[Pentaxor]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

SMC PENTAX-M 28MM F2.8 WIDE ANGLE LENS MINT+ - eBay (item 120500528973 end time Dec-08-09 10:27:30 PST)


How about this guy?

What size does this turn into on a digital camera? (Actually if someone could give me the equation to convert sizes from 35mm to APS-C focal equivalent it would be awesome..or whatever size sensor a K10 uses)

if you dont shoot at close and tight corners, that lens would be fine. a bit ok for use indoors with a bit of distance but can cover more field area as opposed to a 35m or 50mm. it's best use is outdoors for landscape and architecture at far distances.

[Raptorman]

hmm..probably not what I want then. I'll keep a lookout for a decent Tamron like that one mentioned earlier in that case.

[ivoire]

If you want inexpensive, try this:

TOKINA CHINON AUTO 17MM F/3.5 LENS PENTAX-K/M MOUNT - eBay (item 200412497817 end time Dec-07-09 11:04:05 PST)

[Marc Sabatella]

I'm actually in the process of switching over to digital and pretty much any lens I buy from now on I'd like to be compatible with both my film and digital bodies.

OK, but there is no way around the fact that it it will behave *differently* on the two bodies. So the idea of getting a single lens that will serve your wide end needs equally on both is just not realistic. it's either perfect on digital but too wide on film, or perfect on film and not wide enough on digital. So you'll likely end up needing to buy lenses specifically for each anyhow, to some extent. But many lenses, of course, might be useful *for different reasons* on the different bodies. Like the 28 would be a great wide angle on film, and a great "normal" on digital. Or a 50 that would be a great normal on film, and a great "short portrait" on digital.

All I really want is a wide angle with the little driveshaft hookup so it will autofocus

Ah, that limits things *considerably*. Most of the cheap lenses are not AF.

[Blue]

If you want cheap, I'd suggest the DA 18-55mm version II. Its not too awfully slow at the wide end. While I don't consider it fast, neither are many of the suggestions i.e. f3.5. The challenge is in the 3 words: wide, fast, cheap . . .

[Raptorman]

If you want inexpensive, try this:

TOKINA CHINON AUTO 17MM F/3.5 LENS PENTAX-K/M MOUNT - eBay (item 200412497817 end time Dec-07-09 11:04:05 PST)

Awesome! although I would like a good "digital" lens, its not realistic right not to try to drop money on a true digital type lens...something like this is perfect as a hold over until I can really upgrade things.

On a digital body, what kind of focal length does this lens translate to?

[Raptorman]

New PENTAX 18-55 SMC DA L 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens - eBay (item 320457664366 end time Dec-08-09 09:57:15 PST)


This looks like a sweet deal here!


But..umm wheres the apeture control

[Blue]

New PENTAX 18-55 SMC DA L 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens - eBay (item 320457664366 end time Dec-08-09 09:57:15 PST)


This looks like a sweet deal here!


But..umm wheres the apeture control

If you use a digital body, it will be done via the body.

Edit: keep in mind that the L versions of these DA zoom lenses don't have metal mounts.

[egordon99]

Awesome! although I would like a good "digital" lens, its not realistic right not to try to drop money on a true digital type lens...something like this is perfect as a hold over until I can really upgrade things.

On a digital body, what kind of focal length does this lens translate to?

Just like you multiplied 28mm by 1.5, you multiply 17mm by 1.5 to get the "focal length equivalent" I'll leave the math as an exercise for you


**Normally I tell folks to ignore the crop factor "BS", but since you have experience with film, it makes sense.

[Raptorman]

If you use a digital body, it will be done via the body.

Edit: keep in mind that the L versions of these DA zoom lenses don't have metal mounts.

oh...I think Ill just start saving up for something then. I don't see that lens having a very long life expectancy.


Thanks egordon! thats a huge help...I knew the factor was in that neighborhood but I wasn't sure.

[Blue]

oh...I think Ill just start saving up for something then. I don't see that lens having a very long life expectancy.

You can get it with the metal mount for not much more in slightly used condition.

[Marc Sabatella]

New PENTAX 18-55 SMC DA L 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens - eBay (item 320457664366 end time Dec-08-09 09:57:15 PST)


This looks like a sweet deal here!

If it goes at that prices. But for not that much more you could get the "regular" 18-55, rather than the plastic mount one that also lacks quick shift and a hood.

Plus, like most DA lenses, this won't work on film. Even aside from the lack of aperture control - many film bodies can control aperture themselves - it just isn't designed to cover a 35mm film frame. It would vignette something fierce - not just some darkening, but an actual tunnel with black around it.

[ivoire]

If you like the 18-55mm, the new 18-55mmWR is available new for $139 from Abes. Use Bing cash back for a $3-7 discount.

Pentax smc DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL WR

[Blue]

This just showed up in the marketplace:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/82368-sale-pe...ships-w-w.html

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

Marc Sabatella is a smart fellow, and he has given you excellent advice regarding the Zenitar 16mm. Probably not an ideal lens for film (180 degree fisheyes all need to be stopped down, and look gimmicky except for certain photos).

This lens is far less flare-prone than the famed Tokina 12-24, and closely matches that lens in all other areas (I have the Canon mount version). Super sharp at most apertures (f4 and lower), and no worse than typical CA (better than the Tokina/Pentax 12-24). On digital, you may want to correct for fisheye or not depending on the scene - not severe on a 1.5x sensor. A good copy does indeed compete with lenses costing many times more as has been shown by many posters.

The biggest concern is the source. Very dependable option is RuGift.com - that's where I got mine.

I can post any number of impressive shots (as impressive as my limited eye can obtain) - and here is one example:
Featured Images - James Robins - Powered by Phanfare