| Findings of Frederiks Pentax Bureau of Investigation
Jepp, my bureau is full of Pentax glass!
I have now finally, after 40+ years as a Pentaxian, sorted them out, wich ones to use, and there are no more, and no less, than twoo of them!
Long story short:
My first camera for own money was a Pentax MX with a Pentax M50/1.7 lens.
At that time, I didn't realize what a gem this tiny lens is, nor did I realize what a gem the Pentax MX really is. I did'nt apreciate them properly.
But, now, the last years, I see them in new light: They have real dials, real buttons and real focus and apperture rings. All operation on them is instantaneous and precise: you feel what you are doing with tactile feedback, a sensation for your senses! The build quality, the materials, and how they interact together is pure joy!
That said, I have investigated a number of M-lenses trying to find out the really true gems for my photography style: models, landscape, nature in general. For models often wide open lenses. For birds and animals razor sharp optics at open appertures.
As I have not yet found a digital full frame camera in my likings (and I have scanned the whole market during one decade+ by now), I use an APS-C one, and not a Pentax camera(!), because I am as picky with the camera, as with the lenses. As you will se, I am picky in a special way :-)
I really like lightweight gear, and gear with real buttons and rings, solidly built, joufull to use with solid and precise tactile feedback. Robust, strong and lightweight. Nothing on it that hasn't a real function. And no functions that doesn't add to simplicity and usability.
I guess you all figured out that I really like the Pentax M-series lenses. All other camera brands have the same type of lenses from that era, but all comes nicely together in the Pentax M-serie. All other brands have some sort of shortcomings like lenses mounting in the wrong direction, strange bayonets, focus throw in wrong direction etc, etc. Not to mention their cameras. Just strange and wierd to me :-)
With that said, I sadly can't find a Pentax camera any more... I really wish I could!
To sum all this up a bit:
-I'm a real sucker for wide open apperture photography
-A real sucker for super sharp lenses when it comes to birds and anilmals
-I'm a total sucker for lightweight equipment
-And I really appreciate thrustfull and precise tactile mechanical feedback for joy to my senses!
On this basis, the Pentax lenses I have investigated:
M28/2.8
M50/2
M501.7
M50/1.4
M85/2
M100/2.8
M120/2.8
M135/3.5
M75-150/4
Takumar 135/2.5
For birds and wildlife I have not found any Pentax lens really competitive with the Samyang/Rokinon 135/2: It's super sharp on any apperture, takes on stacked teleconverters and images still turns out super sharp. I really don't need longer focal lenght, I just stack converters to convinience. Focus throw in right direction, apperture ring, solid mechanics and build quality. Lightweight for what it is: a solid performer to any desiered focal lenght and with a to that really reasonable corresponding apperture to my lightweight preference.
The same for wide angle, no Pentax lens matching the Venus Optics Laowa 9/2.8, as I need really wide angle and optics capable of dealing with heavenly stars. It's lightweight, solid mechanics, a joy to use (but not fully Pentax M-series joy). It's really a good compromise in lack of a real Pentax M-style lens :-)
One could point me to newer Pentax lenses with autofocus, but since I'm not using a Pentax camera I'm depending on lens designs made for manual focus with a long and smooth focus throw (really to be able to focus manually with accuracy).
But! Now back to topic and the Pentax lenses I have found working! Outstanding glass, outstanding functionality, outstanding design, outstanding features and outstanding joy to use!
Drumbeat...
Pentax M50/1.7 and Takumar 135/2.5!!
Lenses really sharp, really lightweight, really versatile, really nice mecanics, really good and fun to use :-)
Not much to say about the 50/1.7, everyone likes it. In my findings, by different criterias, I prefere it ower the 50/1.4
The Takumar 135/2.5 may seem like an oddball in this tested company, without proper SMC-coating, belonging to a budget lens series. But it is a truly stellar performer: Sharp at 2.8, and from then on low aberrations (as sharp, or eaven sharper than the praised M100/2,8), takes on a 2x converter nicely from f/4 or even earlier, nice bokhe, large full open apperture. The lack of true M-series mechanical feeling it compensates by funny coloured scales and figures :-) And, it has a built in slide out hood, not to forget this really nice feature!
This two Pentax lenses, the Rokinon/Samyang 135/2 and Laowa 9/2.8 is all i need. I combine them using a 2x MC7 teleconverter (if necessary I just stack another 2X, or another(!) on the Rokinon...) and a lens turbo 0.7x.
This mounted on a wery tiny Sony NEX 5N 16 MP APS-C camera, WITH the tilltable electronic viewfinder Sony FDA-EV1S.
Yes, no Pentax camera has a tilltable electronic viewfinder, a must ever since I started using one. Any camera without that is a 100% dealbraker for me for now on, regardles other beenefits. And also this tiny little lightweigt NEX performs wery, wery well with it's really nice sensor (though really fiddly small buttons, totally hopeless to use).
Listen Pentax/Ricoh: you will beat this in a blink if you decide: small, tactile mirrorless camera with tilltable viewfinder and no crippled K-mount (if you don't start making real M-series style lenses/autofocus lenses again. But then you need a non crippled mount... Ha, ha). -Not much buttons and menus: ISO, shutterspeed and exposure compensation buttons on top of camera (combined with front and back wheel for the same). No top display taking up space for what purpose from what you already feel and se from the mechanical buttons, wheels and rings giving joyfull tactile feedback. Menus stripped down to a minimum, the NEX 5N is exemplary, but strip it down eaven more to just some few really photographic meaningfull settings. And choose this settings picky, and they don't need to be many. The less picky they are picked, the more of them they tend to be and most of them totally uneccesary.
This above lenses gives me (with the converters):
9 mm wide angle, croppable to around 25 mm
35/1.2 (50/1.7+0.7x lens turbo), fully usable from 1.7 (sharp in center at 1.2)
50/1.7, usable from 1.7, sharp from 2
90/1.7 (135/2.5+0.7x lens turbo), usable from 2, sharp and without aberrations from 2.8 (aberrations correctable in post at any apperture)
100/3.5 (50/1.7+2x converter), fully usable from 4, sharp from 5.6
135/2.5, sharp, but totally full of glow and aberrations at 2,5. Eaven sharper at 2.8 and no aberrations and glow. Super sharp at 4
270/5,2 (M135/2.5+2x converter), totally full of aberrations at 2.5. Sharp but aberrations at 2.8 (correctible in post). Eaven sharper from 4 and onwards, no aberrations.
But, for real tele I use the Rokinon/Samyang: from 2.8 super sharp, no aberrations and takes on any number of converters, MC7 ones.
MC4 or it's sibling MC6 is another bread of converters, even the 1.4x ones (have not found an 1.4 converter MC7). I don't use more than one of the 1.4x ones (not stackable), but really, 1.4x is not much of a difference. 2X is.
And the Rokinon/Samyang 135/2 gives 90/1.4 with the 0.7x lens turbo (though a really heawy combination). A nice portrait/model lens. Nice bokeh, really sharp. Also the M50/1.7 is wery nice for models, and lightweight :-)
Believe me, I have tried all of above listed lenses out. The praised M85/2 can give terrible aberrations at 2, not correctable in post. Therefore really not usefull for my purposes. The 120/2.8 has wierd aberrations at 2.8. The 100/2.8 has no built in slide out hood and gives aberrations at 2.8, and the 50/1.7+2x converter gives 100/3.5 close as good. Also the 100 is to short to really give reach and the 135/2.5 is tack sharp at 2.8 (wich the 100 is just a tack low of and also gives aberrations (I have tested two different spiecements M100/2.8). The M135/3.5 isn't sharp at 3.5, wich makes it to inferior to the 135/2.5, eaven though lighter.
The M75-150/4 is a really nice lens. Sharp, versatile and low aberrations. On the slow side. Does'nt add much considerad the above two lenses I picked as favorites.
Yes my friends, this is the twoo Pentax lenses I have found to use :-)
And they are sheapos, real bargains!
But you need a NEX 5N to shoot them, as you really can't focus them properly with live view on Pentax cameras: the screen is hopeless to se in daylight because of reflexions, and if you need reading glasses like me, you have to fiddle arond with them: a total dealbreaker compared with not having to with a viewfinder with dioptri adjustment. And: try out a tilltable viewfinder, incredible convinient in many, many situations! Thats why the NEX 5N with viewfinder.
And abowe all Pentax/Ricoh: Please make again vievfinders the same size as the Pentax MX! Then one can again properly focus manually, combine with a digital split image and at a button press viewfinder magnification. One press magnification on, one press of. Nothing more, no extra presses to reside back to non magnification. One press on, one more press same button off :-) You see, less is more :-) This you will easily make if you like, and, it's really easier to make than a camera propped with nonsens functions not adding.
Ok! For me, long time Pentaxian, all there is are two vintage lenses from Pentax at the moment.
Easily changed if liked and desiered, I'm just waiting for something usefull to pop up in Pentax land.
|