Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-08-2016, 05:07 PM - 1 Like   #16
Site Supporter
SteveD's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 82
I have a mix. I was new to Pentax and set out to get what I could. After dabbling now a bit with the K 28/2, K 50/1.2, 77/1.8, 300 DA and most recently the 15-30 FF I have already noticed that if I do not want to do post processing the 15-30 and 300 DA are pretty much good to go right out of the camera. The 77 jpgs have also been quite good right off. The older lenses needed some help with the raw files. But then I like doing the work in Photoshop. If you prefer to not do much post processing then I think the newer lenses might be a better choice. I should add that the newer lenses tend to have auto profiles for fixing issues that the older ones do not; yet.

Bottom line is I have liked the shots I got, if I did a good job of shooting them, equally across all.

09-08-2016, 05:34 PM - 1 Like   #17
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,867
QuoteOriginally posted by DSLRnovice Quote
For FF, here is what I now have, D FA 100/2.8 macro, FA 35/2, Sears/Ricoh 50/1.7, SMC M 28/2.8, SMC M 200/4, Takumar 135/2.8. The only one optimized for digital is the 100, which by the way the film era version of this lens is the only one he gave good marks.
I don't see any lens on your list that "wastes" the capabilities of your K-1, though a few are more capable than the others and only two allow full use of your camera's full range of exposure modes and flash capabilities. Those two (the D FA 100/2.8 Macro and FA 35/2) are easily the most capable lenses in your kit. I use my FA 35/2 for cityscape and street photography on 35mm film and it truly shines in that role. The 100mm macro is a no brainer as to its suitability and best usage.

Your other lenses will likely require a test drive to see if you are happy with how they handle and how you manage with the limitations of stop-down metering. The M 28/2.8 was a middle of the road performer when new and nothing has changed in the last 35 years. That being said, it still may very well be perfectly suitable for your landscape and cityscape needs. Take if for a spin. The same is true for the rest of the lenses on your shelf. Don't cry before you try.

I expect that there may be a couple of modern zooms and/or auto-focus primes in your future, but for now, mastery of the camera is a good goal. After a few months of shooting you will know where the pain and rubbing points are and also know how severe that pain and rubbing is in monetary terms.


Steve
09-08-2016, 06:29 PM - 1 Like   #18
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 237
We have a tendency today to judge a good lens by not only it's sharpness but by how sharp it is across the entire frame, but really it depends on what you'll be shooting. If you're shooting architecture, scenic landscapes or macros of a postage stamp collection, then edge to edge sharpness becomes more important. If your shooting portraits or shots isolating you subject then edge sharpness has no bearing at all. Up until a few years ago you could buy lenses that were purposefully 'soft' that you could vary the blur with them for effect, Lens baby does something similar today. Some types of lenses have defects that produce images that many people find appealing, such as the rendering of Helios lenses or even the doughnut bokeh of mirror lenses. Most lenses (and I'm not saying "all" as I do own some lenses that aren't) are acceptably sharp in the center for personal everyday prints of 5x7 or smaller or really anything short of pixel peeping, large scale printing or some publications. As everyone has said try what you have first, you may just find that the lenses you have now are good enough for your needs at the moment, you can always add / replace lenses in the future.
09-08-2016, 06:51 PM - 1 Like   #19
CDW
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Big Island, Hawaii & Utah
Posts: 357
I use my K1 primarily for astrophotography and as a backup for my 645Z. I have a couple of modern zooms, the 28-105 and a Tamron cheapie 75-300, along with a Rokinon 14mm. I also own several older Pentax manual focus zooms and primes. With one exception, I would not hesitate to shoot with any of them. Two examples are the 50mm f1.4 and the 70-210 F4. Both are manual focus, nearly 30 years old and they are superb. The limited number of lens myth seems to be one perpetuated by some of the press and Canikon fanboys.

FWIW, you can also buy adapters to use Pentaxx 645 medium format optics on your K1. They are, for the most part, outstanding when used on the K1 as you're using the sweet spot of a lens, with edge to edge sharpness and lack of vignetting that is amazing and usually not matched by a FF K mount lens.

09-08-2016, 07:28 PM   #20
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 81
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by alamo5000 Quote
Aaaand can I get an AMEN!

I have done so before and I will continue to preach it... good photos have a TON of elements that make them 'good photos'. The subject matter at hand, the lighting, the composition all come in way before 'sharpness'.

I am not preaching against sharpness by any means. I like it just as much as the next guy but the factors I mentioned are very skill related and a lot less gear related.

1. Are you somewhere around something where something awesome is happening that people want to see?
2. Is the light right? Learning to read light, and what kind of light, and the lack of light, the shadows and all that stuff is an art form unto itself.
3. Did you compose the shot so that it captures those elements in an interesting way? How is the picture visually organized?

Are ANY of those three things gear related? The answer is NO.
To make your point, there have been times when my wife got the best shot with her Point and shoot camera while I was fussing over which lens to use!

---------- Post added 09-08-2016 at 07:55 PM ----------

Thanks everyone for the advice. On the availability of FF lenses that fit the K-1, I can only speak from my experience. The camera stores in my area have greater percentages of Nikon lenses than Pentax by far. Many of the used lenses are budget generic lenses that came with kits from department stores. The same goes for our local Craigslist. I understand that worldwide they are plentiful, but it also seems that the better ones are being held on to by people like those of us on this forum!

Before I found the 100 macro, I picked up a used Tamron 90/2.5 macro. Not cheap for a manual lens, $120. I would have kept it if it wasn't for the light spot in the middle of the frame in the first few shot I took. As was mentioned here, this would not have been a problem with film.
09-08-2016, 09:54 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 317
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
That is not quite the correct question to ask.

This is the glass I use most often, it works for me.
@jatrax I see that you are mostly using F series lenses, zooms and primes.
Those are great lenses, I have all zooms from your picture but for primes I am mostly using A series lenses.
One other exception and only manual focus zoom that I am using on daily basis is A 35-105 (over F 35-105).
My latest acquisiton was F 24-50, I bought it 2 months ago for K-1, other F series zooms I have for years.
All of them are very good copies, I have selected them very carefully, as example 70-210 is a third copy, 35-70 is second...
For some of those lenses I have somewhat different opinion in compare to lens reviews.

Because you are obviously F series expert I have a few questions for you:
For what purposes are you using F24-50, F35-70, F28-80, F35-105, F35-135 and F70-210 and what are your typical widest (fastest) recommended aperture for those lenses?
What do you think of F 24-50 vs 35-70?
What do you think of F 28-80 vs 35-100 vs 35-135?
At last what do you think of F 24-50 bokeh as example for close objects @ 50mm f/4,5-f/5,6? It is not typical use of that lens but I found it very unique.
Thank you!

Last edited by banep; 09-09-2016 at 04:20 AM.
09-08-2016, 11:54 PM - 1 Like   #22
Loyal Site Supporter
ivanvernon's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Medina, OH
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,872
I don't have the K-1 but with the K-3 . . .

. . . I use a whole range of glass from Pentax M lenses up to newer DA and FA glass. I am neither a professional nor a very systematic photographer, but concentrate on landscape and flowers. Reviewing my past work, however, I find that I get the greatest number of great shots with the following lenses:

FA 77
FA 31
A 135 2.8
A 35-105 f 3.5
Canon FD 55mm f1.2 (K mount)
Kiron 105mm macro
Revuenon 50mm f1.4
Sears 50mm f 1.4

All these are full frame, so it eventually will be interesting using them in their native fields of view with the K-1 when I finally decide to buy it.

There is some seriously good glass in the Pentax SMC, M, and A categories. I like to try out anything that has ratings in the 8.5 to 9+ range in the Forum lens review section. You can pick some fantastic legacy glass for $50 to $200.

If I could only have a few lenses of the ones I currently own, they would be FA 77, FA 31, Canon 55 f 1.2, and Kiron 105 macro in that order. I am not really a zoomer, but I also like the A 35-105 f 3.5.

All this is totally unscientific, just my reactions to the glass I own and have used. None of these are very expensive except the FAs and the Canon FD with K-mount conversion.
09-09-2016, 07:55 AM - 1 Like   #23
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,625
QuoteOriginally posted by banep Quote
For what purposes are you using F24-50, F35-70, F28-80, F35-105, F35-135 and F70-210 and what are your typical widest (fastest) recommended aperture for those lenses?
24-50 is my DFA*24-70 'light'. The image quality is fine @f/5.6. A little soft wide open but definitely usable. I use it when I do not want to carry the 24-70 beast.
35-70 got use on APS-C, on the K-1 I have not used it much, the focal length seems odd to me for some reason. Perhaps because there is no wide end. It is a fine lens although some copies can be bad. I've had three.
28-80 I really do not use. In my tests it performed very well but I have other glass that covers that range.
35-105 I really want to like as it produces excellent images and has a very useful focal length for a lot of my product work. However the minimum focus distance is too short to be practical for product work. I think this was designed as a portrait lens.
35-135 I have tried to like as well but it is too big and heavy and I always seem to reach for other glass instead. I need to try this one more but I think it has the same short minimum focus distance the 35-105 has
70-210 was used a lot on APS-C and still used on K-1 when I want a lighter kit. But it has mostly been replaced with the DA*60-250, just for the wider focal range and constant aperture. It also focuses close enough I can use it in the studio. Excellent quality images from the 70-210 and if I did not have the 60-250 it would get used a lot
QuoteOriginally posted by banep Quote
What do you think of F 24-50 vs 35-70?
Both have purpose. I think the 24-50 at least my copy is a sharper lens but the 35-70 has the macro function as well. 35-70 is generally so cheap there is no reason not to have one
QuoteOriginally posted by banep Quote
What do you think of F 28-80 vs 35-100 vs 35-135?
I've not used the 28-80 enough to really give an opinion. I've commented on the 35-105 and 35-135 above. If they focused closer they would both be very useful for my work. For portraits I think they both would be excellent
QuoteOriginally posted by banep Quote
At last what do you think of F 24-50 bokeh as example for close objects
Not something I have much experience with. Most of my close work is for product shots which are f/11 or f/13

09-09-2016, 12:33 PM - 2 Likes   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 317
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
24-50 is my DFA*24-70 'light'. The image quality is fine @f/5.6. A little soft wide open but definitely usable. I use it when I do not want to carry the 24-70 beast.
35-70 got use on APS-C, on the K-1 I have not used it much, the focal length seems odd to me for some reason. Perhaps because there is no wide end. It is a fine lens although some copies can be bad. I've had three.
28-80 I really do not use. In my tests it performed very well but I have other glass that covers that range.
35-105 I really want to like as it produces excellent images and has a very useful focal length for a lot of my product work. However the minimum focus distance is too short to be practical for product work. I think this was designed as a portrait lens.
35-135 I have tried to like as well but it is too big and heavy and I always seem to reach for other glass instead. I need to try this one more but I think it has the same short minimum focus distance the 35-105 has
70-210 was used a lot on APS-C and still used on K-1 when I want a lighter kit. But it has mostly been replaced with the DA*60-250, just for the wider focal range and constant aperture. It also focuses close enough I can use it in the studio. Excellent quality images from the 70-210 and if I did not have the 60-250 it would get used a lot

Both have purpose. I think the 24-50 at least my copy is a sharper lens but the 35-70 has the macro function as well. 35-70 is generally so cheap there is no reason not to have one

I've not used the 28-80 enough to really give an opinion. I've commented on the 35-105 and 35-135 above. If they focused closer they would both be very useful for my work. For portraits I think they both would be excellent

Not something I have much experience with. Most of my close work is for product shots which are f/11 or f/13
I agree on 24-50, it quickly becomes my favourite F series lens. It is just perfect for landscaping on K-1.

With 35-70 I had similar expirience, used it a lot on K-5 but still not tried on K-1 except test shots. On K-5 it is sharp wide open at 70mm which is great.

I used 70-210 a lot on K-5 and on K-1. I also have Sigma 70-200 HSM II but it is big and heavy for climbing/hiking and it does not work on K-1. Changed 3 copies of 70-210, when focus is there it has very good image quality but unfortunately I had inconsistent AF results on all 3 copies. Missed a lot good shots, which never happened with Sigma.

I asked you about 28-80 vs 35-105 vs 35-135 because I really can't decide which one of those three lenses is most usable.

Believe it or not 28-80, cheapest lens with lowest scores in lens database is in my case most consistent lens through entire focal range, in macro mode and within the whole aperture range. On K-1 28mm is enough for landscaping, 80mm is enough for portraits so it is also most versatile. In "macro" mode you could be very close to subject and I consistently got sharpest results in that mode, better than 35-105 and 35-135.

F 35-135 is very strange lens, I would like to know what was designers idea when that lens was created. It has ridiculous number of glass elements (for that time and type of lens) only F*250-600mm had more. Probably because of that It acts like a man with hundred different faces. Every combination of aperture and focal length (including macro) looks different. It is pretty consistent for the same parameters, but hard to learn because of many different combinations. As example on 135mm it goes from extremely soft at f/4.5 to extremely sharp at f/8. All apertures in between looks very distinctive. But if you use 85mm for portraits instead of 135 or so-called macro for intimate portraits, rules are changing and the same aperture gives you very different look. Softness/sharpeness amount is changing through focal range. At 50mm it acts almost like a normal lens but not at 35mm. Macro mode is not really usable for macro because of huge minimum focus length but it is good for some other things. That is my oldest F series lens but still don't get it, probably because I don't use it on a daily basis. Had some great landscape/nature/portrait shots but a lot of misses and disappointment also.

At last I don't like new DFA zoom lenses, because of their size and weight. 15-30 and 70-200 are huge and heavy, even 24-70 is too big for me. I prefer small and slow prime lenses which are sharp wide open, as example like new Voightlanders so that is the reason why I use my A series primes when I need to be very light. It may sounds paradoxical but only DFA zoom lens which I would probably buy is 150-450. It is the biggest of the bunch but if you need zoom lens for wildlife it can't be much smaller than that, no matter is it made in 2016 or in 1976.

Last edited by banep; 09-09-2016 at 12:43 PM.
09-09-2016, 09:08 PM - 3 Likes   #25
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,772
I have actually been quite pleased with my K and M lenses (mostly primes) on the K1. The M28./2.8 II, which I found stellar on film is pretty impressive on FF digital as well. The ridiculously inexpensive M200/4 has also exceeded expectations. I'm having a blast resurrecting these old friends with the FOV for which they were intended.
09-12-2016, 12:01 PM - 3 Likes   #26
Site Supporter
jcdoss's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kansas City, MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,842
QuoteOriginally posted by DSLRnovice Quote
Are my older lenses keeping the K-1 from its full potential?


All I have are K and M series lenses, and a lot of them. I love the fit and feel of mechanical manual focus lenses, and the images they're producing on the K-1 are very good in my opinion. Besides, and I don't know if it was originally Michael Reichmann who coined this phrase, but "most lenses are better than most photographers" rings true to me.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, era, film, full frame, full-frame, k-1, k1, legacy glass, lens, lenses, light, macro, pentax k-1, people, reviews for k1, shot, smc, stores
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-1 lens tests with legacy glass jatrax Pentax K-1 12 05-26-2016 08:49 PM
Questions about legacy glass on K-3 II sarge Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 02-18-2016 11:45 AM
Very Basic Questions on Legacy Glass and Modern Bodies Tessie Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 13 09-02-2015 10:01 AM
People Youth is NOT wasted on the Young! Dewman Post Your Photos! 6 08-24-2015 08:25 PM
Why is my 40mm xs so tight on my K-01? hcc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 02-09-2013 06:56 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:51 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top