[Andreas51]

I am an unashamed raider of 2nd hand photographic shops and Internet auction houses (you know the sites I am referring to). And so I now have a reasonably comprehensive collection of Pentax lenses. It all started with me selling my first SLR equipment (M42 screw mount system with a 50mm lens, a 35mm lens and an awful 70 ~ 200mm push-pull zoom lens) and selecting Pentax as my new system. I bought my trusty MX, a 28mm and a 80mm f/2.0 lens. And that was what I started with. In those days the "normal" wide angle lens was a 35mm and the most common telephoto lens was a 135. 28mm was the considered an ultrawide – how the times have changed.



Although I hankered after other lenses this was what I started with. The first addition to this came, when a local camera store had a special offer of a 200mm f/2.5 lens. The price was right, my finance minister said yes and off we went to look at it. It was a beautiful beast of a lens. But realistically, would I always carry it around with me? At almost 1Kg weight? I decided not to get it, instead I got the 150mm f/3.5 – a much more compact lens at 290g and the same filter thread as my other lenses.



Shortly afterwards I also got the 100mm macro.



That was it for quite a few years. I added two medium format cameras and a 4x5" camera. Oh yes also a Sigma 28 ~ 105 going on holiday zoom lens.
What I hankered after but never got was the 40mm pancake lens – nice but did I really need it, the Pentax shift lens – way too expensive – and I again and again looked in the second hand shop windows looking for a reasonably priced 135mm lens.



Then my eyesight got worse and I decided to go autofocus. I got myself a Pentax *IST – and some AF lenses. I got a 35mm AF, a 50mm AF, a Sigma 24 ~ 70 f/2.8mm Zoom and a beauty – the 80mm f/1.4. I found out later that I needed only to swap to my left eye, and hence I now still use my manual focus camera(s)
Then digital struck – not me – well not me at first – but with a lot of people switching to digital, a lot of cameras and lenses could be had at very reasonable prices in auction sites. My MX was joined by a couple more as was my *IST joined by another one plus two MZ-5N. Along with one of the MX came a 135mm lens so I could strike that off my "got away" list. As well als a couple of 50mm lenses.



The 40mm pancake I still hankered over but the price I went for here in Germany was still ridiculous. Until I found it at a well known second hand dealer situated in the US. Along with a 35mm, which I did not really need, it joined my collection. So in the end the only ones that got away are the 200mm f/2.5 which quite honestly is still too heavy and the shift lens but the final verdict is not out on that.



(PS: I also own a couple of non-Pentax primes, and I would like to add, all these lenses are in use – some more, some less)

[Dlanor Sekao]

Sounds pretty good ! The chase is always exciting but as far as Im concerned I would have donated Blood to get that 200mm 2.5 !
Mx sounds good too !
I wonder if this is going to turn into a Lens list "post um" what You own thread ?...lol....If it does Im IN !

[boriscleto]

I wonder if this is going to turn into a Lens list "post um" what You own thread ?...lol....If it does Im IN !

You really want me to type out all 86?

[monochrome]

I owned and sold a K50/1.2. I 'made' $150 on the round turn. And I'm out $400 value today.

Learned my lesson though. I kept the K200/2.5.

[Dlanor Sekao]

You really want me to type out all 86?

I bet you have them all ready to go in a list somewhere...just copy and paste.....lol

[boriscleto]

I bet you have them all ready to go in a list somewhere...just copy and paste.....lol

Certainly. And I can sort them by brand or focal length.

[Andreas51]

But it is not so much about which lenses we own, but which ones we don't own, and why we do not own them. I saw a copy of the 200 f/2.5 classified as excellent at KEH ....

But as a general rule I only buy stuff I intend to use, and quite honestly I still cannot see myself lugging one kg of lens around with me ... so alas again this beauty will not grace my shelves

[Buffy]

I'm very deliberate about acquiring lenses. There have been a few I bought and then sold (including the FA 28 twice) for some reason, either it wasn't meeting expectations or I found it redundant to something else. The FA 35 was practically glued to my camera, but then I got the FA 31 and never used it again. The FA 135 is very good, but I found I didn't like carrying both it and a 70-200mm zoom.

The one that "got away", though, was the DA 16-45. Like a lot of novices, I got the 18-55 kit lens and the DA 55-200. Then I bought then 16-45 to replace the kit lens, and a fast 50 and a few more. Then the fateful moment came when I bought an MZ-S and wanted lenses I could use on both film and digital. In a nearly straight up trade, I swapped the 16-45 for a Tamron 17-35mm. The Tamron is a good lens but .... well, it's lacking something, je ne sais quoi.

[Dlanor Sekao]

Mine that got away was a Ricoh 105mm macro....a very desirable and highly rated Lester Dine Macro !
I was at a estate sale and all they wanted a whole whopping $35 for it and I was rummaging around some other photo gear. Someone else picked it up off the table and that was that....GONE !
Im still crying over that one as it was the very last on my list of lenses to own.....and to think I laid it down to look in a photo bag....Nooooo.....Boo Hoo......Nooooo......I had it in my hands just moments before...Dohhh....Noooooooo....!
But that's OK....I bought a Spotmatic II and three Mint Takumars at the next yard sale for a whole $25......But it still wasn't a Lester Dine Macro.

[boriscleto]

There are far too many 'ones that got away' as I do most of my buying on online auction sites.

One that sticks out to me is the black Spotmatic with a Super-Macro-Takumar 50/4 on Craigslist a few miles from my house. It sat there for months at $100 then was reduced to $50. But for some reason I just never went for it. Probably because I already have a perfectly good Sigma 50mm macro.

[boriscleto]

The Tamron is a good lens but .... well, it's lacking something, je ne sais quoi.

Jenna said what?

[Dlanor Sekao]

jenna said what?

lol....+1

[Buffy]

Jenna said what?

Aaah, you caught me! My spy name is Jenna.

[Dartmoor Dave]

The one that keeps getting away is the Takumar 17mm fisheye. It only ever comes up for auction when I'm too short of cash to make a serious bid for it, and the buy it now prices are always so ridiculously high that I refuse to pay them.

I've got some expensive car repair work coming up next month, so you can pretty much guarantee that two or three Tak 17s will come up for auction here in the UK and I won't be able to bid on any of them.

[Dlanor Sekao]

The one that keeps getting away is the Takumar 17mm fisheye. It only ever comes up for auction when I'm too short of cash to make a serious bid for it, and the buy it now prices are always so ridiculously high that I refuse to pay them.

I've got some expensive car repair work coming up next month, so you can pretty much guarantee that two or three Tak 17s will come up for auction here in the UK and I won't be able to bid on any of them.

Mine is always AFTER I break down and pay full price for a lens....THEN it seems to show up cheap in a store or estate sale when I just paid 3 times as much or more....lol.
Was that way with a 24mm SMC-A......broke down and bought one for $175......then found one in a Kit with a MX and 2 other lenses for $50 3 days later.....of course I didn't pass that up.