[Paul the Sunman]

D FA* 50mm f/1.4. Rating 9.93 (one person only gave it a 9, because it is heavy!).

Expensive (and heavy) for a 50mm prime, but it has redefined for me what a lens can be. A revelation, definitely worth the price (especially since bought on sale).

[gofour3]

Pentax 67 55/4 last version. Perfect 10 out of 10 with six reviews.

Sharpest lens I've ever used in any format. Absolutely stellar in build, handling and close focusing as well.

Phil.

[monochrome]

I’m not surprised by the DFA*50 score. I nearly didn’t bother looking. It is a near perfect lens and a superb value for the price. The reviewer who downrated it for its weight isn’t all wrong, but I’ll say it balances well on the K-1. The weight is not an issue for me.

Then I was surprised by #2. I actually have the DA35.2.8 Macro on my KP more than the DA21 and I suppose I underappreciate it a bit. Perhaps now that we have some sun and warmth and color is coming back into the landscape I will concentrate on using the 21 more.

1. Auto 110 50/2.8 at 10 (Edited)
2. HD DFA*50/1.4 at 9.93
3. HD DA21/3.2 Limited at 9.85

The HD DA21 has 13 reviews. That’s a higher score than the K28/2. It’s a very nice lens, but really?

[EDIT] Given that I own a lot of lenses and I did not check every series there might be one or two with a score higher than 9.85.
[EDIT] I checked. Nope. HD DA21/3.2 beats FA*300/4.5 (and 2.8)
[EDIT] I have the 110 50/2.8, which I learned DownThread is rated 10.

[stevebrot]

This is a tough one in that I have a fair number of lenses with more than half rated above 9. That being said, the highest-rated is:

Pentax-FA 77/1.8 Limited: Rating 9.73
Sharpness 9.8
Aberrations 8.7
Bokeh 9.8
Autofocus 8.8
Handling 9.6
Value 9.1

Ok...Slam-dunk, right? Ummmm...no! The second-highest lens on my shelf is only a slight notch below the 77/1.8, but gets a heck of a lot more camera time:

Tamron SP 90/2.8 Macro (1:1) (72B): Rating 9.63
Sharpness 10.0
Aberrations 8.0
Bokeh 9.0
Handling 9.5
Value 10.0

Most used in last 12 years: Pentax-FA 35/2 and Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 (C)
Most "Explored" in Flickr: Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 (C) (eight listings)
Most "personal favorites": Pentax-DA 18-55/3.5-5.6 and KMZ MC Zenitar 16/2.8 Fisheye (tie)
Usually on camera: Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 (C)
Almost always in bag: Pentax-FA 77/1.8 Limited, Pentax-FA 35/2, Tamron 70-150/3.5 (20A)
Often in bag: KMZ Helios 44M 58/2, KMZ MC Zenitar 16/2.8 Fisheye, Pentax-A 70-210/4, Tamron SP 90/2.8 Macro (72B), Sigma 50/2.8 EX DG Macro


Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 03-25-2019 at 10:55 PM.

[Jonathan Mac]

I haven't checked everything, just the ones I'd expect to be very high, but my highest-rated Pentax lenses are:

1. A 50mm f/2.8 macro: 9.63
2. 40mm f/2.8 DA Limited: 9.58 (I was very surprised to see that this rates slightly higher than the 35/2.8 macro, I suppose due to lower price more than anything.)

[GUB]

Ricoh Rikenon P Macro 105mm 2.8 -- 10
But only three reviews with one not scoring
The Kiron clone has 23 reviews with a score of 9.83
Not bad for a 1980s lens.

[JensE]

The ratings are all over the place. The optically best 50mm Macro is likely the D-FA 50mm/2.8, but rating-wise, with 9.10, trailing far behind its ancestors. It doesn't have a focus limiter, but quick-shift - much more important for my style of working.

So it's the 77mm, which has the highest rating in my cabinet at 9.73. Thanks to its beautiful rendering and compact size (for FF) It is my bag or on my camera, whenever I intend to photograph people. Somewhat of a "specialist", it does shine in this application, otherwise I only use it for short telephoto nighttime landscapes or similar low-light applications. It's a compromise for me - I did like the DA70 LTD on APS-C much better from a handling perspective, I really miss quick-shift. Always a lens to double-check the results, not something to simply point in the right direction and be confident about the outcome. But size is a HUGE benefit: Even if it was theoretically suitable for the same purpose, you'd not want to intimidate people with one of my other high-rated lenses (well-deserved 9.63) Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM.

Maybe I can point out a 'hidden gem', the 9.58-rated SMC Pentax-FA 50mm F1.7. One of the lenses which I'm absolutely confident about - nothing like its 1.4 sibling: Much more decisive and precise AF thank's to its better contrast wide-open and way less residual spherical abberations, extremely fast focusing and generally nicer rendering than the modern DA50/1.8. I actually prefer the optically identical F50/1.7, which in my books has superior build quality, but rates only 9.10. It can be had for very reasonable prices these days.

[Papa_Joe]

I do not have so much newer lenses, so finding the highest rated was easy. It is the

Sigma 70 mm F2.8 EX DG Macro with a rating of 9.71.
And I would say the performance of the lens justifies the rating. The IQ is outstandig, built quality good and the autofocus accuracy is excellent.
Sadly it is already a legacy lens. If you can get one of these or the 50 mm or 100 mm buy it! And it is full frame!

I also looked up the lens I am most dissatisfied with, the DA 18-135 and I would say with 8.53 it is highly overrated. I bought it, knowing about it's flaws prefering compactness over IQ, but nowadays think the sigma 18-125 would have been a better joice.
Really, sharpness 8.1? This lens is sharp only in the middle from 100 mm onwards. And 9.3 for autofocus? Yes it's superfast and silent. I like that, but I would like it better, if not only 50% of the shots would be in focus under bad lighting conditions. I have bader lenses, but I am not expecting to much from a Tokina or Vivitar Zoom from the 80's.

[swanlefitte]

Does anyone know how the total score is derived? If you add the 6 scores and divide by 6 for the 77mm you get 9.3 not 9.73. I did this for 3 lenses. The others went higher than the single score. Pretty sure my calculator skill was up to the task.

[JensE]

Does anyone know how the total score is derived?

It's apparently the arithmetic average of the overall rating - listed in the headline of each review. 1 x N/A, 5 x 8, 15 x 9, (94 - 15 - 5 - 1) x 10 for the FA77.

[nickthetasmaniac]

SMC-K 85/f1.8 for me (no surprise) - 9.65 from 21 reviews.

What was a surprise is that the Super-Macro-Takumar 50/f4 was next with 9.58 from 31 reviews, beating the M28/f2, SMC Takumar 50/f1.4, K50/f1.2, K50/f1.4, M50/f1.4, M100/f2.8 and K135/f2.5.

The Macro Tak is 'good', but I never thought it was that good...

[Rondec]

I think the FA 77 and DFA 70-200 are the highest rated lenses I own.

That said, there is some serious "grade inflation" going on in the lens rating index as every lens I own except for the DA *16-50 and 55-300 have ratings of over 9 and even the 16-50 and 55-300 have ratings of 8.5-ish. I don't think you can really trust the numbers here. Far better to look at the photos and find a narrative review that actually gives a good run down of a lens's strengths and weaknesses. I think most of us, after we buy a lens, struggle to give it anything less than a 9 on a review, even if it has serious weaknesses.

[timb64]

DA16-85WR rated 9.14 overall

[swanlefitte]

It's apparently the arithmetic average of the overall rating - listed in the headline of each review. 1 x N/A, 5 x 8, 15 x 9, (94 - 15 - 5 - 1) x 10 for the FA77.

Thanks I hadn't even seen the overall rating hiding in the upper corner. Took me some time to figure that out after you explained it.

[Blamking]

SMC Pentax-A* 200mm F4 Macro ED, rated 10.

I definitely got a great deal, about a quarter of the average price, due to the lens being in less than pristine shape. So far it seems to perform well optically though so I'm happy with it. I haven't used it enough yet to know if it lives up to its rating - I haven't quite gotten the hang of manual focus telephoto lenses yet.