Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-09-2010, 10:25 AM   #886
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 72
QuoteOriginally posted by Recercare Quote
I haven't received it yet, but I will do a quick comparison for you. According to what I have read the K 35/3.5 is supposed to be a little sharper and also more contrasty. But the K 35/2 has better bokeh and most likely more easy to manual focus. I think you can have both....k35/3.5 as an outdoor lens and K35/2 as an indoor lens.
Thanks, Lars. Being periodically tempted to add the K35/2.0 to my collection, I am looking forward to that comparison.
Dirk

11-09-2010, 11:49 AM   #887
axl
Veteran Member
axl's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,183
QuoteOriginally posted by DirkG Quote
Helsinki Cathedral as seen by K20/4:
this is a stunner!
11-09-2010, 11:50 AM   #888
axl
Veteran Member
axl's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,183
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
I love this shot!

More k55:
despite our differences on certain matters I have to say these are great! Especially the 2nd, just love it. And very nice PPing....
11-09-2010, 12:25 PM   #889
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,079
Here's one from the K 55/1.8 on film.

Pentax K2, SMC 55/1.8, Kodak Gold 100



11-09-2010, 02:57 PM   #890
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Recercare Quote
I haven't received it yet, but I will do a quick comparison for you. According to what I have read the K 35/3.5 is supposed to be a little sharper and also more contrasty. But the K 35/2 has better bokeh and most likely more easy to manual focus. I think you can have both....k35/3.5 as an outdoor lens and K35/2 as an indoor lens.

Kind regards
.lars
I think this is true. from what I had seen, the 3.5 is indeed looks sharper and contrasty. I'm not sure though with the FA35/2 since the resolution figures seems to suggest that the AF version is a lot sharper, but my personal feeling is that the 3.5 is sharper.
11-09-2010, 03:16 PM   #891
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 359
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
I think this is true. from what I had seen, the 3.5 is indeed looks sharper and contrasty. I'm not sure though with the FA35/2 since the resolution figures seems to suggest that the AF version is a lot sharper, but my personal feeling is that the 3.5 is sharper.
Resolution tests, reviews, pictures ......sometimes it's just impossible to decide which lens to buy. For example, the K30/2.8 is rated higher than the K28/3.5 at this website, but when I compare approx 80 pics in Flickriver the K28/3.5 seems to be the better one.

Flickriver: K28/3.5
Flickriver: K30/2.8

Kind regards
.lars
11-09-2010, 05:17 PM   #892
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 72
QuoteOriginally posted by Recercare Quote
Resolution tests, reviews, pictures ......sometimes it's just impossible to decide which lens to buy. For example, the K30/2.8 is rated higher than the K28/3.5 at this website, but when I compare approx 80 pics in Flickriver the K28/3.5 seems to be the better one.

Flickriver: K28/3.5
Flickriver: K30/2.8

Kind regards
.lars
Hello Lars,

I wouldn't say "better", just "different" -- at a high level of quality in both cases. In my comment on the K30/2.8 (in the Lens Review section of the forum), I summarized the differences as follows:

"The center sharpness of both lenses is of the same outstanding quality, but the K28/3.5 has more overall sharpness across the frame; conversely, the K30/2.8 has smoother out-of-focus blur. The differences are subtle, but it means that, functionally speaking, the K28/3.5 might be better for landscape photography, while the K30/2.8 is better for the closer range, where you may want to render objects with 3D effect."

In addition, I would say that tonal rendering is more nuanced in K30 -- but that could just be a very subjective impression. (It is one of those lenses that are easy to like.)

If you'd like to go beyond Flickriver for examples of K30/2.8, there are interesting pictures and comments on the following German site (excuse me if you know it already):
Objektiv Pentax K 30mm f2.8 SMC - DSLR-Forum

Best,
Dirk

11-09-2010, 05:34 PM   #893
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 72
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
this is a stunner!
Thank you ! I should add that the picture lost a bit in sharpness through uploading, but that's not uncommon, I guess .
On a more general note, the K20/4 turns out to be a very qualitative lens for architecture and cityscapes: I compared it to DA21 and sold the DA.
Best,
Dirk
11-09-2010, 06:31 PM   #894
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
gofour3's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 8,085
QuoteOriginally posted by DirkG Quote
Congratulations, Lars. How does it compare to K35/3.5 (apart from being faster) ? The space between 28mm and 35mm is quite crowded in the K-series, with 28/2.0, 28/3.5, 30/2.0, 35/2.0 and 35/3.5 (not to mention the 28mm Shift), and so it's useful to get a good idea of the differences.
I have the K28/2.0, K28/3.5, K28/3.5 Shift, K30/2.8, K35/2.0 and the K35/3.5.
I use them all on my film cameras, for both colour and b&w slides. I use some more than others, but I’d rate them overall in the following order:

1) K28/2.0
2) K30/2.8
3) Tie K35/3.5 & K28/3.5
5) K35/2.0
6) K28/3.5 Shift

Comparing just the two 35s, the K35/3.5 is sharper, but the K35/2.0 is faster. I only use the K35/2.0 for low light or when I’m shooting slow film, otherwise the K35/3.5 gets the nod.

Phil.
11-10-2010, 12:06 PM   #895
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 359
QuoteOriginally posted by DirkG Quote
Hello Lars,

I wouldn't say "better", just "different" -- at a high level of quality in both cases. In my comment on the K30/2.8 (in the Lens Review section of the forum), I summarized the differences as follows:

"The center sharpness of both lenses is of the same outstanding quality, but the K28/3.5 has more overall sharpness across the frame; conversely, the K30/2.8 has smoother out-of-focus blur. The differences are subtle, but it means that, functionally speaking, the K28/3.5 might be better for landscape photography, while the K30/2.8 is better for the closer range, where you may want to render objects with 3D effect."

In addition, I would say that tonal rendering is more nuanced in K30 -- but that could just be a very subjective impression. (It is one of those lenses that are easy to like.)

If you'd like to go beyond Flickriver for examples of K30/2.8, there are interesting pictures and comments on the following German site (excuse me if you know it already):
Objektiv Pentax K 30mm f2.8 SMC - DSLR-Forum

Best,
Dirk

Hello Dirk

Thanks for the link. When using the word "better" I was talking about my personal taste, or as you say: "subjective impression". I am tempted to get the K30 just to test it

Kind regards
.lars
11-10-2010, 12:13 PM   #896
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 359
QuoteOriginally posted by gofour3 Quote
I have the K28/2.0, K28/3.5, K28/3.5 Shift, K30/2.8, K35/2.0 and the K35/3.5.
I use them all on my film cameras, for both colour and b&w slides. I use some more than others, but I’d rate them overall in the following order:

1) K28/2.0
2) K30/2.8
3) Tie K35/3.5 & K28/3.5
5) K35/2.0
6) K28/3.5 Shift

Comparing just the two 35s, the K35/3.5 is sharper, but the K35/2.0 is faster. I only use the K35/2.0 for low light or when I’m shooting slow film, otherwise the K35/3.5 gets the nod.

Phil.

I considered the K28/2 but it's quite expensive. I am not sure I want to spend more than $300 USD for a K-lens.

Kind regards
.lars
11-10-2010, 11:13 PM   #897
Veteran Member
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,294
QuoteOriginally posted by Recercare Quote
I considered the K28/2 but it's quite expensive. I am not sure I want to spend more than $300 USD for a K-lens.


I can understand, but some of them are very special. There are a number of factors at play. Will the lenses of today such as a 16-50 hold there value as compared to some of the Ks? It is hard to find a K28/2 which will impact cost. Ironically, the K28/2, while stellar wide open, is monumentally sharp at F16 (and from one site performs better than the 43 Ltd).

------- ... f2.0 ... f2.8 ... f5.6 . f16.... f22
28/2.0 ... 69 ..... 69 .... 78 .... 98 .... 78
43/1.9 ... 55 ..... 69 .... 98 .... 87 .... 87

$600 (or less) for a lens that sometimes outperforms a FA Ltd isn't so bad is it?
11-10-2010, 11:31 PM   #898
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by smc Quote


I can understand, but some of them are very special. There are a number of factors at play. Will the lenses of today such as a 16-50 hold there value as compared to some of the Ks? It is hard to find a K28/2 which will impact cost. Ironically, the K28/2, while stellar wide open, is monumentally sharp at F16 (and from one site performs better than the 43 Ltd).

------- ... f2.0 ... f2.8 ... f5.6 . f16.... f22
28/2.0 ... 69 ..... 69 .... 78 .... 98 .... 78
43/1.9 ... 55 ..... 69 .... 98 .... 87 .... 87

$600 (or less) for a lens that sometimes outperforms a FA Ltd isn't so bad is it?
fwiw, I think it wouldn't had earn a great reputation as a cult classic if it weren't special.
11-11-2010, 07:26 AM   #899
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 72
QuoteOriginally posted by smc Quote


I can understand, but some of them are very special. There are a number of factors at play. Will the lenses of today such as a 16-50 hold there value as compared to some of the Ks? It is hard to find a K28/2 which will impact cost. Ironically, the K28/2, while stellar wide open, is monumentally sharp at F16 (and from one site performs better than the 43 Ltd).

------- ... f2.0 ... f2.8 ... f5.6 . f16.... f22
28/2.0 ... 69 ..... 69 .... 78 .... 98 .... 78
43/1.9 ... 55 ..... 69 .... 98 .... 87 .... 87

$600 (or less) for a lens that sometimes outperforms a FA Ltd isn't so bad is it?
And K28/2.0 versus FA31/1.8? I don't imagine K28/2.0 would fare badly, really. (My impression is that the hype surrounding FA31/1.8 is very much fed by an insufficient knowledge of the older mf lenses.)

To come back to the issue of K28/2.0 versus K30/2.8, I did a few comparisons which may interest the K-Club members. First, a comparison of (from left to right) K28/2.0, K30/2.8 and K28/3.5 at f5.6 (100% center crop, iso 200, tripod-mounted; the object is an empty glass at half a meter distance).



The differences in this context (stopped down, foreground focus, center of the image) are negligeable. With background focus on the same scene, however, K28/3.5 loses in sharpness compared to the other two.



Limiting further comparisons to K28/2.0 and K30/2.8, my impression is that K28/2.0 has a slight edge in rendering colors and textures (picture taken at f2.8):



... and (off-center in the same picture) has slightly smoother bokeh:



So, all in all, I find evidence for Phil's ordering: K28/2.0 > K30/2.8 > K28/3.5. Is it interesting to have either K28/2.0 or K30/2.8 next to (or instead of) K28/3.5? I would say so, yes.

At the same time, to take up Lars's point: should one then opt for K28/2.0 rather than K30/2.8? Not necessarily, I would say: K28/2.0 is twice the size, twice the weight and twice the price of K30/2.8, but the image quality obviously doesn't increase accordingly. Be happy if you can find and afford a K28/2.0, but don't feel unhappy if you cannot.

Cheers,
Dirk
11-11-2010, 09:17 AM   #900
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by DirkG Quote
And K28/2.0 versus FA31/1.8? I don't imagine K28/2.0 would fare badly, really. (My impression is that the hype surrounding FA31/1.8 is very much fed by an insufficient knowledge of the older mf lenses.)

To come back to the issue of K28/2.0 versus K30/2.8, I did a few comparisons which may interest the K-Club members. First, a comparison of (from left to right) K28/2.0, K30/2.8 and K28/3.5 at f5.6 (100% center crop, iso 200, tripod-mounted; the object is an empty glass at half a meter distance).



The differences in this context (stopped down, foreground focus, center of the image) are negligeable. With background focus on the same scene, however, K28/3.5 loses in sharpness compared to the other two.



Limiting further comparisons to K28/2.0 and K30/2.8, my impression is that K28/2.0 has a slight edge in rendering colors and textures (picture taken at f2.8):



... and (off-center in the same picture) has slightly smoother bokeh:



So, all in all, I find evidence for Phil's ordering: K28/2.0 > K30/2.8 > K28/3.5. Is it interesting to have either K28/2.0 or K30/2.8 next to (or instead of) K28/3.5? I would say so, yes.

At the same time, to take up Lars's point: should one then opt for K28/2.0 rather than K30/2.8? Not necessarily, I would say: K28/2.0 is twice the size, twice the weight and twice the price of K30/2.8, but the image quality obviously doesn't increase accordingly. Be happy if you can find and afford a K28/2.0, but don't feel unhappy if you cannot.

Cheers,
Dirk
interesting results Dirk. although I find it surprising that the K28/3.5 is much less sharper than the other 2 at f5.6. are you sure that you have all lenses properly focused at a certain area? can you do another test? the glass shots somehow show a different result. look beyond (at the back of) the glass and it looks like the books on the shelves (K28/3.5) are more defined compared to the other two.
also Takinami's tests figures suggests that both the K28/3.5 and K30/2.8 have the same higher resolution compared to the K28/2.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
close, colors, dof, f1.2, flickr, focus, guy, idaho, k135, k28, lens, lenses, love, mine, moon shot, pentax, pentax k30, pentax lens, photo, post, raindrop, series, shot, sunset, sw, thanks, thread, time, versa
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The M Club! jsherman999 Lens Clubs 9619 9 Hours Ago 12:53 PM
The F Club! jsherman999 Lens Clubs 1235 1 Day Ago 07:42 PM
D-FA WR Club Rico Lens Clubs 671 03-10-2024 03:17 AM
The A Club jake.astig Lens Clubs 3996 02-15-2024 11:51 AM
In the club again metroeloise Post Your Photos! 4 10-20-2008 08:59 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:54 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top