[PentaxPoke]

I was just given this lens this evening by a thoughtful student who knows that I shoot Pentax. His family had this lens in a box and they were going to throw it away, but he thought maybe I could use it. It is a SEARS 135mm f/2.8 Auto MC and is basically in "like new" condition. It is all-metal (and quite heavy), and I like the nifty built-in hood. I know it is a third party lens and that some of you shoot Sears (per the "Sears Lens Club" thread.)

I have posted a picture of it on my k10d below with the hood retracted and extended. I thought maybe anyone with this lens could tell me what you think of it. I was able to successfully use it in "M" mode, but tomorrow maybe I will have some time to try it in daylight.

---

Last edited by PentaxPoke; 02-17-2009 at 01:43 AM.

There are three reviews here; PentaxForums.com Third-Party Pentax Lens Review Database - 135mm f2.8 Auto Multicoated

It got two sevens.

If nothing else, you have a cool paperweight.
Or put it in a sock for self defense.

[PentaxPoke]

Thanks Gary! I searched and found the Sears thread but forgot about the review section! I don't think mine has the "macro" capability, which would certainly be nice. It sure feels like it is well built for a third-party lens. I may have a bit of fun with it before I use it as a self-defense paperweight.

[Votesh]

I got the same one recently but the aperture is stuck wide open. I opened it up for a bit hoping to fix it but I only had a small Philips head and needed an equally small flat head screwdriver, so I put it back together and haven't given it another go. However, I find it to be quite alright wide open especially considering how cheap it was, at less than $10. I'd probably give it a 7.5 from what I've seen so far.

[winglik]

I have the same one, not bad for it's value. it's not as good as the Takumar 135mm 2.5 or the Takumar m42 3.5. But I think the picture came out of it is good.

[jeffrey r]

Having been casually looking at the Pentax (and third-party) 135mm/2.8 lenses on ebay the past couple of weeks, it seems they are quite common and generally go for between $30-$60 or so. From what I have read, the Pentax-mount 135/2.8 lenses are pretty good in general. I actually recently picked up from ebay a JC Penney branded 135/2.8 for around $30. At that price (or in your case, free), no biggie if it only gets a bit of use.

[k100d]

there's a sears lens club somewhere

[egordon99]

I had the "A" version of that lens (had an 'A' on the aperture ring so a little easier to use than an "M" lens). It was pretty decent, I paid $12 for it...Never used it once I got the DA* 50-135mm, sold it to someone here who seemed to like it (jsherman?)....

[Just1MoreDave]

I got the same one recently but the aperture is stuck wide open. I opened it up for a bit hoping to fix it but I only had a small Philips head and needed an equally small flat head screwdriver, so I put it back together and haven't given it another go. However, I find it to be quite alright wide open especially considering how cheap it was, at less than $10. I'd probably give it a 7.5 from what I've seen so far.

I had two like that. I discovered that I could get the entire aperture assembly off the lens and soak it overnight in mineral spirits. There may also be some oil deposits on the inner elements. I had one taken entirely apart, but it worked fine upon reassembly. I think the lens is on par with the Takumar Bayonet.

[PentaxPoke]

Thanks for the comments. I posted some pics in the "Sears Lens Club" thread.

[dave sz]

Thanks Gary! I searched and found the Sears thread but forgot about the review section! I don't think mine has the "macro" capability, which would certainly be nice. It sure feels like it is well built for a third-party lens. I may have a bit of fun with it before I use it as a self-defense paperweight.

Not really macro since it's only 1:5 max. I have the same one but no built in hood. It's ok in some situations but I barely use it. I do think it's quite sharp though. I can take some photos of very boring subjects if you want...

[PentaxPoke]

I wish the modern lenses would have such built-in hoods. It is nice how it stows away so neatly. Maybe there are space constraints on modern lenses that make it inconvenient to do this though.

[Matthew]

...
Or put it in a sock for self defense.

You do seem to have a violent way of thinking Gary!

[rparmar]

I have the Sears with the "macro" facility, which is simply a way of smearing vaseline on the subject. Interesting effect for those that like it!

[Jewelltrail]

I wish the modern lenses would have such built-in hoods. It is nice how it stows away so neatly.

I have to agree!