[KEzzAP]

These are the lenses available in market and their prices are:

PENTAX - M 50mm 1.7 .................60 dolars
Pentacon 50mm f1.8............. 60 dolars
Pentacon 29mm f2.8............... 110 dolars
Pentax Smc M 28mm f2.8 ........... 60 dolars
Rollei Planar 1,8 50mm HFT............125 dolars
Photax paragon 28mm f2.8............90 dolars
Soligor MC Wide-Auto 28mm f2,8.......70 dolars
Super Takumar 55mm f 1.8............125 dolars
OM mount Sigma mini-Wide 28 mm F 2.8 60 dolars
AUTO REVUENON MC 50mm F 1,7........... 75 dolars
Porst color reflex MC auto f1.7 50mm...........50 dolars
RICOH Rikenon P 50mm F1.7...................50 dolars
Yashica ML 50mm f1.9..............100 dolars
Rollei HFT Planar Carl Zeiss 50mm 1.8 ...........150 dolars
Rollei Rolleinar 28mm f2.8..................160 dolars
Pentax Super Takumar 50mm f1.4.............165 dolars
FUJINON FUJI PHOTO 55 MM F1.8.................50 dolars


I have approximately 200 dolars, what would be your advices for these two lenses?

[boriscleto]

Cross off the Fuji, Yashica, Rollei, Pentacon, the OM Sigma, and probably the Porst, Soligor, & Photax.

The best use of your money would probably be the M50/1.7 & M28/2.8. The Takumars would require and additional adapter, and the Ricoh would require the removal of the 'Ricoh' pin.

[johnyates]

The best use of your money would probably be the M50/1.7 & M28/2.8.

+1 absolutely.

[ChristianRock]

Pentax M 50 1.7 - about 50-60 - I got mine for 30 here in the forums because the lens barrel isn't in good condition, but the glass is good...
Sigma Superwide II 24 2.8 (manual focus) - about 140-150 - this one isn't on your list, somehow.

I had the Pentax M and A 28 2.8, wasn't all that thrilled with them. They're good lenses, don't get me wrong, but I liked my 30 dollar Ricoh Rikenon XR 28 2.8 better, so I sold both Pentaxes. The Sigma 24 is on my to-get list.

---

Last edited by ChristianRock; 02-25-2014 at 12:39 PM.

[Na Horuk]

The best use of your money would probably be the M50/1.7 & M28/2.8. The Takumars would require and additional adapter, and the Ricoh would require the removal of the 'Ricoh' pin.

Well said.
If OP has money left over, maybe get an A series instead of the M. It offers quite a bit more automation.

[VoiceOfReason]

I would also look at A lenses too.

[Kozlok]

One comment, the Tak55/1.8 goes for ~$40 to 50 as a rule, not 125. I use one with a $5 fotodiox adapter that I removed the locking clip from and screwed on tight to my lens. Works like a real K-mount lens. I think either the 55/1.8 or the M50/1.7 are your best bets at 50. For 20's, I'd save up another $200 and get the 21 limited (used) for ~$350.

[Lowell Goudge]

Cross off the Fuji, Yashica, Rollei, Pentacon, the OM Sigma, and probably the Porst, Soligor, & Photax.

The best use of your money would probably be the M50/1.7 & M28/2.8. The Takumars would require and additional adapter, and the Ricoh would require the removal of the 'Ricoh' pin.

+1 absolutely.

+1

Add an M135/3.5 and you should have the standard film kit for $200

[ChristianRock]

Well, a couple points...

. Not all Ricoh lenses have the Ricoh pin that needs to be taken out. The Rikenon XRs, for example, don't. I have two (28 2.8 and 50 1.4) and they work just like Pentax M lenses, no pin to deal with at all.

. The 55 Pentax lenses aren't only in Takumar M42 form, they exist as SMC-K lenses as well. You can get the 55mm 1.8 and the 55mm 2.0 in K mount so you don't need any adapters. The K 55 1.8 goes for about 60 dollars and the K 55 2.0 for about 30-40, though I bought one from KEH for 24 dollars a couple weeks ago. It was listed as BGN but I can't find anything wrong with it... and I'm pretty impressed with the optics, I think it will go in the bag in the next outings, instead of the 50s...

[boriscleto]

Well, a couple points...

. Not all Ricoh lenses have the Ricoh pin that needs to be taken out. The Rikenon XRs, for example, don't. I have two (28 2.8 and 50 1.4) and they work just like Pentax M lenses, no pin to deal with at all.

True. But the Ricoh in the list is a Rikenon P...

[cahudson42]

One comment, the Tak55/1.8 goes for ~$40 to 50 as a rule, not 125. I use one with a $5 fotodiox adapter that I removed the locking clip from and screwed on tight to my lens. Works like a real K-mount lens. I think either the 55/1.8 or the M50/1.7 are your best bets at 50. For 20's, I'd save up another $200 and get the 21 limited (used) for ~$350.

I also was going to suggest the Tak 55mm F1.8 M42. And mention $125 is grossly overpriced. Look at ebay 'sold' listings (not the current 'asking' listings) and you will see many, many for $20 - $30 - those mostly for the older Super-Takumar version.

I would definitely go a bit more for the SMC version - $35 to $50 absolute tops. They are worth it for better contrast and flare resistance. (I have both, and while both are sharp, there is a definite improvement with the SMC version).

A word of caution if you enter the Wild West of ebay old Tak M42 lenses: 1. Avoid 1.8s that come with their Spotmatic body. There is a reason why they are being sold that way - either by someone who picked it up in a garage sale and usually knows nothing about it, or 2. the lens has defects - often fungus. The good lenses are removed and sold separately. The body is worthless and not worth the postage. Pay a bit more and get a lens being sold by an experienced seller - one who also offers a 14-day exchange. They are cheap, even bought this way.

If you don't want to put up with an adapter, the mentioned SMC Pentax-A 1.7 50mm at $50 tops is optically great (I have one, too). But the build quality is not the same as a Tak, and there is a common problem with frozen aperture rings (fixable if you get one really cheap)

Good Luck!

[Kayaker-J]

You didn't say which camera you'd be using, or what sorts of subjects are high priority for you. As a for-instance, with a K-01 (your least costly "in" for still current sensor/processor technology), I'd take careful notice of the advice already given regarding the 50/1.7 -A or SMC (later) 55/1.8's... and then go with a 28mm -- ChristianRock's alternative also makes good, economical sense -- as a versatile, 1.5x crop factor "normal". Personally, I think that if you can live with the maximum aperture, you'd get better IQ results in more instances with the tiny 28mm/3.5 -M, rather than the f.2.8 MF Pentax options. Also consider the Rikenon XR 50mm/2.0: If the MTF curve you can find online from a test at either Popular Photography, or Modern Photography magazine (I forget which) is to be believed, the circa $25 Rikenon matched, or exceeded by a hair, the result from the Nikkor 50mm/1.4 AI around 1/3 stop down from f.2.0 -- a sharp, really economical lens for low light, perhaps?

And Lowell's advice is good: Why NOT also carry an ultralight film body? You don't have to burn up a lot of film; just go for it selectively when full-frame 35mm is really your best option to get a shot. Your effective focal lengths get "repositioned" automatically to make your lenses double-duty... for peanuts! My like-new 11-1/2 oz. ZX-M came free as a lens cap with my SMC-A 50/1.7 (Thanks, Pacerr , for the helpful review on the often overlooked ZX-M.). My camera bag, as of this afternoon, will have only about 23 oz. extra heft to it in addition to my new K-3 (!) from the XZ-M and an Olympus E-PL5/VF-4 for 1x... 1.5x... and 2.0 "optimized crop factors" on the spot. Goodbye heavy, bulky long macro lenses and burdensome, big-dollar AF telephotos (unnecessary for landscape).

[DSims]

M (or A) 50/1.7 and M (or A) 28/2.8.

But even better is to get the M50/1.7 plus an A24/2.8. However, I think the price has gone up a little on the A24 since I had it, so you might need to get one of the smc K 24s. But 24mm is a great focal length, as well as these generally being more outstanding lenses than the M28/2.8.

I found the Sigma 24 super-wide II to not be as great as advertised, and I've had 2 of them.


In fact, if you're going to stick with a 28mm lens the best one to get is the K28/3.5. I had one, and it was excellent, but ultimately I sold it because it didn't fill a need in my kit. So unless you're getting a 24, I'd say go with the A50/1.7 and the K28/3.5.

[timo]

M (or A) 50/1.7 and M (or A) 28/2.8

….

In fact, if you're going to stick with a 28mm lens the best one to get is the K28/3.5. I had one, and it was excellent, but ultimately I sold it because it didn't fill a need in my kit. So unless you're getting a 24, I'd say go with the A50/1.7 and the K28/3.5.

I have both the K and M 28mm f/3.5s - I find the K marginally, very marginally, better, in that the the edges wide open are a bit superior to the 'M', but once you get to 5.6 I cannot tell the difference between the two. I would recommend the M as being smaller, lighter and cheaper.

Tim

[rbefly]

Hello KEzzAP, welcome to the Forum!
I agree with the advice here, the M 50f/1.7 is the absolute first choice, but after that, you could do better by waiting. If you're shooting digital, a good 24mm will be more useful than a 28mm, generally. If not, the M28f/3.5 is the next-best choice.
Leaving a bit left over for a short telephoto!
Good luck!
Ron