Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-10-2017, 07:10 AM - 2 Likes   #1
Veteran Member
IgorZ's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,735
What's the best Pentax prime?

Of course you can ask what "best" means, and you would be right. By "best" I mean the highest lens rating. You might be thinking (quite incorrectly, as it turns out) that Pentax makes great small prime lenses - such as the FA 77. I had some free time and thought I would crunch some numbers from the lens review database, and I can tell you that you are completely wrong. Pentax is all about telephoto lenses. Out of the 10 lenses with highest ratings only 3 are shorter than 200mm. These the A* 85mm (at #4), DA 35 f2.8 (at #7), and K 30 f2.8 at #10. The list of highest rated primes is this:


Lenses Rating Price User Reviews $ per point of rating
1 SMC Pentax-A* 200mm F4 Macro ED 10 1614 10 161
2 SMC Pentax-FA* 200mm F4 Macro ED [IF] 10 2407 7 241
3 SMC Pentax-A* 400mm F2.8 ED [IF] 10 3200 4 320
4 SMC Pentax A* 85mm F1.4 9.93 975 14 98
5 SMC Pentax-FA* 300mm F2.8 ED [IF] 9.9 2832 10 286
6 SMC Pentax-F* 300mm F4.5 ED [IF] 9.88 967 34 98
7 HD Pentax-DA 35mm F2.8 Limited Macro 9.86 497 15 50
8 SMC Pentax A* 200mm F2.8 ED 9.83 740 6 75
9 SMC Pentax-A* 300mm F2.8 ED [IF] 9.83 2850 6 290
10 SMC Pentax 30mm F2.8 9.76 247 25 25

To be honest, I was surprised by this list...

As you can see, these lenses are pretty pricey. Do they offer the best bang for the buck? Not at all. Here is the list of the 10 lenses that offer the best bang for the buck (or dollar per point of rating).

Lens Rating Price # of user reviews $ per point of rating
1 SMC Pentax-M 50mm F2 8.22 24 91 2.92
2 SMC Pentax-A 50mm F2 7.84 34 63 4.34
3 SMC Pentax-M 50mm F1.7 9.38 41 207 4.37
4 SMC Pentax 55mm F2 9.21 53 14 5.75
5 SMC Pentax-M 135mm F3.5 8.57 50 94 5.83
6 SMC Pentax 55mm F1.8 9.36 55 65 5.88
7 SMC Pentax-M 28mm F2.8 8.27 54 75 6.53
8 SMC Pentax-A 50mm F1.7 8.99 62 124 6.90
9 SMC Pentax-M 28mm F3.5 8.81 63 38 7.15
10 SMC Pentax-M 50mm F1.4 9.25 78 97 8.43

In general though, there seems to be little relationship between price and quality as expressed by lens rating. That might not be surprising though, as no lens is rated below 7.7.

Urgh... These tables look correct when I type, but once I post them they are all jumbled... Sorry...

10-10-2017, 07:31 AM - 1 Like   #2
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,182
I think it is important to recall that those reviews are quite subjective and easily biased by the numbers of responses as well as the experience of the reviewer go into this. The head to head shootout on the site (still subjective) came to a totally different conclusion...
10-10-2017, 07:40 AM   #3
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
It is a pretty tough call, particularly when you try to compare lenses with very different focal lengths. How much better is the FA 200 macro compared to the FA *85 f1.4? I have no idea, but hopefully a person realizes that they are very different lenses with different intended purposes.

It is like saying who is the greatest baseball or basketball player of all time? Most lists would actually divide players out by position since it is tough enough to compare players with the same position, much less a center and a point guard.
10-10-2017, 07:53 AM   #4
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
Adam ran a poll, according to the wisdom of the forum, it's the 77 ltd. with the 31 ltd in second.

10-10-2017, 08:01 AM   #5
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
I think it is really tough. The number of reviews varies greatly. There are 89 reviews for the FA 77 and only 7 for the FA 200 macro. The recent DFA zooms only have about 15 reviews. This means that for lenses with only a few reviews, a couple of lower reviews will tend to skew the overall score a lot more than if there are bunches of reviews.

For the competition that Adam ran, it was more of a popularity contest. There are many fewer folks who have shot with an A *135 f1.8 or FA 200 macro or even a FA *85 than with the FA limiteds and DA limiteds. It isn't surprising that those lenses ended up getting more votes in the end.

The FA 77 is a nice lens (I own it), but it certainly isn't the pinnacle of Pentax optics. Of the lenses I've used, the DFA *70-200 probably takes that prize.
10-10-2017, 08:11 AM - 1 Like   #6
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
For the competition that Adam ran, it was more of a popularity contest. There are many fewer folks who have shot with an A *135 f1.8 or FA 200 macro or even a FA *85 than with the FA limiteds and DA limiteds. It isn't surprising that those lenses ended up getting more votes in the end.
Just saying, that was the popular choice. It is not lost on me that I personally don't think I've ever seen images taken with many of the "best" lenses, as well as knowledge that people like LeRolls went from the 77 to the FA*85 1.4, I'm almost always aware of such moves.

Individuals will have preferences based on individual tastes that may or may not be applicable to other shooters.

QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
the DFA *70-200 probably takes that prize.
Oh no, you're going to offend the prime cultists with that one. Put on your flack jacket.
I'd be tempted to try it just on your recommendation if it wasn't so heavy. The arthritis in my shoulders hates heavy gear, and punishes me for even thinking about carrying a lens that heavy.

Now I'm thinking about the 40 XS and my shoulders are sending me some love again.
40 XS, 40 XS,,,,,, 40 XS, hmm that feels good.

Last edited by normhead; 10-10-2017 at 08:18 AM.
10-10-2017, 08:14 AM   #7
Veteran Member
IgorZ's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,735
Original Poster
You guys are taking this post very seriously. As I said, I had free time (I could've added I was bored), so I decided to do this. Having said that, the serious part is whether the rating system works, and if not, how it can be made better. I agree with all the points that you guys made, about it being subjective, about the numbers of reviews that can skew the results, etc. But as someone who cannot just go and buy a whole bunch of lenses, do a shootout, and decide for myself, I have to rely on reviews. Also, as a reviewer, I have to make my review useful. So how do I do that?

I was surprised though that the longer lenses came out on top. Why is that? The high price induces the reviewer to give it a high rating so as to convince himself the money was well spent?

10-10-2017, 08:22 AM - 2 Likes   #8
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
onlineflyer's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NW Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,081
To me, the best prime is the one I have on my camera . . . . . . . . . . and that varies by situation.
10-10-2017, 08:25 AM   #9
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by IgorZ Quote
I was surprised though that the longer lenses came out on top. Why is that? The high price induces the reviewer to give it a high rating so as to convince himself the money was well spent?
That could be it, but it also could be the higher price reflecting more complicated designs and tighter manufacturing tolerances.
For me personally, I just really like longer lenses, both the operation and the look of the images. My current favourite is the DFA 100 macro, because it does macro. On the test charts it's excellent across it's range although barely in to the excellent range, unlike lenses like the 31 and 77 that tend to be very strong in the centre but more difference between the centre and edges. There's probably not a lot of agreement as to what exactly constitutes "best." So what your get in answers is "best for what I do." Which is of no relevance at all for someone who doesn't do that.

Actually you don't get "best for what I do", you get, "best of the lenses I've owned for what I do." Many of us just don't have the money to have tried a lot of the more expensive options, and the cost means I probably never will. "Best for the money you have" is a serious consideration. Most of us never get to even buy a lens we think might be the "best".

So, it doesn't really matter to me what the best is. All I need is what I need to get the pictures I take, and experience would suggest, it doesn't have to be on somebody's best list to accomplish that. IN fact, I'd suggest there would be very little value to such a list except for bragging rights. IN one of my polls, the DA 35-80 was judged the best 35mm lens reduced to website, but only 2 votes pixel peeping. So is the best lens the one that renders the best at web sized where most of my stuff is seen?. or full sized for pixel peeping which no one ever sees in the real world?

All in all "best" is just to nebulous a term.

Some days I'm looking for something to carry for some reach just in case. My F 70-210 fits in my pocket. I probably have the 28-105 ion the camera, I don't want to ruin the walk by carrying to much. At that moment, walking out the door, the F 70-210 is the best option and would be even though I own the 60-250 and DA*200 or if I owned any of the other heavy options.

On one such day I took this image of a Mink fishing in a partially frozen creek. It's my favourite mink image. I have images of the same creature taken with the DA*60-250, DA*200, and Tamron 300 2.8. On this day the F 70-210 was up to the job and I'm not convinced the image would be better taken with a better lens. The 70-210 resolved all the important detail that was available for capture. I do know the other guys shooting their huge Canon and Nikon rigs didn't get anything any better, and I definitely had mobility on my side. This was shot hand held, they were using monster tripods.

So is my F 70-210 better than Canon and Nikon 500 or 600 F4 lenses? It was that day, but it's kind of hard to argue it's some kind of "best" 95% of the time.

As stated above, what's "best" is situational.

Last edited by normhead; 10-10-2017 at 09:09 AM.
10-10-2017, 08:38 AM - 1 Like   #10
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
QuoteOriginally posted by IgorZ Quote
You guys are taking this post very seriously. As I said, I had free time (I could've added I was bored), so I decided to do this. Having said that, the serious part is whether the rating system works, and if not, how it can be made better. I agree with all the points that you guys made, about it being subjective, about the numbers of reviews that can skew the results, etc. But as someone who cannot just go and buy a whole bunch of lenses, do a shootout, and decide for myself, I have to rely on reviews. Also, as a reviewer, I have to make my review useful. So how do I do that?

I was surprised though that the longer lenses came out on top. Why is that? The high price induces the reviewer to give it a high rating so as to convince himself the money was well spent?
I feel like the quality of a review is based on what other images a photographer has used. I know that when I reviewed the FA 50 and DA 40 limited, I was coming from kit lens/consumer telephoto type territory and I thought they were about the best ever. I have used more lenses since then and I wouldn't rank them quite as high. Beyond which, all of the lenses out there (with a few exceptions) seem to have scores between 8 and 10.

But the overall score probably isn't as useful as the narrative -- hopefully it lets you know strengths and weakness of a piece of glass, as well as what other lenses the reviewer is comparing it to.
10-10-2017, 08:45 AM   #11
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
WPRESTO's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 58,952
I think most Pentaxians who have owned and used either version of the 200mm f4 macro rate it very highly, commonly among the top five lenses made in K-mount. Other ratings are inscrutable. Optically, the FA 50mm f1.7 is, I believe, identical to the SMCA version, yet the latter is commonly rated higher than the former. Does the mechanical "feel" play a part?
10-10-2017, 08:51 AM   #12
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Madaboutpix's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Rhine-Westphalia
Posts: 1,429
Luckily, there is quite a range of excellent Pentax primes to pick from, both current-production and discontinued. The mere premise of the OP's calculation, that it is supposed to be possible to arrive at one "best prime", based on an uneven sample of highly subjective user ratings, rings false to me. Best for what purpose, would be a likely follow-up question.

The good news is that pseudo-scientific lens ratings based on laboratory tests like the ones in the DxO Mark database don't fare that much better in terms of usefulness either. If you trust DxO Mark, the second best currently produced Pentax prime lens would be the cheapo DA50 (bettered only by the DA*55), which sure is one heck of a lens and exceptional bang for the buck (in fact, I never tire to recommend it), but likely not most Pentaxians' intuitive pick as the second-best K mount prime.

Such ratings and "best lens" accolades can be additional pointers as to what lenses (which you might have overlooked otherwise) might be worth considering. But nothing beats taking out lenses out on actual photo shoots and finding out about their specific strengths, weaknesses, and spectrum of use. Also, it is so much more fun than skimming charts.

Last edited by Madaboutpix; 10-10-2017 at 10:52 AM.
10-10-2017, 09:35 AM   #13
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
WPRESTO's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 58,952
QuoteOriginally posted by Madaboutpix Quote
Luckily, there is quite a range of excellent Pentax primes to pick from, both current-production and discontinued. The mere premise of the OP's calculation, that it is supposed to be possible to arrive at one "best prime", based on an uneven sample of highly subjective user ratings, rings false to me. Best for what purpose, would be a likely follow-up question.

The good news is that pseudo-scientific lens ratings based on laboratory tests like the ones in the DxO Mark database don't fare that much better in terms of usefulness either. If you trust DxO Mark, the second best currently produced Pentax prime lens would be the cheapo DA50 (bettered only the DA*55), which sure is one heck of a lens and exceptional bang for the buck (in fact, I never tire to recommend it), but likely not most Pentaxians' intuitive pick as the second-best K mount prime.

Such ratings and "best lens" accolades can be additional pointers as to what lenses (which you might have overlooked otherwise) might be worth considering. But nothing beats taking out lenses out on actual photo shoots and finding out about their specific strengths, weaknesses, and spectrum of use. Also, it is so much more fun than skimming charts.
Another problem with owner-ratings is that those posting the ratings don't have experience with all the possible choices. How many who rated the lenses own both a 31 and a 77? How many have used an older 50mm f1.7? How many have used a 200mm f4 macro, either SMCA or IF-AF version? How many have taken pictures with a 400mm f2.8 or 600mm f4, both outstanding lenses?
10-10-2017, 09:49 AM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 484
QuoteOriginally posted by IgorZ Quote
That might not be surprising though, as no lens is rated below 7.7.
The ratings scale being heavily biased towards the 10 end of the scale is the key problem here. If you do the same exercise with the mean rating across all lenses subtracted from the actual, you'll get a very different picture. Your current bargain leader will definitely no longer be at the top, as it shouldn't be.
10-10-2017, 10:08 AM - 2 Likes   #15
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by Ikarus Quote
The ratings scale being heavily biased towards the 10 end of the scale is the key problem here. If you do the same exercise with the mean rating across all lenses subtracted from the actual, you'll get a very different picture. Your current bargain leader will definitely no longer be at the top, as it shouldn't be.
Naw, that's not it...
QuoteQuote:
If you do the same exercise with the mean rating across all lenses subtracted from the actual, you'll get a very different picture.
Such a procedure won't change rank because there is no way for one lens to pass another, if you subtract the same number from all lenses, you maintain rank.. Much easier, no lens is rated under 5, so just subtract 5 from the score to get a score out of five. That removes unused and therefore meaningless digits. But 10 out of 10 is still 5 out of 5. But form a practical viewpoint 7.5 out of 10 is now 2.5 out of 5, a more accurate representation of what 7.5 means on the forum. Then if you take those numbers, bell curve them so the mean and norm are at the top of the curve and you'd have something meaningful, with a less than average lens being rated 2.5, or under. You could do it, but why would you bother? Every teacher knows how to do this stuff, but without your scores being loaded into something like a marks program, it would be way too much work. Others who work in more controlled environments may think differently.

The program I used to do my marks wold be perfect for this, and spit out your standard deviations etc. etc. The less used lenses would have much higher standard deviation in their scores, and therein lies the problem with all those lenses rated at 10. Sure they are rated 10 but the sample is so small that could be anything from 8 to 12. I only buy lenses rated 12 out of 10 personally.

After all that, you still wouldn't know if any given lens would be the best for what you want to use it for. Looking through my Flickr wildlife images, most of my favourite images are taken with the DA*60-250. I also own the F 70-210, the Sigma 70-300, the DA*200, the Tamron 300 2.8 and a couple of TCs. My best lens optically, the 6 pound Tamron 300 2.8, which coupled with the 1.7x AF adapter definitely gives me the best image IQ, or the lens that I took most of my best images with? And I'm just talking best for wildlife. If I go to best for landscape it's going to be a different lens.

In short, being optically the best means nothing, if the lens doesn't come with you when you are out and about. In my mind, best optically has almost nothing to do with it. I have some favourite images taken with the lowest rated of my long lenses. The whole thing about trying to define best by the technical characteristics of the lens is at least in my mind the source of a great many people taking very few images because they have been led to believe they have to have the best lenses to get the best images. Being with you when you need it is far more important.

In my experience no prime is the best. You lose images because of their inherent inflexibility. It can't be the best if it costs you images. It's the best because of the images you get with it. Others who work in more controlled environments may thing differently.

Last edited by normhead; 10-10-2017 at 06:30 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
200mm, 300mm, 50mm, af, conclusion, f2, f2.8, fa, fa77ltd, k-mount, length, lens, lense, lenses, macro, mm, pentax, pentax lens, pentax-a, pentax-da, pentax-m, ratings, review, reviews, slr lens, smc
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
prime, prime, everywhere a prime... pepperberry farm Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18570 42 Minutes Ago 05:04 AM
Best budget options for a prime 30-35mm f1.2-1.8 AF lens for Pentax APS-C? Rayn Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 28 07-05-2016 02:55 PM
New lenses for Ks-2: 55-300 + 35mm prime or 50mm prime? Sean Hamilton Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 05-11-2016 07:37 PM
People The Turkish Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister (photo series/essay) alamo5000 Post Your Photos! 2 04-10-2016 10:09 PM
Pentax prime vs Nikon prime ladybug Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 58 09-19-2010 01:03 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top