[robthebloke]

Really? Looks like A Cool Lens. . .

It's rubbish. Get a DA21. It's better.

[ZombieArmy]

Sears 135mm f2.8. Not a very good lens despite what people say. Could just be my copy but I much prefer my 135mm Takumar Bayonet 2.5

[GeneV]

Yeah, everyone has different experiences. It's painful for me to read posts dissing the FA 50mm f1.4. The best portrait I ever took was with the FA 50 by candlelight at f1.4. Performance has always been terrific in other scenarios, general photography, landscape, etc. Great lens, IME. Really, really needs a hood though, more than any other lens I know. Here's mine, 49mm metal, telephoto:

True for me, too, Dan. The first think I did was to buy a nice metal hood (rectangular) and it became a go-to portrait lens.

[GeneV]

It's rubbish. Get a DA21. It's better.

The DA21 is better if you aren't using it on full frame. For the K1, I haven't tried the A20, but the old M20 is a lot of fun.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[victormeldrew]

Personally the 10-17 fisheye...I would enjoy it a lot more if it weren't for the catastrophically bad CA whenever there is any significant contrast. Backlit foliage just turns into a purple mash. I knew it wouldn't be great, but was unprepared for just how unusable the shots can be.

[normhead]

The FAJ 18-35 hasn't been mentioned yet,

When I did the following test...
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/312892-your...mm-images.html

It was my least favourite lens... and got 4 votes out of 81. But, it's not that bad...and It's FF. I it wasn't so big and cheap feeling I'd probably use it more.

---------- Post added 11-29-16 at 09:33 AM ----------

Personally the 10-17 fisheye...I would enjoy it a lot more if it weren't for the catastrophically bad CA whenever there is any significant contrast. Backlit foliage just turns into a purple mash. I knew it wouldn't be great, but was unprepared for just how unusable the shots can be.

I've sold canvasses with the DA10-17 and the purple mash you describe. Purple brining is usually something that bothers photographers more than clients. I have the Sigma 8-16 now, and I keep telling myself I'll retake that shot, but I just can't seem to get it as good, and the location is a two hour hike. I put it in the bag when the 8-16 doesn't fit these days, or when I'm just out for a good time. A second canvas like the one I sold lives in the bathroom in the basement. I love seeing it. All Tess res is purple fringing. It makes her cringe. You have to look for that stuff, and I've seen printed images in magazines that had serious purple fringing. It's not the really, really bad thing many on here make it out to be.

If I listened to the anti purple fringing crowd, I'd be out $300, there's a price to be paid for that kind of judgement. Learn to look at the overall image.

[TaoMaas]

For me it is the used Sigma 400mm AF f5.6.

I hadn't looked at this thread until this morning because I'd been thinking that I hadn't really owned a disappointing lens. I got as far as your post before I said, "Oh...wait. Yeah, I guess I have had one." I have the manual version of the Sigma 400mm f5.6 and it's not that it's a bad lens...it just wasn't what I was expecting. I was expecting a significant improvement over the old pre-set 400mm f6.3 Tele-Astranar "Girl-watcher special" that I'd been using for years and which cost me about $45 new. At several times that price, I thought I'd get more out of the Sigma than just convenience, but it hasn't worked out that way. For me, it's only been a very slight step up in image quality.

[gofour3]

The A50/1.7.

Stellar optics wasted on a lens with a plastic aperture assembly, that is prone to getting stuck. If only Pentax had spent a few extra yen and used a metal assembly.................

Phil.

[victormeldrew]

The A50/1.7.

Stellar optics wasted on a lens with a plastic aperture assembly, that is prone to getting stuck. If only Pentax had spent a few extra yen and used a metal assembly.................

Phil.

Strangely that was my least disappointing lens. Picked one up for pocket lint because the aperture ring was broken and spent ten minutes with some epoxy fixing it...and got a stellar lens in return!

[ChristianRock]

Of the ones I've had, I have an easy winner... Takumar-A 28-80 3.5-4.5 Macro (it came with my P30T). My copy was just awful... sharpness stopped down wasn't too bad, but the colors were so bland and inaccurate compared to other Pentax lenses...

Runner up would be the Pentax 28 2.8 M and A versions... they weren't bad, but the Rikenon 28 2.8 was quite better and that one ended up staying.

I would also have the mention the 18-55 AL II, though that one at least had some sweet spots which somehow redeemed it. But at 18mm my copy was basically unusable.

There are other lenses that have some bad qualities but the good qualities of the lens greatly outweigh that. Bad bokeh fringing in the SMC-A 70-210, for example - but the lens is otherwise sharp and the colors and rendering are wonderful. My Tamron 70-300 LD DI is soft anywhere over 200mm which is disappointing, but from 70-180mm it's a good lens.

[gofour3]

Strangely that was my least disappointing lens. Picked one up for pocket lint because the aperture ring was broken and spent ten minutes with some epoxy fixing it...and got a stellar lens in return!

Yep that's the issue a cheap build, so the A50/1.7 is a big disappointment for me.

Mine also had problems and I had the lens CLAed, still it's the worst moving aperture ring of my 75+ Pentax lenses. A disaster waiting to happen.

Phil.

[BigMackCam]

Yep that's the issue a cheap build, so the A50/1.7 is a big disappointment for me.

Mine also had problems and I had the lens CLAed, still it's the worst moving aperture ring of my 75+ Pentax lenses. A disaster waiting to happen.

You're not a fan, are you? I think I must have been lucky with mine... It doesn't feel as nice as the M50/1.7, of course, but it works smoothly and precisely. Given the amount I use it (which isn't all that much, currently), I'm hoping it will stay that way...

[gofour3]

You're not a fan, are you? I think I must have been lucky with mine... It doesn't feel as nice as the M50/1.7, of course, but it works smoothly and precisely. Given the amount I use it (which isn't all that much, currently), I'm hoping it will stay that way...

Actually I really like the A50/1.7's optics and even more so than the M50/1.7. It's just that stiff/plastic aperture ring.
Problem is even if you fix it, it still can break again.

Phil.

[boriscleto]

Actually I really like the A50/1.7's optics and even more so than the M50/1.7. It's just that stiff/plastic aperture ring.
Problem is even if you fix it, it still can break again.

Phil.

Or you can just leave it in A and let the camera set the aperture

[Pål Jensen]

Fa* 85/1.4