[Ken Lee]

Pentax 28-105mm: greatest cheap lens you don’t know about?



Naturally, I used the 28-105mm for all these night photos!

[RICHARD L.]

I couldn't have said it better ! A few images taken with the K1 + DFA 28-105 mm ED.

[Paul the Sunman]

Absolutely! However, I've been leaving it at home quite a bit lately because I wanted to give my primes more of a workout. But image quality is certainly not lacking.

[dave_roe]

You are right. Very few have picked up that the 28-105mm is a great walk around lens.

it is a lot of bang for very few bucks.

[pepperberry farm]

Pentax 28-105mm: greatest cheap lens you don’t know about?

Naturally, I used the 28-105mm for all these night photos!

nice shots & article!

[UncleVanya]

Looks fantastic.

[Ken Lee]

I couldn't have said it better ! A few images taken with the K1 + DFA 28-105 mm ED.

Thanks, and nice images.

I really felt compelled to write an article about this lens!!

---------- Post added 04-15-22 at 04:04 PM ----------

Absolutely! However, I've been leaving it at home quite a bit lately because I wanted to give my primes more of a workout. But image quality is certainly not lacking.

Well, I will never try to talk someone out of using primes unless they need to switch focal lengths quickly!!

---------- Post added 04-15-22 at 04:05 PM ----------

You are right. Very few have picked up that the 28-105mm is a great walk around lens.

it is a lot of bang for very few bucks.

We won't tell Pentax that if they "dressed it up" a little and didn't make it look like a 1980s lens, they might be able to charge a little more for it. And yeah, it is a great walkabout lens.

---------- Post added 04-15-22 at 04:05 PM ----------

nice shots & article!

Thanks!!

---------- Post added 04-15-22 at 04:07 PM ----------

Looks fantastic.

The image quality certainly is not lacking. I am so happy with this lens.

I think I mentioned in the article that I purchased it used for somewhere around $300? I know I mentioned that it is available for somewhere around that amount used.

[Eye.n.Eye]

This lens is an excellent combination of cost, size and sharpness.

However, I think any discussion of this lens should note its Achilles heel, its susceptibility to shutter shock on the K1. The worst speed is 1/100, where it has the most shutter shock of any lens I've ever tested. To avoid it completely I skip the range of 1/40 to 1/320.

If you always carry a tripod and can use electronic shutter its a non-issue, but as a day time walk-around lens, I've always found this a frustrating limitation. Its a shame, because its optical performance is genuinely impressive for its size and cost.

[Joetitch]

As a man with short arms and deep pockets, I would have to say not cheap, but value for money for sure.
A cheap lense for me is under $35😁

[Michail_P]

Some excellent photos from a surely valued lens. The 28-105 range is the perfect walk around companion.

[robgski]

(Relatively) inexpensive but we’ll made and delivering great images, not cheap.
Good article and excellent images.

[Wasp]

Just goes to show - there are very few really bad lenses (especially with modern computer aided design). The Ricoh 50mm f/2.2 from days gone by springs to mind but I am digressing. As long as you use a lens within its limitations, and get the basics right you will get good results. Put it on a decent body. Nail the focus. Use it at the aperture that it is sharpest at. Make sure to use a fast enough shutter speed to avoid camera shake (or even better, use a tripod). Use a low ISO to avoid noise. That sort of thing.

[Paul the Sunman]

Just goes to show - there are very few really bad lenses (especially with modern computer aided design). The Ricoh 50mm f/2.2 from days gone by springs to mind but I am digressing. As long as you use a lens within its limitations, and get the basics right you will get good results. Put it on a decent body. Nail the focus. Use it at the aperture that it is sharpest at. Make sure to use a fast enough shutter speed to avoid camera shake (or even better, use a tripod). Use a low ISO to avoid noise. That sort of thing.

I think you are underselling the 28-105 somewhat. You don't have to align all the stars to get good performance. During the pre-shipping phase of the original K1, Ricoh was putting out a lot of sample pictures to show how good the camera was, and some of those were taken with the 28-105. They had confidence enough that it would show off the new camera to best advantage. And that is my judgement too. The variable maximum aperture is its only real "weakness", and for many of us that's a price we are very willing to pay for its relatively compact size and moderate weight. I don't feel I am compromising when I use it. Which of course is not to say that I don't value the special characteristics of the various primes within its range. There is a difference between a "walk around" zoom and a specialist prime. An apple is not a good orange, not matter how perfect it is.

[northcoastgreg]

I regard the DFA 28-105 as a kind of photographic secret weapon. It gives you professional or near professional image quality in a smaller package. As a landscape photographer, not only don't I need f2.8, I don't need f4 either, but if you're shooting with Nikon, Canon, or Sony and you want professional image quality for landscape photographer, you have to play north of $1,000 and put up with greater weight and size in a standard zoom. Can any of those fixed aperture lenses do better than the following images?

[Ken Lee]

This lens is an excellent combination of cost, size and sharpness.

However, I think any discussion of this lens should note its Achilles heel, its susceptibility to shutter shock on the K1. The worst speed is 1/100, where it has the most shutter shock of any lens I've ever tested. To avoid it completely I skip the range of 1/40 to 1/320.

If you always carry a tripod and can use electronic shutter its a non-issue, but as a day time walk-around lens, I've always found this a frustrating limitation. Its a shame, because its optical performance is genuinely impressive for its size and cost.

Hmmmmm....I have not noticed that, but to be fair, I am primarily photographing at shutter speeds of 2-3 minutes in length. But when I have photographed "normally" during the day, I haven't noticed that. I'll keep a look out for it, though, thanks.

---------- Post added 04-18-22 at 10:37 AM ----------

As a man with short arms and deep pockets, I would have to say not cheap, but value for money for sure.
A cheap lense for me is under $35😁

Hahahaha! Well, that's basically paying for postage!!

I feel like for what you get, it's a pretty great bargain....especially on the used market. And with the exception of a few Lensbaby lenses and some oddball used macros, it's the least expensive lens I have, so I'm rather pleased at how much use it gets for having paid about $300 used for it.

---------- Post added 04-18-22 at 10:38 AM ----------

(Relatively) inexpensive but we’ll made and delivering great images, not cheap.
Good article and excellent images.

Thanks! I feel like it's a great value for the money, even new.

---------- Post added 04-18-22 at 10:39 AM ----------

Some excellent photos from a surely valued lens. The 28-105 range is the perfect walk around companion.

It really is a great size, weight, and focal length for a "walkabout" lens. And then the image quality is excellent. I am super happy with it, and just got back from two nights of long exposure night photography in which I used this lens extensively along with some fisheye.

---------- Post added 04-18-22 at 10:42 AM ----------

I think you are underselling the 28-105 somewhat. You don't have to align all the stars to get good performance. During the pre-shipping phase of the original K1, Ricoh was putting out a lot of sample pictures to show how good the camera was, and some of those were taken with the 28-105. They had confidence enough that it would show off the new camera to best advantage. And that is my judgement too. The variable maximum aperture is its only real "weakness", and for many of us that's a price we are very willing to pay for its relatively compact size and moderate weight. I don't feel I am compromising when I use it. Which of course is not to say that I don't value the special characteristics of the various primes within its range. There is a difference between a "walk around" zoom and a specialist prime. An apple is not a good orange, not matter how perfect it is.

And for a lot of us, the variable maximum aperture is not much of an issue if we are going to be photographing at f/8 all the time anyway. I was fanatical about using what is supposed to be my "best" lens for the job only to find that the 28-105mm is producing equally great images and is considerably more flexible. I'm really pleased with this lens, which is why I was inspired to write this article.

And, well, it's always good to write about Pentax whenever possible.

---------- Post added 04-18-22 at 10:46 AM ----------

I regard the DFA 28-105 as a kind of photographic secret weapon. It gives you professional or near professional image quality in a smaller package. As a landscape photographer, not only don't I need f2.8, I don't need f4 either, but if you're shooting with Nikon, Canon, or Sony and you want professional image quality for landscape photographer, you have to play north of $1,000 and put up with greater weight and size in a standard zoom. Can any of those fixed aperture lenses do better than the following images?

I don't know, but if one even has to engage in deep-level pixel peeping and still not be sure most of the time, then it probably doesn't matter anyway.

I do mostly night photography under a full moon with this lens, so I'm basically parked at f/8, f/9 anyway. And when I do day photography, it's mostly landscape, so again, f/8 mostly.

This lens is impressive, especially given the size, weight, weather sealing, and price.