[squareeyes]

That's the lens with a good reputation I got mixed up with a 28-80 I saw in a pawn shop.

I didn't buy it, I dodged a bullet! 😉

Around that time there was also an FA 28-90 that is remarkably low optical quality. I have had my 24-90 welded to my K5iis since I got the camera.

Dreaming of a K1

[jcsnyc]

Not sure if this counts as a "cheap" lens - bit it is a 50mm K 1.2 from the 70s!

[DSLRnovice]

Here are my cheap film era lenses:

Rikenon Fisheye 16mm/2.8
Sears 80-200/4
Rikenon 28-100/4
Sears 50/1.7
SMC Pentax-M 28/2.8
Tokina doubler
Super Albinar 135/2.8
Sears 28/2.8
Pentax-M 200/4
I am looking forward to trying some of them out today.
My most modern FF is the FA 35/2. It has been great on my K20. In fact the Sears/Ricoh 50/1.7 has some very nice qualities used with the K20. I will be interested is seeing comparisions of the K20 and the K-1 in 15MP apsc.

[jcsnyc]

4 shots with Takumar 135 2.5 (Takumar 135mm F2.5 Bayonet Reviews - Non-SMC Pentax Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database) on K1 from this morning.

I like the lens. It's small, opens up nice and wide, and built like a tank and FULL FRAME!

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[Schraubstock]

With its excellent image quality, it would be a priceless classic if it had excellent build quality.

I totally agree. It would be nice to "reverse bury" this lens, give it a modern ones over and make a well priced classic now.

P.S.
I wonder, is the ghostless coating still in use ? I don't hear much about it anymore. Or is it called something else now.

[noser]

Hey, I noticed everyone's talking about pairing the K1 with the famed FA31, FA43 FA77 etc. I'm just curious how the camera will perform with the cheap 28-80ish zooms from the 80s and 90s like the F35-70, FA28-70 and so on. Who knows there may be gems out there? Or would you consider it a disgrace to mount those lenses to that super high end K1?

I did a bunch of tests with the 28-70mm f/4 and the 28-80mm f/3.5-4.5 today on the K-1, mostly at f/8 as they are both soft at f/4 or 4.5, and other than a little more reach on the 80mm, they appeared identical in performance.

If I would keep just one it would be the 28-80, even though it's not constant aperture; my copy is just a bit better than the 28-70 wide open.

So I wouldn't call them gems, but since the K-1 is FF it's probably more likely that you'd be stopped down from wide open to f/5.6 on either of them to avoid softness.

I suppose with 36mp and Lightroom you might get by with either wide open, and a lot of clarity/dehaze/sharpening.

The 28-80mm is going in my bag until something better comes along that doesn't need me to sell the other kidney.

[pathdoc]

Not sure if this counts as a "cheap" lens

No, it definitely does not. That plus K-1 = marriage made in heaven. Only thing better is the A version of the same lens, for seamless exposure and aperture control. (Yes, I know, there are those who argue the K is better built and optically superior in various ways, but others may argue that being able to automate everything except the focus makes better results easier to achieve in difficult circumstances, and both sides could be right.)

[stevebrot]

Not sure if this counts as a "cheap" lens - bit it is a 50mm K 1.2 from the 70s!

Nope...it was a desirable and expensive lens when it was made and remains so today. It should suck on your K-1, however, due to it having been designed for an inferior capture medium.* I will take it off your hands and will even carry the cost of shipping.


Steve

* If you are getting good results, it is only because you have not mastered the art of peeping FF pixels. In a few weeks you will be begging me to take the lens off your hand.

[stevebrot]

Rikenon Fisheye 16mm/2.8

Now that is a rare one. Be sure and post your results in the Fisheye Fever thread when you have a chance.


Steve

[pathdoc]

If you are getting good results, it is only because you have not mastered the art of peeping FF pixels.

A black art, that one - sometimes it is better not to look too closely, and to paraphrase Nietzsche, remember that when you peep into the pixel, the pixel peeps also into you.

[HoustonBob]

I am very pleased to see that the FA 24-90 is holding up on FF as well as I figured it would. I suspect that it will be more or less welded to my K-1 (when UPS finally gets around to delivering it after sitting on it for the past two days)

[stevebrot]

when you peep into the pixel, the pixel peeps also into you.

That is truly disturbing and likely to upset my sleep.


Steve

[HudsonShooter]

if you don't put on your 35-80 after you get it. what is the point of getting a k1 anyhow.

[creative69]

4 shots with Takumar 135 2.5 (Takumar 135mm F2.5 Bayonet Reviews - Non-SMC Pentax Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database) on K1 from this morning.

I like the lens. It's small, opens up nice and wide, and built like a tank and FULL FRAME!

So far my copy of this lens impresses me more than my brand new FA 77 ltd?
Surely this is not right.

[loveisageless]

o.k., I'm back with today's Pentax F 70-210mm pics