K1 II - best legacy budget lens on the best price to IQ value ratio for the lowest $

swanlefitte · 02-28-2019, 02:54 PM

50s and 135s are all decent and inexpensive. Both found under $100 easily enough.

Fenwoodian · 02-28-2019, 03:34 PM - **1 Like**

OK, I can maybe understand putting a cheap lens on a $2000 camera if your mission is to try and find an old lens with characteristics that simply are not found in a newer lens (e.g. soap bubble bokeh, swirly bokeh, halos, etc.). However, for characteristics that most modern day photographers cherish (sharpness, AF speed, few aberations, etc.) you're better off paying a little more and going with a newer lens.

**pres589** · 02-28-2019, 03:47 PM

There's also a Sigma 28-200 that seems decent, the DG, which was available in k-mount and is not so old. Probably another $150ish job on the used market today. Nice focal range and it reviews pretty well. That and a Sigma 17-35 variable aperture zoom would bookend the other lenses I listed previously pretty well.

**BigMackCam** · 02-28-2019, 03:59 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

OK, I can maybe understand putting a cheap lens on a $2000 camera if your mission is to try and find an old lens with characteristics that simply are not found in a newer lens (e.g. soap bubble bokeh, swirly bokeh, halos, etc.).

Right. But it doesn't have to be about those more extreme optical characteristics... the overall rendering of many older and now-inexpensive lenses can be extremely appealing, even if the general optical performance falls short of the newer premium lenses. The Zeintar-K2 2/50 I mentioned earlier is a perfect example. It exhibits none of the extreme optical effects you mention - soap bubble bokeh, swirly bokeh, halos, etc. It just renders in a very pleasing way. If you pixel peep images that were shot with it wide open, you'll find flaws that aren't there on the D*FA50... and it won't compete on edge-to-edge resolution at any aperture setting. But it'll produce great-looking photos, especially at typical reproduction sizes and viewing distances.

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

However, for characteristics that most modern day photographers cherish (sharpness, AF speed, etc.) you're better off paying a little more and going with a newer lens.

Agreed. If your thing is the edge-to-edge sharp, highly-corrected, perfectly-smooth-out-of-focus-rendering, minimal distortion, minimal vignetting look - and that certainly seems to be popular with many folks - then modern, premium lenses are the way to go.

I think it's interesting that different folks like and seek such different things from their lenses. There's certainly room for all preferences, and if they result in great photos, it's all good

Last edited by BigMackCam; 02-28-2019 at 04:50 PM.

**EssJayEff** · 02-28-2019, 04:37 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

.
I just don't understand photographers who want to put $100 lenses on a $2,000 camera.

If you can afford a $2,000 camera system, and want a great 50mm K mount lens, just spend $997 and get the outstanding Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4 lens

I purchased my very first Pentax camera, the K-5 specifically because I wanted use the legacy lenses. I was very interested in exploring the aesthetic qualities of images produced by a digital camera using old lenses . . . a melding of the old with the new.

stevebrot · 02-28-2019, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by pres589

Any accurately machined K/M42 adapter won't cause the M42 lens to stick or whatever.

I have yet to see an accurately-machined* adapter shy of the genuine Pentax, so that would be the one to get...

Steve

* Fits loose in the host opening until mated with an M42 lens, no chamfer on the tang ends either side of the spring clip, and a few other fine points

**ramseybuckeye** · 02-28-2019, 05:18 PM

Originally posted by Docrwm

I get it that not everyone is comfortable spending $1k on a single lens that gets used only occasionally like the new 50/1.4. Here's a cheap lens that is a legacy, works on FF, and has a solid reputation - F35-70/3.5-4.5. Some have referred to it as a stack of primes. You can find them for <$25 at times in good shape. They have the added benefit of doing "macro" at the long end.

SMC Pentax-F 35-70mm F3.5-4.5 Reviews - F Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

I also have the F35-70/3.5-4.5 and it is a really good cheap lens, another from the F series is the F50/1.7 which you can easily find at bargain prices. The old Takumars will be fine on your K-1 as long as you use a genuine Asahi adapter.

**BigMackCam** · 02-28-2019, 05:24 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by stevebrot

I have yet to see an accurately-machined* adapter shy of the genuine Pentax, so that would be the one to get...

LOL

I like the non-flanged Kipon adapter, which is nicely machined and has a relatively-tight fit with little play (though I know you're not keen on it for that reason, and I understand why)...

Batman_ · 02-28-2019, 05:59 PM

You can get a second hand Sigma 24-60mm F2.8 AF lens quite cheap. In fact, it's my standard zoom lens I currently use.

pinholecam · 02-28-2019, 06:28 PM

If possible, go for the 'A' rather than the 'M' for camera control of the aperture and Av mode.

My list :
Samyang 14/2.8
K28/3.5
A50/1.4 (the f2 and f1.7's have a hex type aperture when just stopped down f2.8 and up and can be too distracting for OOF highlights)
M85/2 (the rest of the Pentax ones are not that cheap)
K135/2.5

normhead · 02-28-2019, 06:54 PM

I'm going with my FA 35-80.

ChatMechant · 02-28-2019, 07:19 PM

fa50 1.4 go pretty cheap used. I got my A70-210 for around $40, and an fa80-200 5.6 for $10. Both are just fine on the k1.
But any old 50, 28 or 135 is likely going to be the best for the money.

reh321 · 02-28-2019, 08:48 PM

Originally posted by pxt

Yes, I wrote about adapter. I exclude M42 lens, because I hear from few sources about stucking on body. I would avoid it.

The tiny springing device on the adapter is normally the culprit here. I've removed it from mine, and since then I've never had one get stuck. Excluding M42 lenses has the downside of eliminating the fabled 8-element 50mm f/1.4.

Kelvin 5500 · 02-28-2019, 08:59 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by pxt

So what you will recommend with specific conditions?
1. The least price as possible (less is better)
2. Good IQ on K1 II full frame
3. It is quite common lens and not extra rare item
4. Only K mount (without reduction like M42 lenses)

If when you write "legacy" you are referring to pre-digital era manual focus, I can definitely recommend the SMC Pentax-A 35-105mm F3.5 Zoom Lens. Check it out in the Pentax Forums Lens Review Database. It is a remarkable lens at an extremely economical price. Now selling in the used lens market at under $100.00 U.S.

Dennis

**iheiramo** · 03-01-2019, 12:05 AM

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

OK, I can maybe understand putting a cheap lens on a $2000 camera if your mission is to try and find an old lens with characteristics that simply are not found in a newer lens (e.g. soap bubble bokeh, swirly bokeh, halos, etc.). However, for characteristics that most modern day photographers cherish (sharpness, AF speed, etc.) you're better off paying a little more and going with a newer lens.

People do have different reasons to shoot and therefore what's logical also differ.

So far the IQ from my legacy primes has been more than enough for me, I like the rendering they offer and I enjoy shooting with fully manual glass. Even with K5 I lose plenty of detail as I mostly view my shots from 27" 4K monitor. I admit that with K1ii the IQ is better, but the main reason I bought it wast to shoot lenses in their original format. At 1400€ it was the cheapest K mount FF I could find

There simply is no logical reason for me to pay thousands for lenses until I have some use for the quality they provide. As I don't make any money, and have no intention to spoil an other hobby with professionalism, that means I would have to enjoy using and results from 1000€ DFA*50 quite a lot more than from 50€ M50/1.7. Don't see it happen at the moment, but maybe some day.

02-28-2019, 03:34 PM - 1 Like	#17
Fenwoodian Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,874	OK, I can maybe understand putting a cheap lens on a $2000 camera if your mission is to try and find an old lens with characteristics that simply are not found in a newer lens (e.g. soap bubble bokeh, swirly bokeh, halos, etc.). However, for characteristics that most modern day photographers cherish (sharpness, AF speed, few aberations, etc.) you're better off paying a little more and going with a newer lens. Last edited by Fenwoodian; 03-03-2019 at 09:43 AM.

02-28-2019, 08:59 PM - 1 Like	#29
Kelvin 5500 Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2017 Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA Posts: 98	Originally posted by pxt So what you will recommend with specific conditions? 1. The least price as possible (less is better) 2. Good IQ on K1 II full frame 3. It is quite common lens and not extra rare item 4. Only K mount (without reduction like M42 lenses) If when you write "legacy" you are referring to pre-digital era manual focus, I can definitely recommend the SMC Pentax-A 35-105mm F3.5 Zoom Lens. Check it out in the Pentax Forums Lens Review Database. It is a remarkable lens at an extremely economical price. Now selling in the used lens market at under $100.00 U.S. Dennis Last edited by Kelvin 5500; 02-28-2019 at 09:07 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K1 to K1 Mark II or not II	Kingman	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	39	03-07-2019 10:09 PM
Best value way to get extreme reach with reasonable IQ?	Unsinkable II	Pentax Q	9	06-27-2012 04:24 AM
FA100-300 4.7-5.8, or DA55-300, or DA18-250?? (IQ+$$=Best value))	karelson	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	05-30-2012 01:29 PM
macro lence for a newb	Asgaroth	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	06-25-2009 12:11 PM
should i get this lence	moreempty	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	10-30-2006 11:32 PM

02-28-2019, 02:54 PM	#16
swanlefitte Pentaxian Join Date: May 2015 Location: Minneapolis Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,068	50s and 135s are all decent and inexpensive. Both found under $100 easily enough.

02-28-2019, 03:47 PM	#18
pres589 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Wichita, KS Photos: Albums Posts: 4,529	There's also a Sigma 28-200 that seems decent, the DG, which was available in k-mount and is not so old. Probably another $150ish job on the used market today. Nice focal range and it reviews pretty well. That and a Sigma 17-35 variable aperture zoom would bookend the other lenses I listed previously pretty well.

02-28-2019, 03:59 PM - 2 Likes	#19
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,673	Originally posted by Fenwoodian OK, I can maybe understand putting a cheap lens on a $2000 camera if your mission is to try and find an old lens with characteristics that simply are not found in a newer lens (e.g. soap bubble bokeh, swirly bokeh, halos, etc.). Right. But it doesn't have to be about those more extreme optical characteristics... the overall rendering of many older and now-inexpensive lenses can be extremely appealing, even if the general optical performance falls short of the newer premium lenses. The Zeintar-K2 2/50 I mentioned earlier is a perfect example. It exhibits none of the extreme optical effects you mention - soap bubble bokeh, swirly bokeh, halos, etc. It just renders in a very pleasing way. If you pixel peep images that were shot with it wide open, you'll find flaws that aren't there on the DFA50... and it won't compete on edge-to-edge resolution at any aperture setting. But it'll produce great-looking photos, especially at typical reproduction sizes and viewing distances. Originally posted by Fenwoodian However, for characteristics that most modern day photographers cherish (sharpness, AF speed, etc.) you're better off paying a little more and going with a newer lens. Agreed. If your thing is the edge-to-edge sharp, highly-corrected, perfectly-smooth-out-of-focus-rendering, minimal distortion, minimal vignetting look - and that certainly seems to be popular with many folks - then modern, premium lenses are the way to go. I think it's interesting that different folks like and seek such different things from their lenses. There's certainly room for all preferences, and if they result in great photos, it's all good Last edited by BigMackCam; 02-28-2019 at 04:50 PM.*

02-28-2019, 04:37 PM - 2 Likes	#20
EssJayEff Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: near Saxapahaw, NC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 969	Originally posted by Fenwoodian . I just don't understand photographers who want to put $100 lenses on a $2,000 camera. If you can afford a $2,000 camera system, and want a great 50mm K mount lens, just spend $997 and get the outstanding Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4 lens I purchased my very first Pentax camera, the K-5 *specifically* because I wanted use the legacy lenses. I was very interested in exploring the aesthetic qualities of images produced by a digital camera using old lenses . . . a melding of the old with the new.

02-28-2019, 05:15 PM	#21
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by pres589 Any accurately machined K/M42 adapter won't cause the M42 lens to stick or whatever. I have yet to see an accurately-machined* adapter shy of the genuine Pentax, so that would be the one to get... Steve * Fits loose in the host opening until mated with an M42 lens, no chamfer on the tang ends either side of the spring clip, and a few other fine points

02-28-2019, 05:18 PM	#22
ramseybuckeye Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Hampstead, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 17,292	Originally posted by Docrwm I get it that not everyone is comfortable spending $1k on a single lens that gets used only occasionally like the new 50/1.4. Here's a cheap lens that is a legacy, works on FF, and has a solid reputation - F35-70/3.5-4.5. Some have referred to it as a stack of primes. You can find them for <$25 at times in good shape. They have the added benefit of doing "macro" at the long end. SMC Pentax-F 35-70mm F3.5-4.5 Reviews - F Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database I also have the F35-70/3.5-4.5 and it is a really good cheap lens, another from the F series is the F50/1.7 which you can easily find at bargain prices. The old Takumars will be fine on your K-1 as long as you use a genuine Asahi adapter.

02-28-2019, 05:24 PM - 1 Like	#23
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,673	Originally posted by stevebrot I have yet to see an accurately-machined* adapter shy of the genuine Pentax, so that would be the one to get... LOL I like the non-flanged Kipon adapter, which is nicely machined and has a relatively-tight fit with little play (though I know you're not keen on it for that reason, and I understand why)...

02-28-2019, 05:59 PM	#24
Batman_ Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2019 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 85	You can get a second hand Sigma 24-60mm F2.8 AF lens quite cheap. In fact, it's my standard zoom lens I currently use.

02-28-2019, 06:28 PM	#25
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,706	If possible, go for the 'A' rather than the 'M' for camera control of the aperture and Av mode. My list : Samyang 14/2.8 K28/3.5 A50/1.4 (the f2 and f1.7's have a hex type aperture when just stopped down f2.8 and up and can be too distracting for OOF highlights) M85/2 (the rest of the Pentax ones are not that cheap) K135/2.5

02-28-2019, 06:54 PM	#26
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	I'm going with my FA 35-80.

02-28-2019, 07:19 PM	#27
ChatMechant Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Matsuyama Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,284	fa50 1.4 go pretty cheap used. I got my A70-210 for around $40, and an fa80-200 5.6 for $10. Both are just fine on the k1. But any old 50, 28 or 135 is likely going to be the best for the money.

02-28-2019, 08:48 PM	#28
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,180	Originally posted by pxt Yes, I wrote about adapter. I exclude M42 lens, because I hear from few sources about stucking on body. I would avoid it. The tiny springing device on the adapter is normally the culprit here. I've removed it from mine, and since then I've never had one get stuck. Excluding M42 lenses has the downside of eliminating the fabled 8-element 50mm f/1.4.

03-01-2019, 12:05 AM	#30
iheiramo Unoriginal Poster Join Date: Nov 2016 Location: Espoo Photos: Albums Posts: 3,182	Originally posted by Fenwoodian OK, I can maybe understand putting a cheap lens on a $2000 camera if your mission is to try and find an old lens with characteristics that simply are not found in a newer lens (e.g. soap bubble bokeh, swirly bokeh, halos, etc.). However, for characteristics that most modern day photographers cherish (sharpness, AF speed, etc.) you're better off paying a little more and going with a newer lens. People do have different reasons to shoot and therefore what's logical also differ. So far the IQ from my legacy primes has been more than enough for me, I like the rendering they offer and I enjoy shooting with fully manual glass. Even with K5 I lose plenty of detail as I mostly view my shots from 27" 4K monitor. I admit that with K1ii the IQ is better, but the main reason I bought it wast to shoot lenses in their original format. At 1400€ it was the cheapest K mount FF I could find There simply is no logical reason for me to pay thousands for lenses until I have some use for the quality they provide. As I don't make any money, and have no intention to spoil an other hobby with professionalism, that means I would have to enjoy using and results from 1000€ DFA*50 quite a lot more than from 50€ M50/1.7. Don't see it happen at the moment, but maybe some day.