Lenses for K-5, manual, fast, tele, 85-135?

cream · 10-07-2013, 12:03 AM

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.

Hi

I have two fast lenses, 50mm 1.7 from Ricoh and 135mm 2.8 from Revue. I like them both. I read here that the 135mm/2.8 some lenses have low contrast, not very bright colors in bright daylight. My lense is unfortunately this, but it is okay. I bought it for low-light use anyway. I find it good for that. Maybe I will buy another one, and the contrast will be better. Now I want more fast lenses. I do not have infinite money.

So budget lens recommendations would be great. I have owned my K-5 for a month now, I have not tried the autofocus yet. I like manual focus. I like to use it for photography and video. I think it is great for both

(Pentax please, add manual ISO and shutter speed control for video!) I saw a thread here, a few months ago, someone sold (I think) a 85mm 1.7 or 105mm 1.7 (sorry, I don't remember the length) for less than $100, it had slight haze inside the lense but I believe for that price, not very expensive even without haze. He said it was a rare lens. How can you know about such lenses? There are so so many, if I never read that thread I would not even know it is possible to find such a lens for under $500. I wasn't even sure if they exist, because it is over 55mm. I ask for your help, alone I can never find out about all the lenses.

I would like a lense that would get me closer than 50-55mm, for portraits and other low light photography. 50-55mm means you have to get too close

135mm is a length I like a lot. I like the 135/2.8, but 2.8 is only good when it is not too dark. It can do pretty low light well, but I want a larger aperture that can do low light better. So I am looking for 77-150mm (something in that range, not zoom, but if you now prime zoom for that price you can suggest. I think it doesn't exist...) (or longer but I think longer means more expensive haha) that is f/2.0 or lower. If you know a good lens that is 2.1-2.4 you can suggest it too (the only one I know is Takumar 105/2.4). Thank you

Are there any lenses like this for under $300? (Cheaper is better haha) Used is okay and I will find the best price I can, if you think I can find it for this price or less please suggest it. Thank you

cream · 10-07-2013, 12:09 AM

I forgot! If lens+adapter is cheaper than k-mount lens, you can recommend, but with adapters infinity focus is lost? I would like to keep infinity focus. Does adapter reduce the light from the lens? I want all the light from the lens...

cream · 10-07-2013, 01:08 AM

I understand f/2 and lower is expensive... so maybe under $400?

but i would like to spend as little as possible!

VisualDarkness · 10-07-2013, 01:47 AM

Do you have hoods for the lenses? It can increase contrast a lot!

cream · 10-07-2013, 01:52 AM

Originally posted by VisualDarkness

Do you have hoods for the lenses? It can increase contrast a lot!

thank you for the advice! the 135 has a built-in hood that you can raise, I must admit... I think I shot with the hood down when I tried it during the day. I will try it again with the hood!

thornburg · 10-07-2013, 10:33 AM

It sounds to me like you want a Samyang/Rokinon/etc 85mm f/1.4.

85mm f/1.4 on Amazon

$250 brand new.

cream · 10-07-2013, 07:18 PM

Originally posted by thornburg

It sounds to me like you want a Samyang/Rokinon/etc 85mm f/1.4.

85mm f/1.4 on Amazon

$250 brand new.

yes! that is perfect! thank you so much! a good price for 1.4 and it is even aspherical!! that's exactly what i was looking for ^^ in case i want something longer later... do you know if there are longer lenses below f/2 (or max f/2) that don't cost $1000 or more?

thornburg · 10-07-2013, 07:37 PM

The longest lens I know of f/2 or below is the Nikon 200mm f/2. Much more common (but still rare!) are various 135mm f/1.8 lenses. Some of the older fully manual ones can be had for about $400-$500 used. If you can find one. Once you get above 135mm, anything faster than f/3.5 is expensive. Even f/2.8, which is relatively common.

Example of 135mm f/1.8 for less than $1000.

There's a Nikon mount one for even less, but it's much harder to adapt a Nikon lens than an m42.

**dms** · 10-07-2013, 07:39 PM

K (SMC) 135mm f2.5 is superb. I consider the 50mm f/1.7, the 135mm f/2.5 and the 28mm f/3.5 (of the Pentax lenses I have used) to be outstanding--independent of price, and yet they are quite reasonable in price. BTW photozone has a review of the 135mm f2.5.

cream · 10-07-2013, 07:49 PM

Originally posted by thornburg

The longest lens I know of f/2 or below is the Nikon 200mm f/2. Much more common (but still rare!) are various 135mm f/1.8 lenses. Some of the older fully manual ones can be had for about $400-$500 used. If you can find one. Once you get above 135mm, anything faster than f/3.5 is expensive. Even f/2.8, which is relatively common.

Example of 135mm f/1.8 for less than $1000.

There's a Nikon mount one for even less, but it's much harder to adapt a Nikon lens than an m42.

thank you!! m42 can be easily adapted but i didn't even know you can adapt nikon lenses on pentax... i don't want to try anything difficult! only what works (like m42, you can buy adapter...) I have noticed that finding older lenses is more of a problem than the price... the price is a matter of how much you WANT to pay, but finding a lens is fate...

Originally posted by dms

K (SMC) 135mm f2.5 is superb. I consider the 50mm f/1.7, the 135mm f/2.5 and the 28mm f/3.5 (of the Pentax lenses I have used) to be outstanding--independent of price, and yet they are quite reasonable in price. BTW photozone has a review of the 135mm f2.5.

I have revuenon 135/2.8, maybe i will exchange it for a 135/2.5 SMC...

i find my 135/2.8 is not very good with contrast in bright daylight (the hood helps a lot but i would still like a better contrast and better colors, i think they are not as good as they can be... even with CPL, and you have to be careful to avoid CF in bright light, UV filter doesn't help. it is a good lens... but I believe SMC would be better

10-07-2013, 12:03 AM	#1
cream Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 91	Lenses for K-5, manual, fast, tele, 85-135? 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. Hi I have two fast lenses, 50mm 1.7 from Ricoh and 135mm 2.8 from Revue. I like them both. I read here that the 135mm/2.8 some lenses have low contrast, not very bright colors in bright daylight. My lense is unfortunately this, but it is okay. I bought it for low-light use anyway. I find it good for that. Maybe I will buy another one, and the contrast will be better. Now I want more fast lenses. I do not have infinite money. So budget lens recommendations would be great. I have owned my K-5 for a month now, I have not tried the autofocus yet. I like manual focus. I like to use it for photography and video. I think it is great for both (Pentax please, add manual ISO and shutter speed control for video!) I saw a thread here, a few months ago, someone sold (I think) a 85mm 1.7 or 105mm 1.7 (sorry, I don't remember the length) for less than $100, it had slight haze inside the lense but I believe for that price, not very expensive even without haze. He said it was a rare lens. How can you know about such lenses? There are so so many, if I never read that thread I would not even know it is possible to find such a lens for under $500. I wasn't even sure if they exist, because it is over 55mm. I ask for your help, alone I can never find out about all the lenses. I would like a lense that would get me closer than 50-55mm, for portraits and other low light photography. 50-55mm means you have to get too close 135mm is a length I like a lot. I like the 135/2.8, but 2.8 is only good when it is not too dark. It can do pretty low light well, but I want a larger aperture that can do low light better. So I am looking for 77-150mm (something in that range, not zoom, but if you now prime zoom for that price you can suggest. I think it doesn't exist...) (or longer but I think longer means more expensive haha) that is f/2.0 or lower. If you know a good lens that is 2.1-2.4 you can suggest it too (the only one I know is Takumar 105/2.4). Thank you Are there any lenses like this for under $300? (Cheaper is better haha) Used is okay and I will find the best price I can, if you think I can find it for this price or less please suggest it. Thank you

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Nice manual lenses: Pentax SMC "K" 135/2.5, 80-200/4.5; Ricoh XR RIkenon 300/4.5	Nick Siebers	Sold Items	9	10-19-2013 05:23 PM
Manual for old SMC Lenses 500 1000 1000reflex 135-600zoom	RockvilleBob	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	03-21-2013 06:03 AM
Customising K-5 for manual lenses	vladimiroltean	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	7	03-10-2013 01:50 PM
Availability of DXO Profiles for manual K/A/M lenses and K-5	ChrisGVE	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	4	07-29-2012 05:54 PM
K-5 AF for Manual Lenses support	PiotrKrochmal	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	5	03-15-2011 03:58 PM

10-07-2013, 12:09 AM	#2
cream Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 91 Original Poster	I forgot! If lens+adapter is cheaper than k-mount lens, you can recommend, but with adapters infinity focus is lost? I would like to keep infinity focus. Does adapter reduce the light from the lens? I want all the light from the lens...

10-07-2013, 01:08 AM	#3
cream Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 91 Original Poster	I understand f/2 and lower is expensive... so maybe under $400? but i would like to spend as little as possible!

10-07-2013, 01:47 AM	#4
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Do you have hoods for the lenses? It can increase contrast a lot!

10-07-2013, 01:52 AM	#5
cream Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 91 Original Poster	Originally posted by VisualDarkness Do you have hoods for the lenses? It can increase contrast a lot! thank you for the advice! the 135 has a built-in hood that you can raise, I must admit... I think I shot with the hood down when I tried it during the day. I will try it again with the hood!

10-07-2013, 10:33 AM	#6
thornburg Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Doylestown, PA Posts: 200	It sounds to me like you want a Samyang/Rokinon/etc 85mm f/1.4. 85mm f/1.4 on Amazon $250 brand new.

10-07-2013, 07:18 PM	#7
cream Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 91 Original Poster	Originally posted by thornburg It sounds to me like you want a Samyang/Rokinon/etc 85mm f/1.4. 85mm f/1.4 on Amazon $250 brand new. yes! that is perfect! thank you so much! a good price for 1.4 and it is even aspherical!! that's exactly what i was looking for ^^ in case i want something longer later... do you know if there are longer lenses below f/2 (or max f/2) that don't cost $1000 or more?

10-07-2013, 07:37 PM	#8
thornburg Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Doylestown, PA Posts: 200	The longest lens I know of f/2 or below is the Nikon 200mm f/2. Much more common (but still rare!) are various 135mm f/1.8 lenses. Some of the older fully manual ones can be had for about $400-$500 used. If you can find one. Once you get above 135mm, anything faster than f/3.5 is expensive. Even f/2.8, which is relatively common. Example of 135mm f/1.8 for less than $1000. There's a Nikon mount one for even less, but it's much harder to adapt a Nikon lens than an m42.

10-07-2013, 07:39 PM	#9
dms Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: New York, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,192	K (SMC) 135mm f2.5 is superb. I consider the 50mm f/1.7, the 135mm f/2.5 and the 28mm f/3.5 (of the Pentax lenses I have used) to be outstanding--independent of price, and yet they are quite reasonable in price. BTW photozone has a review of the 135mm f2.5.

10-07-2013, 07:49 PM	#10
cream Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 91 Original Poster	Originally posted by thornburg The longest lens I know of f/2 or below is the Nikon 200mm f/2. Much more common (but still rare!) are various 135mm f/1.8 lenses. Some of the older fully manual ones can be had for about $400-$500 used. If you can find one. Once you get above 135mm, anything faster than f/3.5 is expensive. Even f/2.8, which is relatively common. Example of 135mm f/1.8 for less than $1000. There's a Nikon mount one for even less, but it's much harder to adapt a Nikon lens than an m42. thank you!! m42 can be easily adapted but i didn't even know you can adapt nikon lenses on pentax... i don't want to try anything difficult! only what works (like m42, you can buy adapter...) I have noticed that finding older lenses is more of a problem than the price... the price is a matter of how much you WANT to pay, but finding a lens is fate... Originally posted by dms K (SMC) 135mm f2.5 is superb. I consider the 50mm f/1.7, the 135mm f/2.5 and the 28mm f/3.5 (of the Pentax lenses I have used) to be outstanding--independent of price, and yet they are quite reasonable in price. BTW photozone has a review of the 135mm f2.5. I have revuenon 135/2.8, maybe i will exchange it for a 135/2.5 SMC... i find my 135/2.8 is not very good with contrast in bright daylight (the hood helps a lot but i would still like a better contrast and better colors, i think they are not as good as they can be... even with CPL, and you have to be careful to avoid CF in bright light, UV filter doesn't help. it is a good lens... but I believe SMC would be better