[Pepe Guitarra]

A question that may help me decide: Which one will you buy (assuming you have the money):

1) The Pentax K 28mm f2 (about $650 - $800) -- old , or
2) The Zeiss Distagon T* ZK 28mm f2 (about $900 -$1,050) -- brand new

Here is my thought: It is supposed to be the same formula, but isn't the Zeiss brand new improved, especially being a Zeiss (remember, the lenses on the cameras that we sent to space have Zeiss lenses. Is is worth the difference in price to get the Pentax ? What would you do?

[interested_observer]

Good Morning,

I have the ZK 25/f2.8 and it is a very nice lens - waaaaay overbuilt by a factor of 2 or 3x. It acts like an "A" lens, and its focus throw is about 355 degrees. 180 of that is from 6 to 12 inches. Just a note - none of the post processing utilities recognize it as a Zeiss lens, just an A lens in the EXIF.

I am also very partial to the K lens. You would loose the auto aperture, probably the larger focus throw, and the newer coating. On the up side, it is part of Pentax history, and should shoot very well.

[gofour3]

The Pentax K28/2 and the 1970’s Zeiss “Hollywood” 28/2 were the same optically back then. Almost 40 years later, who knows with the Zeiss? The current version may have improved lens coatings, just like the newer Pentax lenses. However I would still choose the older K28/2, just for the reason it’s a Pentax classic.

Phil.

[johnha]

I don't know how 'international' prices run, but is there any particular reason (other than a slightly different focal length) why you didn't put the FA31 in the same question?

[Pepe Guitarra]

I don't know how 'international' prices run, but is there any particular reason (other than a slightly different focal length) why you didn't put the FA31 in the same question?

Yes. I am a manual focus guy.

[Pepe Guitarra]

Unless you have identified a source for the K-28mm/2.0, consider the M-28mm/2.0. It's somewhat rare, but when paired to an "obsolete" K-x, that little baby will dance...




Not much pp was done on this image in LR5. The 'star burst' flare of the lights is a natural characteristic of the lens.


I've yet to use it on a K-3.


Cheers... M

Nice shot. Is the Pentax-M better than the Pentax-A? And how is the Pentax A compared to the Pentax-K?

[Michaelina2]

Nice shot. Is the Pentax-M better than the Pentax-A? And how is the Pentax A compared to the Pentax-K?

For a collection of user reviews, check out...


Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database


Cheers... M

[stevebrot]

The Pentax K 28/2 is a collector's item and the price reflects it.

The Zeiss 28/2 is a Zeiss (made by Cosina) and the price reflects the name, though I am sure it is probably a very credible tool as well.

Both lenses have great build quality.


Steve

[mannyquinto]

I just got the K 28 f2 and by my limited time with it, I say its a lens worth having. It's a collectors lens that is very hard to find. I also have a Sigma 30 f1.4 and I don't mind keeping both.

[Digitalis]

You are aware that these two lenses are basically the same? get either of them, they will server you well. the K23mm f/2 is superb - and is made with glass that was used before the enforced restrictions on leaded glass.

[SteveM]

I've had the FA31, and still have the DA12-24, and a *bunch* of 24-35 primes. I hope to find a Zeiss 21 at some point, but I'm not convinced it will be better than my 28/2. I haven't had an issue with CA with the K28, but given the era I'm sure you could pixel peep. The one issue I have with newer glass is the drop of contrasty colours and the 3d effect.

[blende8]

The K28/2 isn't better than the M28/2 or A28/2 regarding resolution and contrast.
I have tested this.
I would prefer the M or A, because they are smaller.

[interested_observer]

I have converted a Contax Zeiss 28/f2.8 from the C/Y mount to the K. I like it very much. So much that a while ago (within the last year) I have seen two K28/f2 on the marketplace that I was not quick enough on either one. I actually started thinking about perhaps getting it, but what would I do with my CZ? I also have a converted Leica 28/f2.8, but I like the Zeiss much better (personal taste). I also have a Voightlander 20 (but its new glass - and the Zeiss 21 - either the Contax or the ZK are way too expensive), and the 31 Ltd, in addition to the K28/f3.5 Shift. As I posted before, in a moment of weakness (the price was good) a new ZK 25/f2.8 found its way to my doorstep. That's on top of the 12-24 and 16-45. I really do like the 20 to 30mm range. I have stopped acquiring - wanting to use them much more (to the point of what should I take along to shoot). So, that is perhaps another reason for being purposely too slow on the K28/2.

Personally, I would go for the K28/f2 - since its older, and with the old glass, something that is no longer being (or can be) produced. The ZK even though it is out of production, it is much easier to find. Also, the K can't be any larger than the ZK in size and weight. For all the nice features the ZK has (A lens, etc.), I do use the converted CK a lot more - probably based on size/weight. I have only read and seen good (actually wonderful) results out of the K lens.

[ChristianRock]

From what I have seen from the FA 28mm 2.8, it's a fantastic lens. Much better in rendering and contrast than previous Pentax 28mm designs, which are usually considered "boring" lenses. I have had a couple of the older ones (M, which I sold and A, which I still own) and agree with that assessment...

So I'm curious to know what these Zeiss (Cosina) and Pentax f2 lenses bring to the table, other than a stop of light, that would be worth the huge price difference.

[Pepe Guitarra]

... So I'm curious to know what these Zeiss (Cosina) and Pentax f2 lenses bring to the table, other than a stop of light, that would be worth the huge price difference.

They talk about a floating element. What is that?