[Schick]

Got my first dlsr (k-50 with 18-55) last month, and am already thinking about buying my first used lens(es). ebay of course has numerous offerings if I search for k-mount. The problem is that are so darn many and I have no idea of any of them. I look through this fine site to see what I can find about certain cheap models I see on line. I am just really worried that I will end up buying the wrong lens type, or buying what is simply a complete piece of crap.

For instance, I found a RIKENON P 35-70 mm F3.5-4.5, but so far have only found feedback about these as good or okay. Crap? I was hoping to used its claimed macro feature and perhaps just experiement with a different lens, taking general shots when not doing macro. Also, $50 shipped sounds cheap, but it could be a $20 lens

is there a sub forum to ask about old lens? (after using search)

i really would love recommendations of really cheap lens for a newbie like me. Street shots, macro, general stuff.


EDIT: Perhaps I should have stated that my search is for auto focus lens. AF I believe.

---

Last edited by Schick; 10-18-2014 at 09:48 AM.

[sergysergy]

You should use the lens review section :

Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database


A lens that is cheap and great is the M 50 1.7 (It can go for around $40) It was my first manual lens and I still keep that copy.

[dms]

I would suggest you only consider sources like KEH and B&H.That way you know generally the stuff is checked out/is as advertised, you have no problems w/ returns (2 weeks or 30 days), and it is warrantied for 6 months as I recall. And the prices are usually less for equipment in comparable condition.

[vonBaloney]

MOST of the time, old cheap zooms (especially manual focus) will be crap, and are not easy to use on modern cameras. Also almost any zoom that says "macro" really isn't -- it just means "fairly close focusing". (Real macro lenses are much superior.) Check every lens you are thinking about in the lens database on this forum. If you can't find it, consider that lens either crap or "over your head" for now. There are some ok telephoto zooms in the $60-$90 range that you might find, some of the Sigma 70-300 models, or the Pentax FA 70-300 silver (the one that goes to 5.8 instead of 5.6) is pretty good.

Most cheap old lenses will be worse than the fine 18-55 kit lens you already have, so what's the rush to not use that one?

[boriscleto]

If you are going to buy old manual lenses, stick to primes. It's hard to go wrong with any of the common focal lengths of the film era (28, 35, 50, 135).

On a side note, beware the Ricoh P lenses. The P series has the dread 'Ricoh' pin that can become stuck in the AF screw drive. Most of the pins ate safe, but the early lenses are dangerous. Some third party lenses can be dangerous too, beware any Korean made Sears tele-zoom (80-200 or 60-300).

[ElJamoquio]

Got my first dlsr (k-50 with 18-55) last month, and am already thinking about buying my first used lens(es). ebay of course has numerous offerings if I search for k-mount. The problem is that are so darn many and I have no idea of any of them. I look through this fine site to see what I can find about certain cheap models I see on line. I am just really worried that I will end up buying the wrong lens type, or buying what is simply a complete piece of crap.

For instance, I found a RIKENON P 35-70 mm F3.5-4.5, but so far have only found feedback about these as good or okay. Crap? I was hoping to used its claimed macro feature and perhaps just experiement with a different lens, taking general shots when not doing macro. Also, $50 shipped sounds cheap, but it could be a $20 lens

is there a sub forum to ask about old lens? (after using search)

i really would love recommendations of really cheap lens for a newbie like me. Street shots, macro, general stuff.

As others have said, avoid early zooms like the plague.

Normal primes are the best in the old system, although some wides are also very good. Other people like older telephotos but I don't agree, the most I would go with manual glass is 135.

[Schick]

I would suggest you only consider sources like KEH and B&H.That way you know generally the stuff is checked out/is as advertised, you have no problems w/ returns (2 weeks or 30 days), and it is warrantied for 6 months as I recall. And the prices are usually less for equipment in comparable condition.

I am curious now if shipping and duty make them an economic choice. Realistically I would being paying shipping and duty on used sales from US ebay sellers as well. Perhaps those two stores are worthwhile.

---------- Post added 10-18-14 at 10:55 AM ----------

MOST of the time, old cheap zooms (especially manual focus) will be crap, and are not easy to use on modern cameras. Also almost any zoom that says "macro" really isn't -- it just means "fairly close focusing". (Real macro lenses are much superior.) Check every lens you are thinking about in the lens database on this forum. If you can't find it, consider that lens either crap or "over your head" for now. There are some ok telephoto zooms in the $60-$90 range that you might find, some of the Sigma 70-300 models, or the Pentax FA 70-300 silver (the one that goes to 5.8 instead of 5.6) is pretty good.

Most cheap old lenses will be worse than the fine 18-55 kit lens you already have, so what's the rush to not use that one?

I wonder if a nice old 50mm af would qualify. I really was just hoping to experiement and educate my self a bit about using different lenses.

[vonBaloney]

It is almost guaranteed as a newbie your enthusiasm will be ahead of your wisdom and you will be disappointed in what you get for your budget. One of the 18-250 superzooms might do you well as a single lens solution -- I used the DA 18-250 as my only lens for years and was quite happy with it (and still am, just have a boatload of others to play with also now).

[marcusBMG]

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/58-troubleshooting-beginner-help/259929-s...es-online.html

[wombat2go]

I agree with the others that if you have the 18~55 kit, there is no gain in buying old zooms, you would be better to go for some good, old, fixed focal lenses.
Here is a "fence test" I just did with the Rikenon 35~70mm you mention.
Camera jpgs out of K-01
Rikenon P 35~70mm set at about 45mm, f/5.6
https://app.box.com/s/u0u3827znxg20mc4w5d9

Pentax 18~55 Kit lens set at about 45 mm f/5.6
https://app.box.com/s/5gql6i5zobm4lknvwnvo

SMC Pentax -A 1:1.4 50mm set at f/5.6
https://app.box.com/s/c2uy48goob7ywy9sm7id

Test shows , on both zooms, the un-even focus side to side that I often see on old zooms
The 18~55 kit zoom seems to have better contrast than the Rik-P

The -A 50mm appears quite a lot better in sharpness across the plane, and in contrast, than both zooms.

As far as the Rikenon quality, the P lenses were plastic with the advantage of being light. However my Rik P lenses are starting to have glue failure and one has fallen apart.
The older Rikenon XR lenses here , on the other hand are of metal and are still in good condition, and my XR 50mm f/1.4 takes photos of similar quality to the Pentax -A 50mm f/1.4 above.

[Storm Chaser]

I would agree with many on this one, just hold off and get to now what you have first, then start shopping. I have some glass from the 70's and works great, buying used buy from a good source with some type of return policy.

[Tarragon]

I've been picking up stuff all year both from eBay and also my local camera shop. All cheap 2nd hand stuff. I've stuck with k-mount lenses and have been having fun with them. I disagree about the zooms - I think they are worth a shot if cheap enough. I have two that I use all the time (a vivitar 70-200 one and a bell &howell 60-300). I have found them great to have, and yes the primes are great too. the lens reviews on this site are worth looking at for each lens you are thinking of getting, and you will be surprised how good some of these lenses are rated (primes and zooms!). Great fun to be had, and if you decide you don't like a lens then you are free to resell it on eBay and get your money back(theoretically!)

just avoid any lenses that have fungus and you should be fine

[boriscleto]

A much bigger problem than fungus is element separation and haze. I bought a FA 28-70/4 that was so hazed you could barely see through it. That was the last lens I will ever buy from a Goodwill in Arizona on shopgoodwill.com. The ZX-5 that it was attached to wasn't functional either. It wasn't the first bad lens from Arizona that I had bought. You would think that the desert climate would be good for lenses, but who knows how long it was somewhere else before it got to AZ...

[Outis]

Just wanted to say that I recently ordered a used lens (40mm Limited) from Adorama, and when it became evident that the lens had problems in the first few days, they took it back with no questions asked.

[bschriver11]

Most lenses on ebay are not worth what the sellers are asking especially when you aren't getting any warranty and being described and sold by someone with very little knowledge of photography in many cases.I'd rather spend a little more and get it right the first time.A fool and his money soon go there seprate ways!