Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-02-2014, 06:01 AM   #1
Forum Member
vrolok's Avatar

Join Date: May 2014
Location: Caesaraugusta
Posts: 89
M 135 f3.5 "vs" M 200 f4 - best suited for Q?

Hi!

I am planning to buy my first M lens to use it with a Q body, that I have just purchased in mint conditions. I have also ordered the proper adapter - shipped from HK, will take some time though... Quick question: which lens would you recommend me between

- SMC M 135 f3.5

- SMC M 200 f4.0

??

Obviously the "reach" factor differs pretty much, but I can sacrifice it if the M135 is overall better suited for Q. In the reference thread, I have read that one or two forum users like the M135 - I wonder whether they tried also the M200. Anyone has tried both and mind sharing his/her opinion?

Also true that good copies can be found so cheaply priced that I may end up buying both lenses...

Cheers

08-02-2014, 06:31 AM   #2
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,735
The M200/4 performs better at infinity than closer in.
So I would not recommend it unless you'll be using it at long range.

Remember that the Q sensor is very demanding,
so unless you're mounting top (= expensive) optics,
be prepared for purple fringing, chromatic aberrations, and so on.
08-02-2014, 06:33 AM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Iowa
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,269
The 135 is a very useful and very long tele on the Q. It's equivalent to a 756 mm lens on the Q, and considering it's ridiculous reach, it's downright tiny. I also really like the built-in hood. Haven't used the 200, but the 135 is about as long as I'd want to shoot handheld on the Q. Now if you're using it on the Q7 with the smaller 4.5x crop factor, it would bring the 200mm equivalent down to 900mm, which might be more manageable for handheld use.

I think the sweet spot on the 135 is around f5.6 to f8, by the way. There's less fringing around that range.
08-02-2014, 06:48 AM   #4
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 160
Doesn't it depend on what you plan to do with it? I have the 135 and it works great for hand held, but my 80-200 M at 200mm does not work that well for me without being steadied in some way. But then, if you are going after birds in the tree across the street, the 135 isn't going to do what you want as well as the 200?

08-02-2014, 07:08 AM   #5
Forum Member
vrolok's Avatar

Join Date: May 2014
Location: Caesaraugusta
Posts: 89
Original Poster
Ok - thank to everyone. indeed birds across the street is one of the targets! I like the fact the 135 is relatively compact and yet capable of delivering 750mm on the Q. The built-in hood is another plus!
I also have a DA55-300wr which I will try as well.
Cheers
08-02-2014, 07:59 AM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,426
In my experience the M and K 135'a are very good on the Q and Q7. I have only a K200/2.5 for comparison and I'm not very good yet with that lens (but I arrtibute my lack of success to operator error).

IIRC, one thing barondla discovered for the Q is to set the SR compensation to 150mm instead of 135mm - that seems to improve sharpness dramatically.
08-02-2014, 08:02 AM   #7
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
QuoteOriginally posted by vrolok Quote
Ok - thank to everyone. indeed birds across the street is one of the targets! I like the fact the 135 is relatively compact and yet capable of delivering 750mm on the Q. The built-in hood is another plus!
I also have a DA55-300wr which I will try as well.
Cheers
I have the M 135 f3.5 and a 55-300 both work well on the Q, I sole my 200 f4 Tak M42 because it was heavy on the Q and I didn't use it much. The 135 is my most used adapted lens in addition to my SMC F 80-200 zoom that also works well
08-25-2014, 11:37 AM   #8
Forum Member
vrolok's Avatar

Join Date: May 2014
Location: Caesaraugusta
Posts: 89
Original Poster
After getting a mint M135 for a ridiculously cheap price, I have received today the fotodiox/jinfinance adapter. Wow what a nice combo is the M135+Q! Thanks for the advice. No need of a tripod using the M135.

I have done a quick test, using a tripod, to compare the M135 and a DA55-300. Below is the result, no postprocessing at all, except for resizing the photos.

Cheers

Attached Images
       
08-25-2014, 12:41 PM   #9
Pentaxian
8540tomg's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,454
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
In my experience the M and K 135'a are very good on the Q and Q7. I have only a K200/2.5 for comparison and I'm not very good yet with that lens (but I arrtibute my lack of success to operator error).

IIRC, one thing barondla discovered for the Q is to set the SR compensation to 150mm instead of 135mm - that seems to improve sharpness dramatically.
I'd be curious to see a few shots from the K 200/2.5 on the Q monochrome.

It is much heavier the the M or K 135 with that massive front element.

Tom G
08-25-2014, 01:32 PM   #10
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
QuoteOriginally posted by 8540tomg Quote
I'd be curious to see a few shots from the K 200/2.5 on the Q monochrome.

It is much heavier the the M or K 135 with that massive front element.

Tom G
The difference between the K135/2.5 and the M135 is considerable.

I would love to try a M200/4 just to get 200MM really light
08-25-2014, 02:49 PM   #11
Pentaxian
8540tomg's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,454
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
The difference between the K135/2.5 and the M135 is considerable.

Hi Lowell,

I would love to try a M200/4 just to get 200MM really light
I've got both the M 200/4 and the M 150/3.5. Come to think of it I've also got the K 135/3.5. I hardly ever use any of them.

I suspect the M 150/3.5 would be ideal for the Q format as it is only 20 grams heavier than the M 135.

You're just up the road from me as I recall. If you would like to borrow them let me know.

Tom G

Last edited by 8540tomg; 08-25-2014 at 05:13 PM. Reason: typo
08-25-2014, 03:54 PM   #12
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,426
QuoteOriginally posted by 8540tomg Quote
I'd be curious to see a few shots from the K 200/2.5 on the Q monochrome.

It is much heavier the the M or K 135 with that massive front element.

Tom G
That's been on my 'project' list forever. I'm a little concerned about the weight (950g) as well but I have the tripod foot for the adapter so it should work out. Unfortunately I don't have Arca Swiss QR heads so I can't use the Fanotec foot.

I just picked up a pristine K200/4 with a frozen aperture for pennies. If I can't fix it myself I'll send it off and try that one too.

I'll try to get that done this week.
08-25-2014, 05:49 PM   #13
Pentaxian
8540tomg's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,454
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
That's been on my 'project' list forever. I'm a little concerned about the weight (950g) as well but I have the tripod foot for the adapter so it should work out. Unfortunately I don't have Arca Swiss QR heads so I can't use the Fanotec foot. [snip]
I'll try to get that done this week.
Looking forward to it monochrome

That K 200/2.5 is a really sharp lens even wide open. I expect it will perform very well indeed on the Q.

The results will tell the tale.

It is pretty hefty but, at least for myself, I find it "feels" just about perfect attached to my K10 or K5.

Tom G
08-25-2014, 09:11 PM   #14
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2012
Location: Adelaide
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,104
I have both the M135 and the M200. The 135 is the superior lens by some margin, IMO. Quite sharp when correctly focused at F5.6 to F8. Its rendering can be very attractive.

M200 not as sharp at any aperture, tends to fringing and lots of CA in oof areas, and can struggle a bit with contrast. Though I found using a circular polarizer noticably helped contrast and saturation. With care, can take some nice photos but not the strongest card in the M series pack. Also 200mm focal length on APS-C is where the need for good tele technique seems to really kick in. On a Q though, even a 'normal' 50mm lens demands tele technique!

M200 can be OK at very close range in my experience and has nice bokeh when used that way, as long as no bright spots in background to bring out the CA's.
08-25-2014, 10:17 PM   #15
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
QuoteOriginally posted by 8540tomg Quote
I've got both the M 200/4 and the M 150/3.5. Come to think of it I've also got the K 135/3.5. I hardly ever use any of them.

I suspect the M 150/3.5 would be ideal for the Q format as it is only 20 grams heavier than the M 135.

You're just up the road from me as I recall. If you would like to borrow them let me know.

Tom G
I might just have to figure out how to do this.
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!
camera, f3.5, lens, m135, m135/3.5, m200 f4, mirrorless, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7, smc
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Optical differences between Pentax "K", "M", and "A" lenses 6BQ5 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 31 01-10-2014 01:02 PM
Change Mount on "M" Lenses and Loose Hood on the 135/3.5 Albino_BlacMan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 08-03-2013 08:56 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:52 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