[aslyfox]

Any of the Pentax 100mm non-macro f2.8 lenses would work well. The macros will as well but they are either a bit slow (f4) or a bit pricey compared to the budget stated for the macro f/2.8 ones. The budget will limit options but if you look hard you can find something - maybe M42 if you have the adapter. The 105 f/2.8 Super Tak is a nice m42 option.

The O P might find the D FA 100 F2.8 macro ( without WR ) in a reasonable price range close to the budget

also as noted here:

The optical design is the tried-and-proven formula of the previous generation D FA 100mm F2.8 Macro lens, which in turn had inherited the optical design from the well-respected FA 100mm F2.8 and F 100mm F2.8 macro lenses introduced in 1991 and 1987, respectively. None of these earlier lenses had rounded aperture blades.

Read more at: Pentax-D FA 100mm F2.8 WR Macro Review - Specifications | PentaxForums.com Reviews
the FA 100mm F2.8 and F 100mm F2.8 macro lenses might fit the bill

don't know if the 100mm on the ASP-C sensor would have the field of view you would want tho

---

Last edited by aslyfox; 05-04-2018 at 07:50 AM.

[stevebrot]

Seems to indicate that a 90mm is the equivalent of 135mm

They two have the same field of view on APS-C vs 24x36mm, but "equivalent" is a little more than FOV.


Steve

[pres589]

Under $100? Probably some 35mm f2.8's get down there. Not a lot of great options that cheap for an 85ish mm prime There's a Tamron adaptall 90mm f2.5 macro that might come down there and be decent for what you want.

[aslyfox]

They two have the same field of view on APS-C vs 24x36mm, but "equivalent" is a little more than FOV.


Steve

I think the chart I found and posted is just designed to show the field of views of various focal lengths when used with the different sensors

it should not be read for other purposes

various focal lengths do give certain advantages

certain coatings on lenses give certain advantages

[Sandy Hancock]

On crop, DA35/2.4 and DA70 would be pretty hard to beat without breaking the bank.

I've just finished a month shooting the latter daily, and it does a very nice portrait.







The FA77 is next level, but quite a bit more moolah.

[dms]

Under $100.
-- (for 35mm) I also suggest the super takumar 35mm f/3.5. BTW many of them may be smc, even if not marked as such. In fact this is a recommendation that is independent of price. A really excellent lens.
-- (for about 90 mm) My only inexpensive good lens to suggest (from my usage) is too long a FL, namely the takumar 135 mm f/5.6. I recently got the Pentax 85 mm f/2 SMC-M lens and so far it seems excellent--as long as high resolution is not needed. But it is likely double to triple your price point.

[jawats]

Under $100.
-- (for 35mm) I also suggest the super takumar 35mm f/3.5. BTW many of them may be smc, even if not marked as such. In fact this is a recommendation that is independent of price. A really excellent lens.
-- (for about 90 mm) My only inexpensive good lens to suggest (from my usage) is too long a FL, namely the takumar 135 mm f/5.6. I recently got the Pentax 85 mm f/2 SMC-M lens and so far it seems excellent--as long as high resolution is not needed. But it is likely double to triple your price point.

Thank you very much. I've been eyeing that 35mm - glad to know it's decent, even outside of the excellent ratings on here.

I'd looked at the 135mm quite a bit, but you're right re: FL.

[TwoUptons]

I’m a little confused why the older 35mm lenses cost as much as they do. If you stick with modern cameras, the DA35 seems to be a terrific value.

I’ll admit to being a big fan of the Rokinon 85mm F1.4...

For something longer, there is the Pentax 100mm f3.5 macro as a wildcard. Made by Cosina, it is plasticky and slow to focus, but optically it’s better than it should be...

-Eric

[aslyfox]

On crop, DA35/2.4 . . .

thank you Sandy

you point out something I have done with my wide angle lenses but never thought to transfer that ability to portraits

I have found that I can " reach into " my photos and if I have it focused correctly, crop the image so the lens is usable for subjects not usually associated with such lens at first glance

no reason at all not to try that with a good quality 35mm

I am changing my opinion that a good 35mm lens would not make a good portrait lens

________________________________

" Bonus Points " are hereby awarded

Remember that " bonus points " are useable at your favorite café for the purchase of a beverage of your choice when accompanied by the necessary amount of local $.

rumor has it local law and/or regulation may prevent the local café from public acknowledgement of participation in the program but they do.

[Sandy Hancock]

thank you Sandy

you point out something I have done with my wide angle lenses but never thought to transfer that ability to portraits

I have found that I can " reach into " my photos and if I have it focused correctly, crop the image so the lens is usable for subjects not usually associated with such lens at first glance

no reason at all not to try that with a good quality 35mm

I am changing my opinion that a good 35mm lens would not make a good portrait lens

First of all, those images were with the DA70.

But yes, 35mm is a fantastic portrait focal length, both on crop and full frame. It all depends on distance and perspective.

[aslyfox]

First of all, those images were with the DA70.

But yes, 35mm is a fantastic portrait focal length, both on crop and full frame. It all depends on distance and perspective.

I had realized the photos posted were not cropped from a 35mm but your discussion made me realize the possibilities

once again thanks

[bassek]

I wonder why any prime between 55mm and 100mm are so much more expensive?
Both used and new. Complex design or just typical FL for pro use?

Seb

[pres589]

I think it's typical use and quality that drives the prices up. There's also not a lot of options in k-mount land in this area.

I'm a little curious what the OP has in mind for shooting with an 85mm prime on crop. It's a little tight for portraits (although anything is possible). It's not really long for birding or anything like that.

[jawats]

I think it's typical use and quality that drives the prices up. There's also not a lot of options in k-mount land in this area.

I'm a little curious what the OP has in mind for shooting with an 85mm prime on crop. It's a little tight for portraits (although anything is possible). It's not really long for birding or anything like that.

When I read up on portraits, 135mm seems a very common FL for portraits. That translates to 80-90mm on crop sensor, as far as I can tell.

[swanlefitte]

I wonder if 135mm became common around the time apc came around from people using their 85mm on it because they heard 85mm lens was the best and not realizing that was based on a 35mm film camera.