[ivanvernon]

Here is a reasonably priced chrome Jupiter 85 mm on eBay.

[yusuf]

85/1.8, film or digital, arguably one the best for for Pentax. As nice as FA77 and much less CA compared to all other Pentax 85mm and 77mm.

Having said that, I mostly used it wide open so not aware if it has any focus shifting.

[gofour3]

However, that lens seems to be significantly harder to find...

There were two of them in the PF Marketplace a few weeks back. Looks like 105mm is not a popular focal length on APS-C, so they did not sell quickly.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/36-sold-items/243001-sale-sold-sold-pendi...05mm-lens.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/36-sold-items/227194-sale-sold-pentax-smc...f-4-macro.html

Phil.

[SpartanD63]

I think I've decided upon the K lenses. Either the K85/1.8, which I'll have to save up for, or the K105/2.8 if I can find one.
Images from both have impressed me in just about every shot I've seen. Then again, around these forums, I can say that about shots from just about any lens.

[baro-nite]

Looks like 105mm is not a popular focal length on APS-C, so they did not sell quickly.

Yes, at times you can find several of these on the market (here, eBay, etc.). Adorama has one now. One recently sold on eBay for US$111.50 in an auction with 28 bids, an absurdly low price for this lens. When/if the hotly desired Pentax full 135 format DSLR appears I expect this lens will be rediscovered. If you're willing to follow eBay for a month or so I expect you will be able to find one at a reasonable price.

[SpartanD63]

How would the Super Takumar 105/2.8 compare to the K105/2.8? The super Tak seems to be more available and tends to go for even less than the K version.

[baro-nite]

Super- and SMC Takumar versions have the same optical formula, so if you are happy shooting M42 this is a good way to go. As you say, the Super-Tak in particular can be picked up very cheaply.

[yusuf]

Personally I will avoid smc and super tak 105, both soft wide open. I got them after hearing high praise but probably I am more critical about acceptable sharpness wide open, didn't took a long to let them go. Rendering is also nothing exceptional. I never used k105 so can't comment on it but in general I wouldn't expect more considering two disappointing 105mm from Pentax. I personally find M100 a better lens than these two 105mm I have used.

[gofour3]

The K105/2.8 has better SMC coatings than the older M42 versions. It also has a better minimum aperture of f/32, so hence it has a higher price.

I have the FA77/1.8, K85/1.8 and the K105/2.8. On film they are pretty well equal optically.

Check out these lens tests on film, to see the resolution tests of Pentax short Telephotos:

http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/pentax_tele.html

Phil.

[Jonathan Mac]

The M 85/2 is very good, and is the cheapest and most common Pentax 85mm. The M 100mm f/2.8 or Takumar 105/2.8 are also good and much easier to find, though they don't perform quite as well at f/2.8 in my opinion. Another option would be the FA 77/1.8 limited, if you want to spend the $$$.

[pinholecam]

The best modern one is certainly the 77ltd.
But thats out of your budget.


Its one of the best to me (FA77ltd)
Superb build, very sharp, very small and handy, nice drawing style and rendering (not just plain smooth, but a good edgy/smooth that keeps things interesting to me)


The Samyang 85/1.4 is cheap, 85mm and f1.4 (nice rendering too)
Its also big and less portable imo, not as 'generalist' a lens as its best is at f1.4-f2 and I find that its rendering is too plain_nar...
Worth considering though imo as long as you are aware of its pros and cons.


J9, can be great.
Fantastic sonnar rendering that is less common nowadays, esp for SLRs.
Problem is finding a good copy (or end up spending $150 a few times to get one, in which case you might as well have spend $400 to just get a safer buy like the K85)


J9

K85
The most reliable of the f1.8-2 Pentax 85mm.
Reliable as in no PF, sharpest, good bokeh in almost all situations, pentax style colors and rendering.
Also not too big.
I'd highly recommend it.
But price has been climbing.


K85


M85


Nice and small and cheaper.
Bad thing is the weakness to CA and hazing in some situations.
But when it does its job, its a nice drawing style (and some glow) and its so small like a 50/1.4 that all can be forgiven.
I take this lens out a lot.


Tak 85/1.9


I won't discount the slower Tak as well.
IMO, its only 2 weakness, a bit bigger than the others and bokeh can be a bit more busy for some bkgnds (usually linear stuff)


Look at 100mm, 105mm and 135mm options too (you already have a 135/2.8)
The K135/2.5 is not expensive and a great lens.



All photos taken on FF digital.
I'd also add that there isn't any wrong choice in any of them.
They are all sharp enough from wide open and a joy to use.
What sets them apart, size, price, rendering preference.

[SpartanD63]

All photos taken on FF digital.
I'd also add that there isn't any wrong choice in any of them.
They are all sharp enough from wide open and a joy to use.
What sets them apart, size, price, rendering preference.

I think you may have just helped me to decide. I want one of each of them!
Nah, I think I like the K85, M85, and the J9 most. price considered. The 77mm, while nice, is a bit too much to justify. I think I'll just keep an eye out for each and jump if I can find a good deal.

And I've decided against 105 since I think it'd be too similar to my 135mm

[yusuf]

Great pictures and the summary, I think it's worth to add that FA77 is as bad as M85 in CA department

The best modern one is certainly the 77ltd.
But thats out of your budget. .....

[stevebrot]

Great pictures and the summary, I think it's worth to add that FA77 is as bad as M85 in CA department

Truly? That is one characteristic I seem to have missed with my FA 77/1.8. According to Klaus at photozone.de, both LaCA and LoCA are low (LINK). My experience during several years of ownership echos his analysis.

That being said, the FA 77/1.8 has the reputation for being prone to Purple Fringing (PF), but that is not CA, per se. I have only seen PF a handful of times with the FA 77/1.8 on my K10D and never (of course) on film.


Steve

[yusuf]

Truly? That is one characteristic I seem to have missed with my FA 77/1.8. According to Klaus at photozone.de, both LaCA and LoCA are low (LINK). My experience during several years of ownership echos his analysis.

That being said, the FA 77/1.8 has the reputation for being prone to Purple Fringing (PF), but that is not CA, per se. I have only seen PF a handful of times with the FA 77/1.8 on my K10D and never (of course) on film.


Steve

Well, PF is because of CA but anyway, it's the PF I was talking about.

Unfortunately, both the lens (M85/FA77) has been worst I have seen in the PF department. You may not notice indoor or low contrast scenes but I often shoot streets in strong sunlight and its sometime so bad that the only option left is to convert into B+W. Both K85 & Samyang much better here.

btw, PF will be there irrespective of recording medium, it's a lens characteristic which is more noticeable on digital sensor. On film, its often not so noticeable unless scanned at high resolution and may be a bit more exposed. But anyway, that's a different discussion.