[monochrome]

Manual lenses I’d probably never sell

A50/1.2: I got this one for a couple hundred dollars. The glass and helicoid are perfect but there was considerable road rash on the front edge and aperture ring. I had it silvered by dcshooter which hides the cosmetic flaws and makes it a special version of a special lens. It looks wonderful on a silver camera (I know that shouldn’t matter). I like it a few stops above f/1.2 - I don’t understand the paper thin DoF fetish. The extra light makes it very easy to OVF focus on K-1 and it is blinding on the MX.

K30/2.8: I swear this lens sat in the Marketplace for three weeks with numerous bumps. I finally spent money I didn’t have and did the deed. I actually like this lens better than the Cult Classic K28/3.5

K35/3.5: Fifteen years ago I pestered J. Colwell for sis months until he finally relented and sold me this lens. This is my real ‘cold, dead hands’ lens. At one point during the financial crisis I took (what I thought was) all my gear to a traveling KEH event and walked out with several thousand dollars in my jeans. I stopped coming to PF. I quit shooting. About a year later in the very back of a high closet shelf I found my black KX with 50/1.4 mounted, this lens in its leather case and a NIB Vivitar Series 1 105/2.5 Macro.

K28/2: I have it more for just having it than for the images, which is sinful.

Auto-Tak 85/1.8: I haven’t scratched the surface of this lens’ sublime images yet. It beats the K85/1.8, which with the SMC Tak85/1.8 is supposed to be the better lens.

The rest are fine lenses but they’re not exceptional like I think these are.

---

Last edited by monochrome; 06-24-2018 at 11:48 AM.

[Wild Mark]

Great conversation here especially the very public spat between Ron and HelenJo I m looking forward to the aftermath

On another thread I have been contemplating similar thoughts. How many is too many ..... well from the posted responses it would seem that there is a diversity of thought on this topic.

For me, I have two concurrent themes at pay. I have my 'working' collection - a collection of lenses that are practical and high quality. Mostly AF, but some are not. Many are 'light' for travel/ hiking; although some are the opposite. Then I have my 'collection' style lenses. Generally historical and fine examples of a certain era and/ or focal length. Hard to get or part of a larger collection. I use these when I want to shoot film. Examples are as follows for tele length lenses:

Working collection
F*300 and Sigma 100-300 f4 are my go to hiking tele lenses - light weight and clinically sharp. A TC added and these lenses are great. Conversely, if weight is not an issue, I have the F*600 - bazooka.

Collection
K300/4, K400/5.6, K500/4.5 - these lenses are simply great to have and show, they form part of a large K series collection and look great on a K series camera should I decide to shoot film.

With the above all said, I have almost completely skipped the M series and most of the FA series.

So, for me, the question of how many is too many is a constant question - designed to control the curse of LBA. Perhaps the point at which you ask this question is the moment when your becoming aware of your LBA problem

[kernos]

I love old lenses, the touch and feel of them. Since I do a lot of flower photography at mfd, autofocus really doesn't help. There is a certain joy seeing how each one renders. On the other hand, if I'm taking pictures of people at a demonstration, I absolutely want autofocus. And for architecture and most landscapes, a modern designed-for-digital lens is just going to do a better job.

[monochrome]

I’m in the same boat, with apparently the same preference for K lenses. The solution forming itself in my mind is to put everything but the K’s on the dining room table, pull the FIVE must-keep lenses and sell the rest.

Such as: Vivitar Bokina + Extension; FA50/2.8 Macro; A50/1.2; Super Tak 8-element 50; Auto Tak 85/1.8. So then what about the A20/2.8? FA*300/4.5?

Same with cameras: KX, MX, LX, SV, AP. What about MZ-S, K-01, GR and Q System? XA; etc. ?

I know I have too much, but what do I Keep?

Great conversation here especially the very public spat between Ron and HelenJo I m looking forward to the aftermath

On another thread I have been contemplating similar thoughts. How many is too many ..... well from the posted responses it would seem that there is a diversity of thought on this topic.

For me, I have two concurrent themes at pay. I have my 'working' collection - a collection of lenses that are practical and high quality. Mostly AF, but some are not. Many are 'light' for travel/ hiking; although some are the opposite. Then I have my 'collection' style lenses. Generally historical and fine examples of a certain era and/ or focal length. Hard to get or part of a larger collection. I use these when I want to shoot film. Examples are as follows for tele length lenses:

Working collection
F*300 and Sigma 100-300 f4 are my go to hiking tele lenses - light weight and clinically sharp. A TC added and these lenses are great. Conversely, if weight is not an issue, I have the F*600 - bazooka.

Collection
K300/4, K400/5.6, K500/4.5 - these lenses are simply great to have and show, they form part of a large K series collection and look great on a K series camera should I decide to shoot film.

With the above all said, I have almost completely skipped the M series and most of the FA series.

So, for me, the question of how many is too many is a constant question - designed to control the curse of LBA. Perhaps the point at which you ask this question is the moment when your becoming aware of your LBA problem

[Fenwoodian]

.
I'm a relative newcomer to the Pentax brand, so I have no particular sentimental fondness for old manual Pentax glass. I have no Pentax glass from high school, nor did I inherit any from my father.

I can relate to those who talk about the tactile experience of handling a fine old Pentax lens, but I've found that other manufacturers (e.g. Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander) also make MF prime lenses with at least as high of a "fondle factor" as Pentax.

I recently obtained a mint copy of a Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR/Super-Takumar 135mm F2.5 lens. It's well made and a joy to hold. I also have a Samyang 135mm F2.0 ED UMC. The Samyang is a piece of junk compared to the old Takumar. I've had nothing but minor mechanical/build problems with the Samyang since owning it - all these problems were caused by its' "cheap design" and its' "poor build quality/QC".

The Tak is probably 40 years old and will likely last for another 40 years. The cheaply made Samyang is less than 5 years old, and I'll be happy to get another 5 years out of it.

That said, when comparing these two lenses in head-to-head image making tests, I found that the Samyang's IQ is much better in every way than the Takumar's IQ. I checked out the forum ratings on these lenses - Tak is 9.17, and the Samyang is 9.88. Based on my tests, I believe that the gap between these two lenses when it comes to IQ should be even greater (could it be that the Tak was rated higher than it deserved because of bias towards old Pentax lenses?) .

To bad there isn't a separate rating for a lens' build-quality/fondle-factor. If there were, the Takumar 135mm F2.5 would rate above 9.5 , and the Samyang 135mm F2.0 would rate below 5.0 (definitely below average).

[BigMackCam]

The Samyang is a piece of junk compared to the old Takumar. I've had nothing but minor mechanical/build problems with the Samyang since owning it - all these problems were caused by its' "cheap design" and its' "poor build quality/QC".

...

The cheaply made Samyang is less than 5 years old, and I'll be happy to get another 5 years out of it.

...

That said, when comparing these two lenses in head-to-head image making tests, I found that the Samyang's IQ is much better in every way than the Takumar's IQ.

The only Samyang lens I own is the 85mm f/1.4 in Sony A-mount. I've had no problems with it, except that the bayonet hood isn't a tight fit... it doesn't "click" into place, it just feels like it's held there by (very little) friction, and the hood itself feels "cheap". But otherwise, it's been a dependable lens for the couple of years I've owned it, and the rendering is lovely... Really, very good indeed. I hope I'll get more than another five years out of it, but I'd be the first to admit that the build quality doesn't compare to the all-metal lenses of old, nor indeed the higher-end models produced today. It's definitely built to a price, and I can believe QC isn't the most consistent

[BirdDude007]

I too have a bit of LBA, but for somewhat of a different reason from others in here. I like old photo equipment, over the last few years I have discovered I like collecting old camera stuff (Pentax biased because that is mainly what I have ever used)
I cut my teeth at the wee age of 12 back in 77, (Dad handed it down to me) on a Pentax ME w/M 50mm, f1.4 and a Vivitar 70-210 lens, (still have the M 50mm, will never give that one away, still use it too)
I actually have started to build a Pentax/old camera shrine(so to say)
but I also love using the old lenses and love the feel on them. I live in Vegas and there are tons of pawn shops and I am constantly stopping and going in them when I am cruising around town.
I would one day love to have a collection of Pentax bodies (complete from the beginnings to the start of the digital age)
I do however, love the newer lenses and use them mostly, love my DA* zooms. But I do like using my old manual primes especially on my K01 mostly. My K3 is my main workhorse and I use it mostly for "no nonsense worry free" shooting, so it gets all the automatic goodies.
I have many lenses and bodies I will never use but they sure look cool on my vintage photo equipment shrine/display, and I most likely will never get rid of any of them.
on another note, my daughters are showing an interest in photography and they will have access to any of my lenses in my collection.

[mgvh]

Interesting discussion... I started buying legacy lenses because they were so much cheaper than newer ones with similar quality, especially when I was trying to get a telephoto lens. I also determined that old primes are really the best bang-for-the-buck. [Though I do have fondness for an old SMC PENTAX45-125mm F4, the VIVITARSERIES 1 70-210mm f3.5 (Version 2), and a SMC PENTAX M75-150 f4, each of which I found for less than $30.]

After all is said and done, my three most used lenses are... DA 10-17FE, DA 16-85, and DAL 55-300. I can get better pics with the primes (though the DA 16-85 is really excellent for my needs), but I also have more throwaways due to focusing issues. There is something just nice about using an old prime, both in the experience of using a well-engineered piece of metal and glass and also in the rendering.

[monochrome]

Interesting discussion... I started buying legacy lenses because they were so much cheaper than newer ones with similar quality, especially when I was trying to get a telephoto lens. I also determined that old primes are really the best bang-for-the-buck. [Though I do have fondness for an old SMC PENTAX45-125mm F4, the VIVITARSERIES 1 70-210mm f3.5 (Version 2), and a SMC PENTAX M75-150 f4, each of which I found for less than $30.]

After all is said and done, my three most used lenses are... DA 10-17FE, DA 16-85, and DAL 55-300. I can get better pics with the primes (though the DA 16-85 is really excellent for my needs), but I also have more throwaways due to focusing issues. There is something just nice about using an old prime, both in the experience of using a well-engineered piece of metal and glass and also in the rendering.

Pretty much my story.

[Kerrowdown]

Im going to blame ALL of this on HelenJo !

That feeble weak excuse cuts no ice around here.

[Kerrowdown]

I see you have been up to no good while Im gone.

Good to see you back, I thought we had lost you in the mists of time...

so come over and bring my 20-35 with you

You go for it girl, you tell 'em

I cant believe it either. When I see him , He is in Big trouble ! Haha.

Do keep us informed, as we say around here... "he's just being a woose or even worse a Jessie"

[Ronald Oakes]

I’m in the same boat, with apparently the same preference for K lenses. The solution forming itself in my mind is to put everything but the K’s on the dining room table, pull the FIVE must-keep lenses and sell the rest.

Now THIS is my kind of thinking and logic ! That's almost exactly what I did.....

---------- Post added 06-24-18 at 11:41 ----------

Good to see you back, I thought we had lost you in the mists of time...



You go for girl, you tell 'em



Do keep us informed, as we say around here... "he's just being a woose or even a Jessie"

I need to go read what has been posted I think ?

[Kerrowdown]

I need to go read what has been posted I think ?

Google it for translation purposes, it maybe your friend here.

[Ronald Oakes]

Great conversation here especially the very public spat between Ron and HelenJo I m looking forward to the aftermath

Spat ? She has been here hasn't she ?.....need to go read....lol

On a separate note I like the way you split lens collections into usable group and collection group ! Nice !

---------- Post added 06-24-18 at 12:07 ----------

I think Pigmy misses you too Rony. She keeps looking at the door ?

Yes….I almost forgot ! While you were MIA for an extra (((5 weeks))) !!! .....and I didn't know if you were Dead or Alive or ever coming back home...…...I took the liberty of training Ms. Pygmy to go potty outdoors !

That's why she keeps looking at the door......she doesn't miss me...…..she has to Go !

No more bed liners on the closet floor and no more poo-ing in a box designed for a Cat in the kitchen !
She now likes Grass and real Dirt under her little feet when she has to do her Business......OUTSIDE !
Oh....And on a side note …... She now loves to scratch and fling the dirt about when she is all done with her business OUTSIDE like a proper little Dog !

Unfortunately.....and unforeseen by me...….that scratching behavior now includes the Kitty-Litter-Box in your kitchen !
I suppose that is why your possibly finding kitty litter scattered around under your table this morning ?
The new little broom and dustpan by the backdoor is there for a reason...….You can thank me later...…..

---------- Post added 06-24-18 at 12:31 ----------

Google it for translation purposes, it maybe your friend here.

I think Im Friend-LESS at this point.....lol.

[h4yn0nnym0u5e]

This was turning into an essay, but TL;DR: only really came back to my vintage glass when I got the K-1, it just didn't excite me on APS-C. Now it's modern zooms+DA*300 for the "it's just gotta work first time" shooting, and vintage glass for its beautiful imperfect soul when "creating art". With a bit of overlap, of course - the modern lenses are more than capable of good art, just that little bit less inspiring, somehow.