[edo]

Lens manufacturers have to sell you new lenses!

And so, CA correction, IS, ultra sharpness wide open etc.. Etc.. Are just details whose manufacturers try hard to make you believe you need to replace those old lenses.

Otherwise they would sell less...

Putting unworthy lens on k1 is an aberration in itself. All lens, even cheapo lens has its use.

Putting ultra new Batis on your body so that you never have to use lightroom IS an aberration, but if you have those lenses, all power to you.

I always could make a 10$ bargain lens to look like a multi thousand lens with my lightroom skills, and the other way around too.

With Post processing I always wondered why there was still a market for ultra lenses. Because in the end, sharpness and contrast and light fall off ect. Can all be optimized in post.

---------- Post added 05-14-16 at 10:17 AM ----------

For me, old Pentax lenses has charm and character, nice color with the SMC coating. Nice build for the takumars too! Etc..

I can do the JOB with a 10$ albinar prime or the like.

Shooting Pentax legacy lenses is a passion beyond reason, and for this reason, shooting not perfect lenses is perfectly permitted and even encouraged.

[micromacro]

I can do the JOB with a 10$ albinar prime or the like.

I guess it depends what job you can do with it. Birding? Street photography? Wedding? Or the flower, or a portrait on tripod with plenty of time of focusing in ideal conditions?
I can do that last job with any non broken lens as well with modern cameras and LR. Some lens have the features worth spending time on PP. Some- not so much, imo.

Again, comparing affordable zooms (up to 250-300mm) with the other system, I hope Pentax soon will deliver good options for FF. I really do.

[edo]

You are right, I totally agree. Special job need special lenses!

But for jobs that requires ultra wide angles, or tilt/shift features, of fast telephoto advantages or ultra fast prime, I guess you would not find that many bargain lenses now! And then (before K1 release) those were pretty rare too! (UWA Tokina 17mm is an example.)

Consumers zooms back then, were pretty average performance wise. But some of the better optically constructed consumers zoom are pretty awesome on the K1!

For the limited time I had to play with my too numerous lenses I would say that the bargain lens in the pentax line up are there. Just need to dig them up!

And I agree that you sigma is not the best zoom ever made. But looking at your shots, I think I could totally live with that ( and some post processing)!

[Obin Robinson]

Here's a cheap $20 lens on my K-1. This is a photo with my Takumar 135mm f/2.5 Bayonet lens. Ignore the EXIF data because I was testing my 28mm lens before this. I had this lend stopped down to f/8 for this photo of a Southern Black Racer (Coluber constrictor Priapus). I also used a Samigon 82A filter and a Fotga metal lens shade



I used the green button for metering. It worked quite well in my opinion.

obin

[awscreo]

SMC 50 1.8 is a great lens, got it new for 118$ with free prime shipping from amazon. AF is a tad slow, misses sometimes, but optically it's a great little lens (physically very small compared to other brands).

[Obin Robinson]

Here's what a cheap Promaster EDO AF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 Tele-Macro (1:2) can do on my K-1. It was windy out so getting these little guys in focus was tricky especially in direct sunlight. These images are resized crops. The insects are between 8 and 12 feet away.

obin

[felixkh]

I have tried the FA Limiteds, the K50/1.4, the Sigma 70-200/2.8 and the FA*28-70/2.8 on my K1. The results are superb. I did not want to spend USD$1.7K for the DFA24-70/2.8 as the price is too ridiculous here in Singapore.

Here is one with the Sigma 70-200/2.8


Taken with FA 77mm F1.8 Limited:


Taken with K85mm F1.8:


Taken with F85mm F2.8 Soft:


Taken with FA43mm F2.9:

---

Last edited by felixkh; 10-10-2016 at 07:33 PM.

[Wheatridger]

This was from my K-1 with Tamron 90/2.8 AF macro. Who could ask for more?

[Wheatridger]

And for a total change of pace, here's a real estate job I did today, using a Pentax-F 24-50/4 with a light dose of HDR-

[TwoUptons]

I've tried a bunch of cheap lenses because I seem to have them all over the house...
None of these are clinical, objective comments, just impressions...
Of these, I think the most expensive were the Zenitar and the Tamron, as I bought them new.

Pentax 28-200 -- not as bad as I thought stopped down to f8 or smaller, but still pretty bad, particularly at the wide end.
Pentax 28-80 PZ -- not as good as I remembered it being on film, and worse than the F 35-70
Pentax 28-80 AF (the one that came with the MZs) -- a tiny bit better than the PZ variant, but still not great, particularly at 28
Pentax 28-105 PZ -- better than I expected having just tested the 28-80. Not as nice as the new one, but nearly as good as the 35-70 and good enough for now
Pentax F 35-70 -- a little soft at 35 wide open, otherwise I really like it
Pentax F 50mm 1.7 -- very nice, though not as cheap as I thought since it required service...
Pentax M 24-35 -- not as good as I wanted it to be at the wide end, but decent once stopped down
Pentax A 24-50 -- a little better than the 24-35, and works great with flash. I use a lot for walk-around when not using the 28-105
Pentax A 50mm 1.4 -- very good, when I can focus it
Pentax M 135mm 3.5 -- wonderful
Pentax M 28mm f2.8 -- very good, and small. I like it a lot
Pentax K 300mm f4 -- big, heavy, no tripod mount, won't focus closer than the next county, purple fringes as much as the Tamron, I love it
Miranda 24mm close focus -- if I can manage the flare, it's pretty good
Zenitar 16mm -- inexplicably hard to focus, but works great otherwise, I love having my fisheye back with the K1
Vivitar 70-210 (Komine, but not S1) -- big, metal, old-school zoom, good at f11, reminds me of the old Nikkor 80-200
Vivitar 135 f2.8 close focus -- flares, not as good as the Pentax 135 for portraits or as good as the macro for closeups, but interesting
Tamron 70-300 Ldii -- not a replacement for a 70-210 f2.8, but better than it should be, useful close-focus. purple fringes like mad

-Eric