Pentax-F 35-70mm worth the upgrade?

Oldbayrunner · 09-03-2014, 12:56 PM

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.

Lot of 2 Collapsible Rubber Lens Hoods for Camera Lens with 49mm Filter Thread | eBay
49mm Collapsible Folding Rubber Lens Hood Sun Shade Screw in Double Thread Ring | eBay

nyonya · 09-03-2014, 01:38 PM

Originally posted by Oldbayrunner

Lot of 2 Collapsible Rubber Lens Hoods for Camera Lens with 49mm Filter Thread | eBay
49mm Collapsible Folding Rubber Lens Hood Sun Shade Screw in Double Thread Ring | eBay

Thank you for the links. Would something like this work as well? What are the pros/cons of a rubber vs. a metal hood?

Amazon.com : Neewer

Oldbayrunner · 09-03-2014, 03:43 PM

No because you would get vignetting at the 35mm focal length due to the length of the hood. That's the beauty of the collapsing one is you can adjust for both. Otherwise you need a 49mm floral design screw in.

SOldBear · 09-04-2014, 12:28 AM

Originally posted by nyonya

Can anybody paste a link to a lens hood they've found to work well with this lens? Having some trouble finding one that would definitely fit and work well.

The hood is a genuine Pentax. The marking says: "Standard Lens 1:1.4 50 mm 1:1.8~2 55 mm".

Pentax-F series lenses have plastic front thread. I protect the thread by an "empty" 49mm ring (a filter with the glass removed). The cap is this one. A nice thing about this setup is that the cap can be removed/installed with the hood in place.

I bet you this one will work. It looks cool too.

Note that at 35mm for an APC-C sensor, the lens has the same view as a 52mm lens for a full-frame sensor.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

mtux · 09-04-2014, 01:42 AM

At 35mm, the kit lens is significantly better, specially at corners!
at 50mm the 35-70 is a bit better, and your kit lens does not reach 70 so no comparison there.
Also take note that minimum focus distance on F 35-70 is 70cm and it goes closer only at 70mm FL!
And it gives you about one stop more light than the kit.

All in all, I didn't find it a big step up over the kit lens. at least the copy I tried.

JPT · 09-04-2014, 02:40 AM

I've used the hood from the DA40mm ltd on the the 35-70 and it seemed to work well without adding bulk to what should be a small lens. The problem is it costs a lot as a seperate item, and if you have the DA40, you probably use it over the 35-70. How about using a step down ring? I'm not sure what the appropriate inner diameter would be, though.

Oldbayrunner · 09-04-2014, 08:05 AM

Originally posted by mtux

Also take note that minimum focus distance on F 35-70 is 70cm and it goes closer only at 70mm FL!

Wrong, the minimum focus distance is .32cm in macro mode, which is within the green area past 70mm.

mtux · 09-04-2014, 08:15 AM

Originally posted by Oldbayrunner

Wrong, the minimum focus distance is .32cm in macro mode, which is within the green area past 70mm.

ONLY in macro mode! other than that, it's only 0.7m!
What else did I say? past 70mm do you mean it's a longer FL!? then that's wrong :P

Oldbayrunner · 09-04-2014, 09:09 AM

No, what I meant was moving the lens beyond the 70mm mark into macro, which in realty is a shorter focal length. So you're still wrong in your previous statements, I quote you "and it goes closer only at 70mm FL!". No it does not go closer at 70mm it goes closer to .32cm by moving to lens beyond the 70mm mark into the shorter focal lengths of the macro portion of the lens. When moved in macro mode the lens focal length moves back towards the shorter 35mm focal length to about half the len's extension at maximum macro, to a close up of 1:4 magnication ratio max.... So it is not closer at 70mm PERIOD.. Don't believe me if you have a copy move it past 70mm and watch the lens extend to a shorter focal length.... The minimum focus distance for any lens is the complete minimum focus distance that lens will go as stated in the specs for the lens.

Sorry for taking this slightly off topic but this is the second thread this member is putting forth incorrect information.

SOldBear · 09-04-2014, 10:05 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by JPT

How about using a step down ring?

Like this? The ring is 49-28.

mtux · 09-04-2014, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by Oldbayrunner

No, what I meant was moving the lens beyond the 70mm mark into macro, which in realty is a shorter focal length. So you're still wrong in your previous statements, I quote you "and it goes closer only at 70mm FL!". No it does not go closer at 70mm it goes closer to .32cm by moving to lens beyond the 70mm mark into the shorter focal lengths of the macro portion of the lens. When moved in macro mode the lens focal length moves back towards the shorter 35mm focal length to about half the len's extension at maximum macro, to a close up of 1:4 magnication ratio max.... So it is not closer at 70mm PERIOD.. Don't believe me if you have a copy move it past 70mm and watch the lens extend to a shorter focal length.... The minimum focus distance for any lens is the complete minimum focus distance that lens will go as stated in the specs for the lens.

Thanks for explaining, I had the lens and used it and know what it is!
My point was that when you are in 35mm or 50mm focal lengths you cannot get closer than 70cm to subject. It just can't focus closer!
And I think moving the zoom past the 70mm mark (to GREEN macro mode), just extends the tube for closer focus ability! just like a macro lens when you focus closer it extends more! and in macro mode you CANNOT focus on infinity! So again, it's changing just focus! not the FL!

Blue · 09-04-2014, 08:02 PM

Originally posted by JPT

The F35-70 is a fun lens, but I think the main reason to get it is for the different zoom range. I like this for times like a barbecue when I'm doing a lot of people pictures in relatively good light. It's pretty sharp but has notably worse flare resistance compared to DA and FA lenses. You also have to remember you're losing a lot at the wide end and the gain at the long end if not so noticeable.

I actually have both variants of this lens. First I got the supposedly inferior Takumar-F version, which has the focal length written in white on the side. I enjoyed using it, but always wondered how much better the SMC Pentax-F version would be, which has the focal length written in red on the side. Finally, I found one for sale. I was expecting to see more difference in contrast and flare resistance, but I couldn't tell the difference, even when trying to provoke flare. Actually, my SMC one it a bit sharper so I'm glad I got it, but I think that's just the copy I got.

So, I think it will be better than your 18-55 for some situations and it doesn't cost much. With reasonable expectations, why not give it a try?

A small hood will help with the flare issues if there are any. I regret selling my F 35-70.

nyonya · 09-06-2014, 05:14 PM

Thanks for the responses everyone. Before I pull the trigger, do you think this hood would work well? The review says it was used with a 35mm lens with no issues. Is there some advantage to the 3-position rubber hood (i.e., would I ever want to extend it past the first stop)? Thanks!

Amazon.com : FOTGA Screw-in Mount 49mm Metal Wide Angle Lens Hood for Canon Nikon Pentax Sony 49 mm : Camera Lens Hoods : Camera & Photo

**boriscleto** · 09-06-2014, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by nyonya

Thanks for the responses everyone. Before I pull the trigger, do you think this hood would work well? The review says it was used with a 35mm lens with no issues. Is there some advantage to the 3-position rubber hood (i.e., would I ever want to extend it past the first stop)? Thanks!

Amazon.com : FOTGA Screw-in Mount 49mm Metal Wide Angle Lens Hood for Canon Nikon Pentax Sony 49 mm : Camera Lens Hoods : Camera & Photo

A normal lens hood would be better. A wide angle hood won't be long enough, a tele hood is slightly too long.

mtux · 09-06-2014, 09:15 PM

Originally posted by nyonya

Thanks for the responses everyone. Before I pull the trigger, do you think this hood would work well? The review says it was used with a 35mm lens with no issues. Is there some advantage to the 3-position rubber hood (i.e., would I ever want to extend it past the first stop)? Thanks!

It's too wide I guess!
I used something like this on mine, and it was fine:

09-04-2014, 09:09 AM	#24
Oldbayrunner Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 1,665	No, what I meant was moving the lens beyond the 70mm mark into macro, which in realty is a shorter focal length. So you're still wrong in your previous statements, I quote you "and it goes closer only at 70mm FL!". No it does not go closer at 70mm it goes closer to .32cm by moving to lens beyond the 70mm mark into the shorter focal lengths of the macro portion of the lens. When moved in macro mode the lens focal length moves back towards the shorter 35mm focal length to about half the len's extension at maximum macro, to a close up of 1:4 magnication ratio max.... So it is not closer at 70mm PERIOD.. Don't believe me if you have a copy move it past 70mm and watch the lens extend to a shorter focal length.... The minimum focus distance for any lens is the complete minimum focus distance that lens will go as stated in the specs for the lens. Sorry for taking this slightly off topic but this is the second thread this member is putting forth incorrect information. Last edited by Oldbayrunner; 09-04-2014 at 09:47 AM.

09-04-2014, 10:05 AM - 1 Like	#25
SOldBear Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Alameda, CA Posts: 3,206	Originally posted by JPT How about using a step down ring? Like this? The ring is 49-28. Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is it worth the upgrade from the A 50 f/1.7 to f/1.4?	Fat Albert	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	03-14-2014 03:31 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax A 35-105mm f 3.5, Vivitar 100mm f 3.5 macro, Pentax f 35-70mm	davidgreen3003	Sold Items	5	12-12-2013 03:55 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax F 35-70mm 3.5-4.5 Macro Mint in the Box	jjdgti	Sold Items	3	05-02-2013 05:26 PM
Worth the Upgrade?	Allison	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	12	02-12-2013 10:12 PM

09-03-2014, 12:56 PM	#16
Oldbayrunner Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 1,665	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. Lot of 2 Collapsible Rubber Lens Hoods for Camera Lens with 49mm Filter Thread \| eBay 49mm Collapsible Folding Rubber Lens Hood Sun Shade Screw in Double Thread Ring \| eBay

09-03-2014, 01:38 PM	#17
nyonya New Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: NYC Posts: 19 Original Poster	Originally posted by Oldbayrunner Lot of 2 Collapsible Rubber Lens Hoods for Camera Lens with 49mm Filter Thread \| eBay 49mm Collapsible Folding Rubber Lens Hood Sun Shade Screw in Double Thread Ring \| eBay Thank you for the links. Would something like this work as well? What are the pros/cons of a rubber vs. a metal hood? Amazon.com : Neewer

09-03-2014, 03:43 PM	#18
Oldbayrunner Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 1,665	No because you would get vignetting at the 35mm focal length due to the length of the hood. That's the beauty of the collapsing one is you can adjust for both. Otherwise you need a 49mm floral design screw in.

09-04-2014, 01:42 AM	#20
mtux Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: the Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,444	At 35mm, the kit lens is significantly better, specially at corners! at 50mm the 35-70 is a bit better, and your kit lens does not reach 70 so no comparison there. Also take note that minimum focus distance on F 35-70 is 70cm and it goes closer only at 70mm FL! And it gives you about one stop more light than the kit. All in all, I didn't find it a big step up over the kit lens. at least the copy I tried.

09-04-2014, 02:40 AM	#21
JPT Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,821	I've used the hood from the DA40mm ltd on the the 35-70 and it seemed to work well without adding bulk to what should be a small lens. The problem is it costs a lot as a seperate item, and if you have the DA40, you probably use it over the 35-70. How about using a step down ring? I'm not sure what the appropriate inner diameter would be, though.

09-04-2014, 08:05 AM	#22
Oldbayrunner Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 1,665	Originally posted by mtux Also take note that minimum focus distance on F 35-70 is 70cm and it goes closer only at 70mm FL! Wrong, the minimum focus distance is .32cm in macro mode, which is within the green area past 70mm.

09-04-2014, 08:15 AM	#23
mtux Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: the Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,444	Originally posted by Oldbayrunner Wrong, the minimum focus distance is .32cm in macro mode, which is within the green area past 70mm. ONLY in macro mode! other than that, it's only 0.7m! What else did I say? past 70mm do you mean it's a longer FL!? then that's wrong :P

09-04-2014, 07:03 PM	#26
mtux Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: the Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,444	Originally posted by Oldbayrunner No, what I meant was moving the lens beyond the 70mm mark into macro, which in realty is a shorter focal length. So you're still wrong in your previous statements, I quote you "and it goes closer only at 70mm FL!". No it does not go closer at 70mm it goes closer to .32cm by moving to lens beyond the 70mm mark into the shorter focal lengths of the macro portion of the lens. When moved in macro mode the lens focal length moves back towards the shorter 35mm focal length to about half the len's extension at maximum macro, to a close up of 1:4 magnication ratio max.... So it is not closer at 70mm PERIOD.. Don't believe me if you have a copy move it past 70mm and watch the lens extend to a shorter focal length.... The minimum focus distance for any lens is the complete minimum focus distance that lens will go as stated in the specs for the lens. Thanks for explaining, I had the lens and used it and know what it is! My point was that when you are in 35mm or 50mm focal lengths you cannot get closer than 70cm to subject. It just can't focus closer! And I think moving the zoom past the 70mm mark (to GREEN macro mode), just extends the tube for closer focus ability! just like a macro lens when you focus closer it extends more! and in macro mode you CANNOT focus on infinity! So again, it's changing just focus! not the FL!

09-04-2014, 08:02 PM	#27
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by JPT The F35-70 is a fun lens, but I think the main reason to get it is for the different zoom range. I like this for times like a barbecue when I'm doing a lot of people pictures in relatively good light. It's pretty sharp but has notably worse flare resistance compared to DA and FA lenses. You also have to remember you're losing a lot at the wide end and the gain at the long end if not so noticeable. I actually have both variants of this lens. First I got the supposedly inferior Takumar-F version, which has the focal length written in white on the side. I enjoyed using it, but always wondered how much better the SMC Pentax-F version would be, which has the focal length written in red on the side. Finally, I found one for sale. I was expecting to see more difference in contrast and flare resistance, but I couldn't tell the difference, even when trying to provoke flare. Actually, my SMC one it a bit sharper so I'm glad I got it, but I think that's just the copy I got. So, I think it will be better than your 18-55 for some situations and it doesn't cost much. With reasonable expectations, why not give it a try? A small hood will help with the flare issues if there are any. I regret selling my F 35-70.

09-06-2014, 05:14 PM	#28
nyonya New Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: NYC Posts: 19 Original Poster	Thanks for the responses everyone. Before I pull the trigger, do you think this hood would work well? The review says it was used with a 35mm lens with no issues. Is there some advantage to the 3-position rubber hood (i.e., would I ever want to extend it past the first stop)? Thanks! Amazon.com : FOTGA Screw-in Mount 49mm Metal Wide Angle Lens Hood for Canon Nikon Pentax Sony 49 mm : Camera Lens Hoods : Camera & Photo

09-06-2014, 05:55 PM	#29
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by nyonya Thanks for the responses everyone. Before I pull the trigger, do you think this hood would work well? The review says it was used with a 35mm lens with no issues. Is there some advantage to the 3-position rubber hood (i.e., would I ever want to extend it past the first stop)? Thanks! Amazon.com : FOTGA Screw-in Mount 49mm Metal Wide Angle Lens Hood for Canon Nikon Pentax Sony 49 mm : Camera Lens Hoods : Camera & Photo A normal lens hood would be better. A wide angle hood won't be long enough, a tele hood is slightly too long.

09-06-2014, 09:15 PM	#30
mtux Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: the Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,444	Originally posted by nyonya Thanks for the responses everyone. Before I pull the trigger, do you think this hood would work well? The review says it was used with a 35mm lens with no issues. Is there some advantage to the 3-position rubber hood (i.e., would I ever want to extend it past the first stop)? Thanks! It's too wide I guess! I used something like this on mine, and it was fine: