[ashurbanipal]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

I'm fond of the F35-70 as well, although I don't use it as often as I thought I would. For a general (decent light) walkabout lens I use a Tamron 28-105 that I picked up from KEH for a song, and indoors I generally use either an F28 or DA35/DA40. When I use the 35-70 it's mostly at 70mm, about 50/50 whether it's in "macro" mode or not. The macro mode is nice to have but it'd be even better if the lens just had close focus ability over the whole range--but that's expecting a bit much for the price! It definitely needs a decent hood--I can get mine to flare pretty easily, which isn't necessarily a drawback.

[reeftool]

The overall IQ of the 35-70 I think is better and I also like the macro capability on the long end. Problem is, on our digital bodies, it's a normal to short telephoto lens. The 18-55 is still a pretty good performer and much more versatile. Both are available cheap enough so for most people, owning both is quite painless.

[Mattco26]

I have both of the lenses in question and I'd have to give it to the 35-70 in terms of image quality, I prefer the color rendition as well. The limiting factor of this lens in my opinion is the 35mm wide end as it can be limiting up close and indoors. The "macro" function really is useful though when using it as a walk around.

When it comes to hoods I'm using a cheap Fotga 49mm metal hood that I got on ebay here : Fotga 49mm Screw Mount Standard Metal Lens Hood FOR Nikon D90 D800 Sony Canon | eBay

I have no interest or relation to the seller fyi, I just got mine there. They also work great on the 50mm for film and digital and for the 28mm on crop sensor only. For the price I recommend picking up a few. Because of the protection they provide I don't really use a lens cap with them but you could stick a 52mm on the end or a 49mm pinch inside if you needed to.

As far as the 18-55 goes it still has a place in my kit for the wide angles it brings. I have the lighter DA-L version and it feels great in the hand on the K-01. I bought mine used without the hood and got one like this PH RBA 52mm Lens Hood FOR Pentax K R K M K X DA 18 55mm F3 5 5 6 AL II | eBay

I really can't recommend hoods enough especially if you, like me don't use filters much. The protection you get for your front element is a great added benefit to the boost in contrast and flare resistance. Since they're so cheap I don't see why you wouldn't use one.

[ivanvernon]

I have three lenses in the category: Pentax DA 18-55 WR 3.5-5.6, which is great for photos in the rain, and with more than acceptable IQ, Pentax FA 24-90 (not WR) 3.5-4.5 which offers superb IQ, the best of any Pentax zoom I have used; and Tamron 17-50 with constant f2.8 (not WR) which provides excellent IQ and is great for low-light situations. Used copies of the 18-55 run around $100-125; used copies of the 24-90 seem to sell for $250-350, and used copies of the Tamron 17-50 around $250-350, and is also still available as a new lens for a little higher price. These three lenses, in my view, are all good choices. When deciding which to use, I pick the 24-90 for best image quality, 18-55 for rainy conditions, and Tamron 17-50 for low-light situations. The 18-55 WR is the bargain of the bunch, high value for the money. The 24-90 is apparently not as well known, and may be hard to find, but it offers the best IQ for the money; and the 17-50 Tamron is worth the price if you plan lots of low-light photography. Best choice from among these three probably depends upon pocketbook and importance of WR, IQ, and low-light capability. I like all three, and would not give up any one of them for the use I make of them.

[JimJohnson]

Jim, - thanks for the tip. I'm assuming this hood doesn't cause vignetting at the 35mm end. And if so, is it still effective at 70?

I just took the shots below. The blank grey images are shots using infinity focus at about 8cm/3in, front element to my LED computer monitor using the same manual exposure for all. Other than reduction and adding the text, they are jpegs as rendered by my K-30. Plus I added a couple shot of the Matin hood in stored and mounted positions.

To me it looks like the lens has a slight vignetting at the top corners only at 35mm. It made no difference whether the hood was used or not, so the hood is not a factor. Naturally, the results might be different on a FF versus APS-C image. Further, prior to this test, I haven't noticed the vignetting when using the lens.

The final two shots are of the lens with the hood in the stored and mounted positions.

[yellowbrick]

Thank you all for your help. I have decided to get a 35-70mm and try it out for myself! May also get the Matin hood-- looks great in your pictures, Jim!

[mgvh]

I love my 35-70, and I have one of those collapsible rubber hoods which works very well.

[hongzhibin1987]

I am enjoying my K-01 with the DA limited lenses 15, 21, 40, and 70mm. But sometimes I want to have the convenience of a short zoom for times when I don't want or can't change lenses easily. Because I'm using the K-01, I want a very light and compact zoom lens, so I'm ruling out the 17-70s, 17-50s, 18-250s, and even (for the moment) the 18-135. Which leaves me with the cheap (always welcome) and light kit lens 18-55 (either DA-L or WR versions) or maybe the F 35-70 of which I've read excellent reviews and see for sale at very good prices. Actually, both these options are about the same price used. I know the DA kit lens is more of a walkaround lens with the wider field of view but I really like to shoot in the 40-70mm range, so maxing out at 55mm may not be ideal, plus I've read that the 18-55 is weakest at the long end. If I went for the F 35-70, I could easily carry around the 21mm for the occasional need to go wide on a walkabout with my camera.

So if anyone has experience using both the 18-55 kit lens (DA-L, ver II, or WR models), and the smc-F 35-70mm, particularly on the K-01, could you chime in on which one is a better performer: (1) optically (sharpness, colors, flare resistance), and (2) mechanically (autofocus speed, build quality). I'm probably leaning towards the 35-70 based on user reviews that rave about it, but I think the 18-55 could also be good, especially since it's a newer design, optimized for digital, and has modern lens coating.

Thanks for any comments and suggestions!

IMO the two lenses are basically the same on optical performance. I owned both, and here is my opinion:
1855: get the 2nd gen one (not WR cuz it's kind expensive, not L cuz it's bad). Usually you can get this around $50~$70 from ebay or KEH;
F35-70: on the APS-C it's like 50-105 (weirdly it's common huh). And here is the photos: http://pp.163.com/johnyoker/pp/7926035.html#29083319
The biggest different is the focus length. Optically F35-70 will suffer a little bit from purple fringe. However it is pretty compact, and focuses very quick. (in a violent way=kinda noisy).
1855: I used to own 1855WR and then sold it for DA15, and then I got a 1855 II back and then sold it...now I bought it back again (sigh) with 50-200 and I will keep both lens forever and ever. I think if you want to get 1855, get 50200 as well cuz they are just so small. 1855 is fine, however some aberration at corner (soft), that's the only problem.

[bdery]

The 35-70 has better image quality and autofocus speed than the DAL 18-55. It's smaller and more solid built. You'll need a hood, it doesn't come with one.

I agree with everything except the build quality. The 18-55 WR at least is very well made.

If one can live with 35mm, the F is the better lens.

[seventysixersfan]

I just bought both the smc-F 35-70mm and a 18-55mm WR from the PF Marketplace. Looking forward to comparing the two and using both of these excellent value lenses!

[JinDesu]

I agree with everything except the build quality. The 18-55 WR at least is very well made.

If one can live with 35mm, the F is the better lens.

Well in consideration I was talking about the DAL, not the WR

[seventysixersfan]

Well in consideration I was talking about the DAL, not the WR

Which is why I'm upgrading my DA-L 18-55 to a WR model. I wanted a better constructed lens, with metal mount, quick shift convenience, and a hood. I recently re-discovered the joys of shooting with such a light, compact short zoom for everyday snapshooting, even if the image quality and speed fall a little short of my bigger Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 zoom and DA 18-135 superzoom. I figured I should grab the DA 18-55 WR now for cheap, as any camera body that I purchase in the future may well only come bundled with the DA-L WR variant instead of the better DA 18-55 WR model.

[JinDesu]

Which is why I'm upgrading my DA-L 18-55 to a WR model. I wanted a better constructed lens, with metal mount, quick shift convenience, and a hood. I recently re-discovered the joys of shooting with such a light, compact short zoom for everyday snapshooting, even if the image quality and speed fall a little short of my bigger Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 zoom and DA 18-135 superzoom. I figured I should grab the DA 18-55 WR now for cheap, as any camera body that I purchase in the future may well only come bundled with the DA-L WR variant instead of the better DA 18-55 WR model.

The WR model has quickshift too. After having used it on my Sigma 50 F1.4 (sorta quickshift) and my DA 21, I love just fiddling with it. Sure it's functional too, but just being able to play with that well damped focus ring....

[Tonto]

I had both before I got my K01 and was keen to use my F 35-70 on it. It must be a one off but my copy is noisy as during AF and hunts around. Its weird as it is the opposite on my K7!
So the 18-55 goes on when I need something wider than my FA31

[Mattco26]

IMO the two lenses are basically the same on optical performance. I owned both, and here is my opinion: 1855: get the 2nd gen one (not WR cuz it's kind expensive, not L cuz it's bad).

I really don't agree with either of these points. The 35-70 is visibly sharper at f/5.6 or f/8, I currently own both and have shot them side by side. The DA-L is not "bad" at all. It's got a plastic mount and no quick shift but optically is the same as the II and WR versions. It doesn't come with a hood but you can get a replica of the proper Pentax hood for a few dollars.