Pentax A* 135mm f1.8

beholder3 · 06-25-2017, 09:07 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Kerrowdown

So you don't actually own or have used one of these then... an interesting way to base an opinion on.

I even venture to say that my approach is the one billions of people on this planet use every day prior to making buying decisions.

And with a manual lens it's even more simple: the proof is in the resulting image alone mostly. It lacks autofocus. It lacks weathersealing. So all that there is left is haptics/build quality that doesn't come with an image provided.

I am happy to be corrected by anyone who can provide a raw file of the lens shot wide open in bright light with a nicely textured subject that fits the checking purpose.
Even a handfull full res 36 Mpx JPG images wide open with a good subject would be a start.

SunnyG. · 06-25-2017, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by beholder3

I even venture to say that my approach is the one billions of people on this planet use every day prior to making buying decisions.

And with a manual lens it's even more simple: the proof is in the resulting image alone mostly. It lacks autofocus. It lacks weathersealing. So all that there is left is haptics/build quality that doesn't come with an image provided.

I am happy to be corrected by anyone who can provide a raw file of the lens shot wide open in bright light with a nicely textured subject that fits the checking purpose.
Even a handfull full res 36 Mpx JPG images wide open with a good subject would be a start.

I see your point! Interesting! Maybe some one will post a full sized pic.

---------- Post added 06-25-17 at 10:46 AM ----------

Originally posted by beholder3

Here's my opinion:

The Samyang 135mm F2 goes for 490 EUR in PK with full guarantee and can be repaired easily. The best image quality I have seen so far in any lens on PK.

Any images I have seen of the A*135mm were significantly softer wide open, had bad color fringing CAs and not really flare resistant. You seem to need to stop it down to F4 for real good sharpness - and why buy a F1.8 lens then?
This is also the main reason why you will have such a hard time finding many full resolution images from this lens on 24MPx or 36 MPx bodies using the lens wide open. It's a collector's item and collectors don't want to show off how bad it is actually.

So for the much poorer image quality alone the A* would be rated at 2/3 of 490 EUR = 326 EUR.
For OEM equipment we usually pay roundabout a +30% OEM surcharge to exact same quality items from third parties, which means 424 EUR.
For used items loosing warranty even in mint condition and only a couple of days old you can demand roughly a -20% discount, so we are at 339 EUR.
For really old lenses with no spare parts around any longer you can demand an additional -15% discount, so we end up at 276 EUR fair price for mint quality A*135.

The difference between 276 EUR and what sellers want is collectors' fantasy.

I don't think that's gonna happy. You're free to give it a try and let me know what happens. You cannot send messages to the sellers unless you buy the product

**gofour3** · 06-25-2017, 01:10 PM - **4 Likes**

Originally posted by beholder3

I even venture to say that my approach is the one billions of people on this planet use every day prior to making buying decisions.
And with a manual lens it's even more simple: the proof is in the resulting image alone mostly. It lacks autofocus. It lacks weathersealing. So all that there is left is haptics/build quality that doesn't come with an image provided.

The Samyang isn't AF or weather-sealed either is it, it's also cheap looking and made of plastic??? I have neither lens but would spend four times the amount and buy the A135/1.8 everyday of the week.

Easy decision for me, the Pentax is better built and has already lasted for +30 years, The Samyang looks typical of these newer Asian third party lenses, good optics but plastic with probably bad factory quality control.

The A* was the height of Pentax craftsmanship and no current third party lens can match that for me.

Phil.

SunnyG. · 06-25-2017, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by gofour3

The Samyang isn't AF or weather-sealed either is it, it's also cheap looking and made of plastic??? I have neither lens but would spend four times the amount and buy the A135/1.8 everyday of the week.

Easy decision for me, the Pentax is better built and has already lasted for +30 years, The Samyang looks typical of these newer Asian third party lenses, good optics but plastic with probably bad factory quality control.

The A* was the height of Pentax craftsmanship and no current third party lens can match that for me.

Phil.

Well the Pentax F 135mm f2.8 & the SMC Pentax 135mm f2.5 are good alternatives. Though they're not so fast.

**gofour3** · 06-26-2017, 07:36 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by SunnyG.

Well the Pentax F 135mm f2.8 & the SMC Pentax 135mm f2.5 are good alternatives. Though they're not so fast.

Yes agreed, I do have the K135/2.5 and it's very good. I also have the K135/3.5 which is also not bad. (The A135/2.8 looks to have the same optical formula as the K135/3.5)

Phil.

SunnyG. · 06-27-2017, 01:15 AM

Originally posted by gofour3

Yes agreed, I do have the K135/2.5 and it's very good. I also have the K135/3.5 which is also not bad. (The A135/2.8 looks to have the same optical formula as the K135/3.5)

Phil.

135mm f2.5 is an inexpensive lens it's really good. And we'll I don't know much about the f3.5, but I do know that A 135/2.8 and FA version are similar, although the FA version might have better coating. And can be found in better condition.

**Pål Jensen** · 06-28-2017, 11:21 AM

Originally posted by beholder3

H

Any images I have seen of the A*135mm were significantly softer wide open, had bad color fringing CAs and not really flare resistant. You seem to need to stop it down to F4 for real good sharpness - and why buy a F1.8 lens then?
This is also the main reason why you will have such a hard time finding many full resolution images from this lens on 24MPx or 36 MPx bodies using the lens wide open. It's a collector's item and collectors don't want to show off how bad it is actually..

I owned the A* 135/1.8 back in the film days. Sold it back in the film days for $1400. I cannot remember it was that bad. As all pentax lenses it was very flare resistant and exceptionally flare resistant for an 1.8 lens. It was not particularly soft wide open. It was on par with the Pentax FA645 120/4 macro, which is a terrific lens, in optical quality (I have the adapter). Never tried it on digital but it is a terrific lens for its time. .
It is better lens than the FA* 85/1.4.

beholder3 · 06-29-2017, 02:50 AM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

I owned the A* 135/1.8 back in the film days. Sold it back in the film days for $1400. I cannot remember it was that bad.

I wouldn't call it bad.
The weaknesses you can see today on 36 MPx pixelpeeping are just way beyond what you perceived on film usually.
And in this case it has the challenge to be up against arguably the optically technically best lens ever provided in PK mount which you get for bargain prices new.

**jbondo** · 07-03-2017, 12:44 PM - **2 Likes**

I own both the Pentax A* 135/1.8 as well as the Samyang 135mm F2. While I have yet to have time to do a strict head-to-head comparison, there one attribute that is important to me that I have never seen mentioned in any discussion or any review anywhere. That is the transmittance. The Pentax has much more transmittance at F2 than the Sanyang at F2 And at F1.8, due to the greater transmittance, the Pentax is far better in very low light situations. Much more so that it would be apparent if you were only looking at the specifications. The Samyang has a little better bokeh for branch-y objects at very far distances. The Pentax has outstanding bokeh at near to medium distances. It may be a month or two before I can do a shootout. I'll post one as soon as I can.

krazykat · 07-04-2017, 04:27 PM

Originally posted by SunnyG.

135mm f2.5 is an inexpensive lens it's really good. And we'll I don't know much about the f3.5, but I do know that A 135/2.8 and FA version are similar, although the FA version might have better coating. And can be found in better condition.

The A 135/2.8 and F/FA 135/2.8 have totally different optical formulas. Coatings is the least of their differences. The A 135/2.8 shares a similar optical formula to the K 135/3.5 (but not the M 135/3.5).

The A 135/2.8 is much weaker optically than the K 135/2.5 and the F/FA 135/2.8 IMO.

SunnyG. · 07-05-2017, 03:20 AM

Originally posted by krazykat

The A 135/2.8 and F/FA 135/2.8 have totally different optical formulas. Coatings is the least of their differences. The A 135/2.8 shares a similar optical formula to the K 135/3.5 (but not the M 135/3.5).

The A 135/2.8 is much weaker optically than the K 135/2.5 and the F/FA 135/2.8 IMO.

Any proof to back that up? Would be nice to know! I'm curious krazykat! I Don't have any experience with the A version or the k Version.

fwcetus · 07-05-2017, 05:40 AM

Originally posted by krazykat

The A 135/2.8 and F/FA 135/2.8 have totally different optical formulas. Coatings is the least of their differences. The A 135/2.8 shares a similar optical formula to the K 135/3.5 (but not the M 135/3.5). The A 135/2.8 is much weaker optically than the K 135/2.5 and the F/FA 135/2.8 IMO.

And the K 135/2.5 (

) has the same optical design as the K 200/2.5 (

) and the A* 200/2.8 (

).

krazykat · 07-05-2017, 05:16 PM

Originally posted by SunnyG.

Any proof to back that up? Would be nice to know! I'm curious krazykat! I Don't have any experience with the A version or the k Version.

The A 135/2.8 is a 4 element 4 group design, the F/FA 135/2.8 is 8 element 7 group. I've attached images of both below.

You can check out the details here: Pentax Telephoto Prime Lenses

And also on the lens review section here on PF of course!

**gofour3** · 07-06-2017, 07:49 AM

Originally posted by krazykat

The A 135/2.8 is a 4 element 4 group design

Yes the K135/3.5 is the same as the A135/2.8.

Phil.

rozand · 09-19-2018, 05:01 AM - **1 Like**

just busy experimenting. all handheld, catch-in-focus

photographs did not upload initially, retrying

also several here: Vanishing into green by Roger van Zandvoort - Photo 274817197 / 500px

07-05-2017, 05:16 PM	#28
krazykat Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 546	Originally posted by SunnyG. Any proof to back that up? Would be nice to know! I'm curious krazykat! I Don't have any experience with the A version or the k Version. The A 135/2.8 is a 4 element 4 group design, the F/FA 135/2.8 is 8 element 7 group. I've attached images of both below. You can check out the details here: Pentax Telephoto Prime Lenses And also on the lens review section here on PF of course! Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
[Asking]SMC Pentax K 50mm f1/4 VS Pentax-M 50mm f1.4 VS Pentax-M 50mm f1.7 ?	liemjerry	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	24	07-08-2015 04:23 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax A 50mm f1.4, Vivitar Macro 135mm f3.5, Chinon 50mm f1.8	causey	Sold Items	4	01-22-2012 11:15 AM
For Sale - Sold: 135mm F1.8, 135mm F3.5x2, FA50mm F1.4, 0.3x adapter, SF10 (Worldwide)	MightyMike	Sold Items	8	07-13-2011 06:23 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA 12-24mm f/4, 50mm M f1.4, Tak. 135mm f2.5, Tak. M42 55mm f1.8 (US)	DenverDutchman	Sold Items	2	11-25-2010 10:06 AM
Which 135mm Takumar is Better, the 135mm/2.5 or the 135mm/3.5?	zx-m	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	23	08-23-2010 05:59 PM

06-25-2017, 09:07 AM - 1 Like	#16
beholder3 Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 3,112	Originally posted by Kerrowdown So you don't actually own or have used one of these then... an interesting way to base an opinion on. I even venture to say that my approach is the one billions of people on this planet use every day prior to making buying decisions. And with a manual lens it's even more simple: the proof is in the resulting image alone mostly. It lacks autofocus. It lacks weathersealing. So all that there is left is haptics/build quality that doesn't come with an image provided. I am happy to be corrected by anyone who can provide a raw file of the lens shot wide open in bright light with a nicely textured subject that fits the checking purpose. Even a handfull full res 36 Mpx JPG images wide open with a good subject would be a start.

06-25-2017, 10:43 AM	#17
SunnyG. Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Posts: 428 Original Poster	Originally posted by beholder3 I even venture to say that my approach is the one billions of people on this planet use every day prior to making buying decisions. And with a manual lens it's even more simple: the proof is in the resulting image alone mostly. It lacks autofocus. It lacks weathersealing. So all that there is left is haptics/build quality that doesn't come with an image provided. I am happy to be corrected by anyone who can provide a raw file of the lens shot wide open in bright light with a nicely textured subject that fits the checking purpose. Even a handfull full res 36 Mpx JPG images wide open with a good subject would be a start. I see your point! Interesting! Maybe some one will post a full sized pic. ---------- Post added 06-25-17 at 10:46 AM ---------- Originally posted by beholder3 Here's my opinion: The Samyang 135mm F2 goes for 490 EUR in PK with full guarantee and can be repaired easily. The best image quality I have seen so far in any lens on PK. Any images I have seen of the A135mm were significantly* softer wide open, had bad color fringing CAs and not really flare resistant. You seem to need to stop it down to F4 for real good sharpness - and why buy a F1.8 lens then? This is also the main reason why you will have such a hard time finding many full resolution images from this lens on 24MPx or 36 MPx bodies using the lens wide open. It's a collector's item and collectors don't want to show off how bad it is actually. So for the much poorer image quality alone the A* would be rated at 2/3 of 490 EUR = 326 EUR. For OEM equipment we usually pay roundabout a +30% OEM surcharge to exact same quality items from third parties, which means 424 EUR. For used items loosing warranty even in mint condition and only a couple of days old you can demand roughly a -20% discount, so we are at 339 EUR. For really old lenses with no spare parts around any longer you can demand an additional -15% discount, so we end up at 276 EUR fair price for mint quality A*135. The difference between 276 EUR and what sellers want is collectors' fantasy. I don't think that's gonna happy. You're free to give it a try and let me know what happens. You cannot send messages to the sellers unless you buy the product

06-25-2017, 01:10 PM - 4 Likes	#18
gofour3 Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,091	Originally posted by beholder3 I even venture to say that my approach is the one billions of people on this planet use every day prior to making buying decisions. And with a manual lens it's even more simple: the proof is in the resulting image alone mostly. It lacks autofocus. It lacks weathersealing. So all that there is left is haptics/build quality that doesn't come with an image provided. The Samyang isn't AF or weather-sealed either is it, it's also cheap looking and made of plastic??? I have neither lens but would spend four times the amount and buy the A135/1.8 everyday of the week. Easy decision for me, the Pentax is better built and has already lasted for +30 years, The Samyang looks typical of these newer Asian third party lenses, good optics but plastic with probably bad factory quality control. The A* was the height of Pentax craftsmanship and no current third party lens can match that for me. Phil.

06-25-2017, 01:54 PM	#19
SunnyG. Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Posts: 428 Original Poster	Originally posted by gofour3 The Samyang isn't AF or weather-sealed either is it, it's also cheap looking and made of plastic??? I have neither lens but would spend four times the amount and buy the A135/1.8 everyday of the week. Easy decision for me, the Pentax is better built and has already lasted for +30 years, The Samyang looks typical of these newer Asian third party lenses, good optics but plastic with probably bad factory quality control. The A* was the height of Pentax craftsmanship and no current third party lens can match that for me. Phil. Well the Pentax F 135mm f2.8 & the SMC Pentax 135mm f2.5 are good alternatives. Though they're not so fast.

06-26-2017, 07:36 AM - 1 Like	#20
gofour3 Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,091	Originally posted by SunnyG. Well the Pentax F 135mm f2.8 & the SMC Pentax 135mm f2.5 are good alternatives. Though they're not so fast. Yes agreed, I do have the K135/2.5 and it's very good. I also have the K135/3.5 which is also not bad. (The A135/2.8 looks to have the same optical formula as the K135/3.5) Phil.

06-27-2017, 01:15 AM	#21
SunnyG. Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Posts: 428 Original Poster	Originally posted by gofour3 Yes agreed, I do have the K135/2.5 and it's very good. I also have the K135/3.5 which is also not bad. (The A135/2.8 looks to have the same optical formula as the K135/3.5) Phil. 135mm f2.5 is an inexpensive lens it's really good. And we'll I don't know much about the f3.5, but I do know that A 135/2.8 and FA version are similar, although the FA version might have better coating. And can be found in better condition.

06-28-2017, 11:21 AM	#22
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by beholder3 H Any images I have seen of the A135mm were significantly* softer wide open, had bad color fringing CAs and not really flare resistant. You seem to need to stop it down to F4 for real good sharpness - and why buy a F1.8 lens then? This is also the main reason why you will have such a hard time finding many full resolution images from this lens on 24MPx or 36 MPx bodies using the lens wide open. It's a collector's item and collectors don't want to show off how bad it is actually.. I owned the A* 135/1.8 back in the film days. Sold it back in the film days for $1400. I cannot remember it was that bad. As all pentax lenses it was very flare resistant and exceptionally flare resistant for an 1.8 lens. It was not particularly soft wide open. It was on par with the Pentax FA645 120/4 macro, which is a terrific lens, in optical quality (I have the adapter). Never tried it on digital but it is a terrific lens for its time. . It is better lens than the FA* 85/1.4.

06-29-2017, 02:50 AM	#23
beholder3 Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 3,112	Originally posted by Pål Jensen I owned the A* 135/1.8 back in the film days. Sold it back in the film days for $1400. I cannot remember it was that bad. I wouldn't call it bad. The weaknesses you can see today on 36 MPx pixelpeeping are just way beyond what you perceived on film usually. And in this case it has the challenge to be up against arguably the optically technically best lens ever provided in PK mount which you get for bargain prices new.

07-03-2017, 12:44 PM - 2 Likes	#24
jbondo Loyal Site Supportaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Texas Photos: Albums Posts: 503	I own both the Pentax A* 135/1.8 as well as the Samyang 135mm F2. While I have yet to have time to do a strict head-to-head comparison, there one attribute that is important to me that I have never seen mentioned in any discussion or any review anywhere. That is the transmittance. The Pentax has much more transmittance at F2 than the Sanyang at F2 And at F1.8, due to the greater transmittance, the Pentax is far better in very low light situations. Much more so that it would be apparent if you were only looking at the specifications. The Samyang has a little better bokeh for branch-y objects at very far distances. The Pentax has outstanding bokeh at near to medium distances. It may be a month or two before I can do a shootout. I'll post one as soon as I can.

07-04-2017, 04:27 PM	#25
krazykat Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 546	Originally posted by SunnyG. 135mm f2.5 is an inexpensive lens it's really good. And we'll I don't know much about the f3.5, but I do know that A 135/2.8 and FA version are similar, although the FA version might have better coating. And can be found in better condition. The A 135/2.8 and F/FA 135/2.8 have totally different optical formulas. Coatings is the least of their differences. The A 135/2.8 shares a similar optical formula to the K 135/3.5 (but not the M 135/3.5). The A 135/2.8 is much weaker optically than the K 135/2.5 and the F/FA 135/2.8 IMO.

07-05-2017, 03:20 AM	#26
SunnyG. Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Posts: 428 Original Poster	Originally posted by krazykat The A 135/2.8 and F/FA 135/2.8 have totally different optical formulas. Coatings is the least of their differences. The A 135/2.8 shares a similar optical formula to the K 135/3.5 (but not the M 135/3.5). The A 135/2.8 is much weaker optically than the K 135/2.5 and the F/FA 135/2.8 IMO. Any proof to back that up? Would be nice to know! I'm curious krazykat! I Don't have any experience with the A version or the k Version.

07-05-2017, 05:40 AM	#27
fwcetus Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New England Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,286	Originally posted by krazykat The A 135/2.8 and F/FA 135/2.8 have totally different optical formulas. Coatings is the least of their differences. The A 135/2.8 shares a similar optical formula to the K 135/3.5 (but not the M 135/3.5). The A 135/2.8 is much weaker optically than the K 135/2.5 and the F/FA 135/2.8 IMO. And the K 135/2.5 ( ) has the same optical design as the K 200/2.5 ( ) and the A* 200/2.8 ( ).

07-06-2017, 07:49 AM	#29
gofour3 Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,091	Originally posted by krazykat The A 135/2.8 is a 4 element 4 group design Yes the K135/3.5 is the same as the A135/2.8. Phil.