[gofour3]

dedicated hood

I guess that's why he was asking $1200.00 for the K28/2?

Phil.

[fwcetus]

I guess that's why he was asking $1200.00 for the K28/2?

Dunno, Phil.

The specific hood is not too easy to find, but it's not like it was "dedicated" for just the K 28/2 (and, in fact, "28mm" almost seems like an afterthought) -



And, while an SMC Pentax filter is a good filter, it's hardly either unique or essential...

[gofour3]

Dunno, Phil.

The specific hood is not too easy to find, but it's not like it was "dedicated" for just the K 28/2 (and, in fact, "28mm" almost seems like an afterthought) -



And, while an SMC Pentax filter is a good filter, it's hardly either unique or essential...

I was agreeing with you about the $1200.00 price for the K28/2 (with hood and filter) and was being facetious.

Phil.

[fwcetus]

I was agreeing with you about the $1200.00 price for the K28/2 (with hood and filter) and was being facetious.

Yes, and I was agreeing with you, too - . [Isn't the Internet great ?!?]

When I said "Dunno, Phil", I was wondering about what was in the seller's mind, and ~not~ doubting what you were saying.

Then, when I said "The specific hood is not too easy to find, but it's not like it was "dedicated" for just the K 28/2 (and, in fact, "28mm" almost seems like an afterthought)" and "And, while an SMC Pentax filter is a good filter, it's hardly either unique or essential...", I was ~minimizing~ the value of the lens (and filter) in trying to explain the rather ~huge~ markup above the $700 or maybe even $800 that the lens might actually be worth.

And, yes, I did notice the "" next to your facetious comment. [But isn't the Internet great ?!?]

---

Last edited by fwcetus; 02-20-2016 at 04:40 PM.

[gofour3]

[But isn't the Internet great ?!?]

Yep it sure is and to think we speak the same language as well!

No worries we are on the same page.

Phil.

[cyberjunkie]

For Pentax 28/2 lenses, I've had the A 28/2 and I have the K 28/2. The A is a nice lens (and maybe better than just "boring"), but the K is nicer in nearly every respect (except for Ka functionality, of course, and for compactness, if that's important to the user -- the A 28/2 is indeed pretty small, while the K 28/2 looks and feels like a short telephoto lens in comparison) -



Certainly part of its "worth" (at least to some serious Pentaxers, alhough many other people wouldn't care) is its history - https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/60011-smc-p...-distagon.html



For optical qualities, it is known for sometimes showing an enhanced "3-D" look, which may be due to some field curvature, Certainly it produces oftentimes superb bokeh.

Thanks Fred, for posting the interesting cut-out made available by Marco Cavina (who lives a few Km from where i was born :-) )
I bought this wonderful lens shortly after its release. Some dumbass with more money than common sense returned it to the shop, in favor of the (then new) 28mm series-M.
I don't use it often with digital, but i will give it some more action when the Pentax full-frame will be available second hand! .-)
It is my preferred Pentax manual lens, along with the A Star 85mm and 300mm. Unfortunately i am mostly doing travel photography, for which i'm using a small selection of good AF third-party lenses.
IMHO it's a "bokeh-lens", good for close focusing with a lively background. The floating element and the high speed come handy...

Better than the recent Cosina-made Zeiss?
Can't say. The old SMC, exceptional for its time, is probably no match for a more modern coating.
On the other hand, classic optical layout recalculated for environmentally-friendly glasses are often slightly worse than the old ones, despite the huge advances in computing power and optical calculation platforms.
Variations on the double gauss layout allow for small improvements, not ground-breaking innovations. Normal zooms with a huge number of elements are a completely different thing...
Mechanical quality is often overlooked, If the lenses are subject to rough use, or bus traveling in third world countries (plenty of vibration and knocks), those plasticky lenses with glued glasses, which often performs so amazingly (sometimes with field curvature corrected in-camera), can loose their specs over time, with noticeable performance degradation.
On the other hand, if you favor manual focusing, the dampened, smooth ring of the best old lenses is a pleasure to operate, and it shows in the pictures! Better, and more consistent focusing.

A side note:
with the arrival of the full-frame, all high-quality old wides will increase in price. Collector's items will increase the more

ciao

Paolo

[fwcetus]

Thanks Fred, for posting the interesting cut-out made available by Marco Cavina (who lives a few Km from where i was born :-) )

Hi, Paolo.

Thanks for your comments on the K 28/2.

I should have posted the URL for the original Marco Cavina article -- so here it is now:

SMC PENTAX 28mm f/2: LA STORIA NON SCRITTA DELLA SUA EVOLUZIONE, DALLA VERSIONE K DI ORIGINE ZEISS ALLA SUCCESSIVA KM PROGETTATA IN PROPRIO

And here is a machine translation of the original Italian into English (which is usable):

SMC Pentax 28mm f/2: THE HISTORY NOT WRITTEN OF ITS EVOLUTION, BY K VERSION OF ORIGIN ZEISS, THE NEXT KM DESIGNED IN OWN

[cyberjunkie]

Thanks for the links, i hope some curious readers will follow the link and explore Marco Cavina's site. It is a treasure trove of extremely interesting technical information, unavailable elsewhere.
Sorry for going a bit off topic, but this thread is a perfect place to share my views with those interested in the acquisition of high-quality vintage lenses.
Pentax or third party won't make much difference. I'm not a Pentax purist, i think that some MF non-Pentax glasses are still well worth buying.
There is a vast number of lenses that don't have a correspondence in any of the objectives sold today.This is particularly true for specialized glasses,
Pentax users had a vast arsenal of optical tools at their disposal. That't is not true anymore.
This is also true for CaNikon users, albeit to a much lesser degree.
An example: I just bought a Tamron 70-150mm f/2.8 Soft Focus, after a looong wait, nothing like that is available today.
I am digressing... back to the Pentax/Zeiss wide-angle.
I think that all the best 35mm PK collector lenses, still super good for actual photographic use, will see much more interest with the release of the full-frame.
Both the "objects of desire", and more common high-end glasses, will be sought-for by full-frame users, and their price will inevitably rise.
This will especially be true for wides, like the 28mm f/2, that are not very usable with cropped digital sensors.
So the lucky ones really interested in lenses like this, and with thick enough wallets, should better decide now. IMHO the prices will get steeper in the near future.
Not good news for common mortals like me!
My craze for Pentax lenses started in 1979, IIRC, and over time i have acquired a good number of items (see link at the end of my signature).
In recent years i realized the value of many of them, comparing with high-end modern zooms.
Most vintage fast lenses, used wide-open, allow for a rounded (yet sharp) foreground, and beautiful out-of-focus areas (yes, the bokeh... starting to hate the word :-) )
Well worth experimenting, if you have enough dough... but i'd not recommend paying crazy prices. Greedy sellers shouldn't be encouraged!

Just my two cents

Ciao
Paolo

[fwcetus]

Just my two cents

Hi again, Paolo.

I also have a fondness for old Pentax and 3rd-party glass -- no, not all of it, but just the most interesting (to me). As an example, having the K 28/2 doesn't mean that I can't also like other interesting 28's, such as the K 28/3.5, the VS1 28/1.9, and the Vivitar 28/2 Close Focusing -



You mentioned your Tamron SP 70-150/2.8 Soft -- here's mine -



I agree that the K-1 will usher in a new era of increased interest (and increased prices) for full-frame Pentax and 3rd-party Pentax-mount glass. It will be fun, but it may not be cheap...

[cyberjunkie]

I have to admit some envy for your Vivitar Series 1 f/1.9.
Not easy to find and usually overpriced!
I have a different Vivitar 28mm F/2. There is a nice page dedicated to them, which you probably already know: The Great 28mm Vivitar Bestiary.
Mine is listed there as K12, it's a version made by Kino (Kiron).
Yours is the Komine-made version, which focuses 7cm closer. Preferable, cause the 23cm minimum focusing allows to be very creative, with a 28mm f/2 wide-open!
Mine is surprisingly sharp, for a wide of that vintage. A pity that both models miss the electric contacts, that i find very useful for the way i use the camera.
Some of the fast Vivitars could be seen as a low cost alternative to the Zeiss/Pentax one. Some early Vivitar products are definitely good, much much better than the more modern ones made by Cosina or Samyang.
I see you have a 28mm f/3.5 series K. I used to own the M version which replaced it.
Sold an eon ago after purchasing the f/2.8 PKA.
I guess that both should be sharper than the f/2, at medium aperture and set to infinity.
No lens, no matter how expensive, is good for everything. The blanket is always a bit too short...
What do you think? How good is your f/3.5?

Thanks for the nice pictures of your vintage 28mm lenses, all of them keepers, AFAIK.
A pity you reminded me of the Series 1! :-) :-) :-)

Ciao

P

[les3547]

I have converted a Contax Zeiss 28/f2.8 from the C/Y mount to the K. I like it very much.

I'm with Gordon. Looking for a prime in the "normal" range, last year I sold my Contax/Zeiss 28/2.8 because of the hassle of having to open the aperture manually to see the shot, and then close it for execution. Plus I thought with all the choices out there I would be able to replace it.

I have tried everything I can to beat or merely equal the Contax/Zeiss 28/2.8 lens. On the list of lenses I've bought and sold over the last year is the Zeiss 28mm ZK, Pentax FA 31 Limited (bought and sold it twice a year apart thinking I forgot about its IQ), Pentax 35/2.8 Limited Macro (bought and sold this twice for same reason as the FA 31), Sigma 35 1.4 Art, Zeiss 35/2 ZK . . . None of them had the color rendering, micro-contrast, and sharpness frame-wide from 2.8 upwards of the Contax. Thus, I've just reacquired another Contax/Zeiss 28/2.8—Leitax hardware is on the way. Mint or near mint Contax 28mm can be found on Ebay for around $300-350. Add Leitax costs and for $400+ one can have one of the finest (IQ-wise) 28mm lens on the planet (as several online reviewers have concluded). Picture from a shootout with the FA 31:

[Pepe Guitarra]

Kiron K28/2 and Kiron-A 28/2: (Good luck finding one!!)

[CreationBear]

Leitax hardware is on the way.

I remember learning a lot (and envying a lot) that shoot-out! I like your strategy with the Zeiss/Leitax work-around, but I'm wondering how robust the new mount is--do you have to baby it all, or is it pretty well integrated?

[les3547]

I remember learning a lot (and envying a lot) that shoot-out! I like your strategy with the Zeiss/Leitax work-around, but I'm wondering how robust the new mount is--do you have to baby it all, or is it pretty well integrated?

The mount isn't really new. It has been very well tested on a variety of Contax lenses. It is snug and works as claimed. Not many (any?) of the Contax lenses measure up to the 28/2.8 for quality, but the Leitax mounting hardware IMO has proven itself as 100% reliable.

Funny but when I decided to re-aquire the Contax 28/2.8 I contacted Gordon (Interested Observer) to see if he'd sell his to me because I knew it was already "Leitaxed". He offered me his Leica 28mm, but not the Contax!

[CreationBear]

He offered me his Leica 28mm, but not the Contax!

Ha, I can see being late to the party is going to cost me... Thanks for the additional info.