59245-pawnshop-lense...ers-guide.html

04-08-2013, 02:10 PM	#6
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Shoot with it and post pics here to show us what it can do and will likely we decent at least. Out and shoot with it, now!

04-08-2013, 02:13 PM	#7
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by jatrax No adapter needed if it has K-mount. No idea about the quality of the lens itself. Looks like a mount adapter on the bottom, maybe YS? It wouldn't be YS. There was no K mount adapter for YS...

04-09-2013, 11:16 AM	#8
tvfd911 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: WI Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 354	I had that lens for a while that came in part of a package deal. It was significantly better than the Pentax M series zoom of the same era. I say shoot with it. My copy was an above average performer for the era.

04-09-2013, 03:04 PM	#9
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685	Originally posted by tvfd911 I say shoot with it. My copy was an above average performer for the era. I don't think the OP had already purchased the lens when he posted this, so the question is whether it's worth his $25. My vote would be to save his money.

04-09-2013, 05:53 PM	#10
ramseybuckeye Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Hampstead, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 17,294	Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy I don't think the OP had already purchased the lens when he posted this, so the question is whether it's worth his $25. My vote would be to save his money. I would agree, most of those old zooms are a big disappointment. For that $25 you may find and old 135/2.8 or another old prime that will be much better.

04-09-2013, 06:20 PM	#11
Sagitta Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Maine Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,081	I like to think I've been fairly lucky with my old zooms so far - I haven't hit one that's been truly bad. In my experience though all these old vintage zooms need hoods, and badly. If you remember that the coatings aren't up to today's standards and that shooting in various lighting conditions can give you a wide range of effects, you should do OK with it if you think its worth the 25 dollar gamble. I'd sooner spend a bit more and get a 'A' lens of that size though. Manual focus + varying aperture + manual/stop down metering = a juggling act. I never realized just how much until I started shooting with vintage A lenses instead of M ones. Primes are one ting since the aperture remains fairly stable, but as soon as you start having to adjust on the fly depending on how far you've zoomed? Ugh. Having the lens do its own thing and meter properly is so handy when out and about its not funny.

04-09-2013, 06:23 PM	#12
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by Sagitta I like to think I've been fairly lucky with my old zooms so far - I haven't hit one that's been truly bad. In my experience though all these old vintage zooms need hoods, and badly. If you remember that the coatings aren't up to today's standards and that shooting in various lighting conditions can give you a wide range of effects, you should do OK with it if you think its worth the 25 dollar gamble. I'd sooner spend a bit more and get a 'A' lens of that size though. Manual focus + varying aperture + manual/stop down metering = a juggling act. I never realized just how much until I started shooting with vintage A lenses instead of M ones. Having the lens do its own thing and meter properly is so when out and about. +1 on the hood. I have a Pentax K45-125 that is a dream to use, but only with a hood. It's like a bag full of primes. It's two drawbacks are weight and a loose push-pull mechanism (common to this design). It's rendering is beautiful and it's range is fairly useful. At times I have had it in my bag when in a city with two small primes (15 & 35) and its been a very solid contributor.

04-09-2013, 06:27 PM	#13
Sagitta Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Maine Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,081	Originally posted by Docrwm +1 on the hood. I have a Pentax K45-125 that is a dream to use, but only with a hood. It's like a bag full of primes. It's two drawbacks are weight and a loose push-pull mechanism (common to this design). It's rendering is beautiful and it's range is fairly useful. At times I have had it in my bag when in a city with two small primes (15 & 35) and its been a very solid contributor. I had to go in and make a custom setting for the 70-210mm I'm using for the Single In challenge I'm using it for this month. Lens is sharp as a tack, but when I shot it in daylight it screamed "Hey, get that 80's washed out effect without need of a time machine!" That doesn't even touch on the fringing.

04-10-2013, 01:45 AM	#14
EJMzagsfan Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Idaho Photos: Albums Posts: 241	You could always let it sit there a couple weeks and if no one buys it offer them 15 dollars they will probably take it. With the prices thrift stores and antique shops throw out on old camera equipment a lot of their stuff seems to sit, at least where im at.

04-10-2013, 11:17 AM	#15
Lloydy Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Shropshire, UK Posts: 1,114	I picked one of those Sigma's up in a bag of Minolta gear a while back, I tried it on a Minolta XD7 film camera and a Sony NEX, it was dreadful, I gave it away in the end. Save your $25 for some old primes is good advice. There are some good zooms out there, but those Sigma's are not among them.