[OldChE]

I've been considering getting the K-1 full frame DSLR. I've been shooting with a K-50, and now a K-70, for a few years. I also have a dozen Pentax film bodies and many k-mount MF and AF lenses for the film cameras. When I purchase the K-1, would you recommend I get the lens that is typically sold with it (the HD PENTAX-D FA 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6 ED DC WR Lens), since I already have similar full-frame Pentax AF lenses? For example, I have a very nice SMC Pentax-FA 24-90mm F3.5-4.5 AL [IF] (2001) that I got to use with my MZ-S - it should work fine with the K-1, no? I also have a SMC Pentax-F 35-70mm F3.5-4.5 with Macro (1987) for something a bit lighter and more compact. Then I have three other standard zooms, a SMC Pentax-F Zoom 1:4-5.6 35-105mm (1988), a SMC Pentax-FA 28-90mm F3.5-5.6 (2001), and a SMC Pentax-FA 28-80mm F3.5-5.6 (1998), any of which should work, no?

I was thinking, rather than spend $400 more to get the 28-105 as part of the package, I could spend that on the 100 WR macro or something like that. Note, though, I'm unlikely to spend as much as some of the limited or DA* lenses will cost.

For longer k-mount AF zooms, I have a couple Tamrons, a Tamron 80-210mm 1:4.5-5.6, and a Tamron AF 70-300 F4-5.6 LD Di Tele-Macro (1:2), which are OK. Maybe I would spend that extra on a nice Pentax ~70-200 lens.

Is the HD PENTAX-D FA 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6 ED DC WR Lens so much better than some of these legacy lenses I already have? I do realize it is WR, so that is something to consider. I really like my SMC PENTAX-DA 1:3.5-5.6 18-135mm ED AL [IF] DC WR, it would be great if there was an equivalent for the K-1, but of course with the full frame that would be too large and heavy for an equivalent focal length range. Perhaps the 28-105 WR is the best equivalent. I find that the 18-135 really handles most of what I like to shoot with the K-70.

Thanks - Richard.

[dbs]

Hi Richard

How do you rate your older ( FA ..... etc ) to the 18 - 135 on your K - 70 ?
I would assume the 28 -105 on the K1 to be similar .


Dave

[Adam]

The DFA 28-105mm crushes comparable film-era zooms, IMO, and is therefore worth getting as an everyday lens. It does have its limitations, however, but that's where primes come in

[Sandy Hancock]

The short answer is yes. Hell, yes.

It's a fantastic lens, and gives you weather sealing and silent autofocus, which the older options do not.

It doesn't make much sense (to me at least) to buy such a high-end camera without pairing it with at least one modern full frame lens.

[StiffLegged]

Have you thought of selling some of these other lenses to put towards another modern lens to complement a 28-105? Seems to me you have a lot of overlap there.

[Paul the Sunman]

The DFA 28-105 is surprisingly good. Vignetting is fairly substantial, though nothing that can't be fixed in post-processing. Apart from that, it's a cheap, WR, comparatively light, optically excellent entree into digital full frame K-mount shooting.

[kiwi_jono]

I have some comparable older FA zooms but the DFA 28-105 is certainly better. The DFA has better IQ, WR and quiet AF.
I have several times taken shots with the DFA and later on mistaken them for being taken with one of my primes. Sure its not very fast and not as good as a good prime (like FA limited or DFA 50 / 100 etc) but its surprisingly good for the money.
While I'm fortunate to have the FA limiteds (which I really enjoy using on the K-1 and they never disappoint), I often take the DFA 28-105 when shooting in adverse conditions or when traveling light.

[surfar]

Should I get the 28-105 kit lens

One of the best "kit lenses"....you should get 2,one for the K-1 and the other for the K-70.(for a handy 40-150 fov)

[JensE]

Adding to the above - it's flare resistance is very good too. The fact that Pentax's first published pixel shift sample picture was taken with this lens may tell you why it shouldn't be regarded as 'kit lens' in the sense of inexpensive stop-gap lens, but for what it is: a compact lightweight high quality lens with a very useful zoom range. There was no 'kit' sold here when the K-1 was released, but I'm still very happy having bought the lens right then.

[K(s)evin]

What they^^^^ all said. It is a fantastic lens. I leave it on my K-1 in my bag, as I know that it will cover most situations when I have to grab and go.

[TwoUptons]

I was in a similar situation, with a stack of decent film-era glass.

My FA 28-105 got some haze along the way, so I replaced it with a used DFA 28-105.

As Adam pointed out, it’s a lot better. But they do come up used pretty often, so you could save a little money toward the macro and still get the 28-105...

-Eric

[pschlute]

I have a very nice SMC Pentax-FA 24-90mm F3.5-4.5 AL [IF] (2001) that I got to use with my MZ-S - it should work fine with the K-1, no?

This is one of the best zooms from the film era. It will work well on the k1

[Serkevan]

Yup, I'd get it unless you really like the results from your zooms on the K-1 (which will of course work).

It's probably my most used lens. Fantastic IQ from ~35mm to 90mm or so, across the frame. At the extremes of the zoom range the edges do suffer a touch but at 105mm you're probably using it for a single subject so it's not a big deal at all. Add WR, silent and fast AF, great flare resistance and actually quite the nice bokeh for the speed and you have a truly all-terrain lens.

[normhead]

I just wasn't happy with the camera until I got this lens. It goes everywhere with my K-1. Whatever else I select to take with it is optional, and many times it's the only lens I take.

[biz-engineer]

Small, light weight, affordable. It's modern glass, plus contrast and flare control of latest coating. The D-FA 28-105 is the default lens on my K1, I've used the 24-70 2.8 but I always come back to the 28-105.