[campdog]

when I upgraded to the K5 earlier this year one of the reasons was Penax stated compatable with older lens. I was in a Camera store to pick up my K5 from CR Kennedy and he said that tecnology with digital Cameras was getting too far ahead and the older lens migh not perform as well as the new generation of lens. I use a Pentax A* 28-70 and a FA* 80-200. I like these lens and got some great results while in the US recently. Does anyone else think I would get better results with a 17-70 or a 60-250 or one of the recent new weather sealed jobs.

[Bramela]

I have used many old MF lenses on my K5 with great results. Sure it takes a little bit of use to get used to and to get the best results, but, I think that the person that gave you that advice was quite a way of the mark.
Or he was very ill informed.
Do not be afraid to use Pentax (or other brand) MF lenses on your K5.
Be sure they are quality lenses though,with the right connection, steer clear el cheapo's, or inferior brands, and that way you will get the best results..

[Coeurdechene]

?
There are people making incredible images while using 60 years old Takumars!
He just wanted to sell you a new, expensive lens... Optics haven't changed all that much, a good old lens is still good by today standards.
Those are * lenses i'm sure they got a good optical quality that will serve you well on your K5.

[NogBoy13]

Well I had ALL kinds of issues using the old primes with the K10 and K20... lots of horrible focus problems. I suspect some kind of design bug somewhere cos nothing I did would fix it - drove me bloody crazy trying to sort it. Consequently I gave up using the the old lenses altogether. However, the K-5 seems a very different kettle of fish somehow, they seem to work superbly with it - thank God! I wouldn't be surprised if some of those nagging bugs were quietly dealt with at Pentax frankly. I feel a little vindicated, as I had a lot of forum feedback that (sometimes not too subtly) suggested my competence/technique was more likely the issue. So... so far so good.
So I guess I'm saying give it shot... with the K-5 at least!
Nogster

[campdog]

Thanks. I feel the FA*28-70 and FA*80-200 are performimg well for me. Im just not up to the new lens specs but love the FA*s that I have.

[Adam]

While FA lenses aren't "optimized" for digital, those two lenses you've got there are among the best zooms Pentax has ever made, and they're not so old, either. The 28-70 will blow the 17-70 out of the water, and the 80-200 will be comparable, but obviously it's a stop faster and will be sharper due to the shorter zoom range.

The reviews in our lens database speak for themselves

Sometimes modern lenses do outperform old lenses, however- one example I can give is the A or K 15/3.5 vs the DA 15/4 limited. The DA owns the legacy lenses in terms of sharpness and exposure, as the old lenses have a tendency to over-expose on newer bodies (by about 1.5 stops on DSLRs and 0.5 stops on FA film SLRs.

[Spock]

I was in a Camera store to pick up my K5 from CR Kennedy and he said that tecnology with digital Cameras was getting too far ahead and the older lens migh not perform as well as the new generation of lens. I use a Pentax A* 28-70 and a FA* 80-200.

Ha, the camera store guy just wanted to put the seed into your mind that your (excellent) lenses were no good so that he could perhaps buy them off you for a steal!

Stick with your classic * lenses - they were, and still are, superb. Their only 'fault' it is their relatively large size and weight.

(btw - I guess you mean FA* 28-70 ?)

[RioRico]

All exactly right above. Legacy Pentax glass often demands a premium price. If comparing 'modern' (AF) zooms with old manual zooms, the shopkeeper has a point -- zoom technology *has* improved greatly since 1985. But otherwise, I'd just suggest that you read the lens reviews here and see how users rate their glass.

[Docrwm]

Ha, the camera store guy just wanted to put the seed into your mind that your (excellent) lenses were no good so that he could perhaps buy them off you for a steal!

Stick with your classic * lenses - they were, and still are, superb. Their only 'fault' it is their relatively large size and weight.

(btw - I guess you mean FA* 28-70 ?)

Nailed it. Man was talking trash. There are crap new lenses and golden oldies out there for our cameras. Read the Lens reviews here to find more of the straight information. Your experience is why I tend to buy over the internet when I can as salesmen have always given me the hives.

[Rupert]

I bought a set of Pentax 645 lenses before the 645D came out and the prices were low......they work perfect on my K20D and my K5, and are fun to use, although full manual. There are many spectacular old lenses that are excellent on the K5...just do a little research and you will find them!

If I recall, this was with the 645 120 4.0 Macro...
[IMG] [/IMG]

Regards!

[TER-OR]

Glass and Brass is still Glass and Brass - you just need to work a little harder with manual. You'll learn how to use your camera like the old manual cameras needed to be used. I grew up using my Dad's full-manual Minolta and it was super-easy to meter, focus and get good results. It's almost as easy with the K-5 (probably was with the K-10, too, but I didn't really start playing with manual lenses until recently).

The big thing to watch out for, though, is the old lenses aren't coated the way new ones are - but you use your lens hood, right?

I suspect - though don't have proof yet - that the newer plastic lens elements cause significant purple fringing. I had to shelf the Tamron 70-300 because of that. Fortunately my wife was tired of otherwise great images being spoiled by purple fringing. Is this more a problem of zoom configuration or plastic lenses? I don't know.

[cbaytan]

If I recall, this was with the 645 120 4.0 Macro...
Regards!

Wow, Rupert this is the hugest pincushion distortion I've ever seen, or cows horns are just asymmetrical? Would never expect from a macro lens.

[Rupert]

Wow, Rupert this is the hugest pincushion distortion I've ever seen, or cows horns are just asymmetrical? Would never expect from a macro lens.

Yeah, I did a little post processing on his horns! They were big anyhow, but Otis wanted them bigger, so I did what I was told.

The 120 645 Macro...for its intended purpose...
[IMG] [/IMG]

[IMG] [/IMG]

Best Regards!

[JeffJS]

when I upgraded to the K5 earlier this year one of the reasons was Penax stated compatable with older lens. I was in a Camera store to pick up my K5 from CR Kennedy and he said that tecnology with digital Cameras was getting too far ahead and the older lens migh not perform as well as the new generation of lens. I use a Pentax A* 28-70 and a FA* 80-200. I like these lens and got some great results while in the US recently. Does anyone else think I would get better results with a 17-70 or a 60-250 or one of the recent new weather sealed jobs.

Absolutely not, and I've never owned Any of those lenses. The only thing the newer ones will get you is a wider end and a longer top end. I Can tell you that from my experience with the FA* lenses (24, 85, 200), that on the K5 or any other pentax, they are stellar performers.

Have a look around my flickr account if you want to see what 'old' lenses will do (and I'm not even that good at using them).

[campdog]

I dont doubt the quality and image quality with these lenses. I took the to the US recently and got some amazing shots. I got the K5 in January and had it back to pentax becuase of focusing issues. Pentax just replaced it becauses of more mirror and shutter problems. The camera gusy suspected a incompatability with the K5 and FA lenses. Im not going to sell them and but a Sigma 17-70 or 70-300 thats for sure. I just had a crook camera thats all. These are my main 2 lenses along with a Sigma 10-20mm and an old Pentax 100 macro.
John