Porst 35mm/ 2.8

Culture · 10-16-2011, 09:55 PM

Hi,
I am eyeing this porst 35mm/2.8 apparently wideangle manual lens. I have been trying to find something about it on the net but can seem to find anything.

Anybody know anything about it?

If this is actually a wideangle lens is it wider than my DA L lens at its shortest focal lenght.

Of course one of the advantages of this lens is that it is fast compared to my DA L.

hcc · 10-16-2011, 11:37 PM

35mm is not really wide angle.

However you may find some relevant info on another Porst 35mm at:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/47532-porst-we...-5-images.html (in this forum)

Hope that the url will be of interest...

RioRico · 10-16-2011, 11:39 PM

I have an M42 Porst Weitwinkel (wideangle) MC 35/2.8, probably made by Tokina, that is pretty good. Porst, like Vivitar and Hanimex, was a seller of 3rd-party lenses and bodies. Some are quite good and some aren't. What's the serial number on your lens? That might identify the lensmaker.

35mm is NOT wideangle on your Kr; it's long-normal or short-tele. On the Kr, 'normal' is around 28mm and is sometimes called wide-normal. [There are reasons that I won't detail right now.] You start getting wide at 25mm, on down to 21mm and 18mm, and ultrawide down below 17mm or thereabouts.

I've seen that 28mm manual lenses are quite common and can be very cheap. 35mm MF glass is more scarce and costly; 24mm is MUCH more so usually. Fast 28's (like f/2-2.5) needn't be expensive; mine all cost under US$20, sometimes MUCH less. Fast 35's needn't be too bad. Fast 24's definitely aren't cheap; my Vivitar-Kiron 24/2 in PKM mount was US$130 and that was a bargain.

Bottom line: Don't expect the Porst to be wide or really fast. It's likely a decent standard lens.

SOldBear · 10-17-2011, 12:22 PM

A while back I had a Porst and a Chinon 35mm F/2.8, both M42 mount. Except for the label, I couldn't tell them apart.

Culture · 10-19-2011, 10:07 PM

Sorry I was a little busy. So couldnt get back to you guys. Thanks for all the info.

RioRico thanks for that explanation. Helped much.

I did not go for the lens. I am now pondering over an smc pentax-m 28mm 2.8

RioRico · 10-19-2011, 10:41 PM

Originally posted by Culture

I did not go for the lens. I am now pondering over an smc pentax-m 28mm 2.8

It's quite a decent lens. I use mine mostly for 'scapes, stopped-down a bit. Be sure to see the lens reviews here, and the eBay COMPLETED LISTINGS for actual sale prices. Good luck!

Culture · 10-20-2011, 04:20 AM

Yeah I have gone through the review that is why I am getting it. From the reviews it sounds decent.

Btw are there many manual wideangle lenses? I dont see any for the k-mount in the review listing. It will be nice to have a cheap wideangle lens in the kit.

**Just1MoreDave** · 10-20-2011, 10:29 AM

This Vivitar/Tokina I just got might be a version of the Porst:

Originally posted by Culture

Yeah I have gone through the review that is why I am getting it. From the reviews it sounds decent.

Btw are there many manual wideangle lenses? I dont see any for the k-mount in the review listing. It will be nice to have a cheap wideangle lens in the kit.

We have to rely on what people were buying for film cameras for the cheap stuff, and on 35mm film, a 24mm lens has an awfully wide field of view. Most people already have a version of the DA 18-55, or can get one used for less than $100. To get wider than that, at similar quality, for less than $100, there might be one or two lenses around. Maybe the Tamron 17mm f3.5 or something. I think I would save time and get something shiny and new instead.

RioRico · 10-20-2011, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by Culture

Btw are there many manual wideangle lenses? I dont see any for the k-mount in the review listing. It will be nice to have a cheap wideangle lens in the kit.

Like I said, 28mm isn't really wide. And good cheap wide lenses are rare. There's no stock of wide vintage glass because that was exotic, back in the day, when 21mm was ultrawide and 16mm was fisheye.

The best cheap wide option for Pentax is the kit.lens set to 21-24mm, and f/4 or beyond. You might find decent 24mm primes for not too much. I'll list an M42 Sigma-Z 24/2.8 on eBay soon. (I MUST!) I sometimes see 24's in Nikon, Olympus OM, or Yashica C/Y mounts (all easily modded for Pentax) sell for fairly low prices. And you might find an M42 Lentar-Tokina 25/3.5 for under US$50.

For more money: The Vivitar-Kiron 24/2 in PKM mount is somewhat over US$100 (and a very nice lens). The M42 Tokina-made (branded as Lentar, Vivitar, Soligor, etc) 21/3.8 is quite decent, and a bit under US$100. Going wider, the Zenitar 16/2.8 (mine is PKM mount) is slightly fishy and very nice optically, around US$200. Everything wider costs more unless it's stolen.

Wide adapters suck. Avoid them.

A 28mm is a great walkaround focal length. I've spent days in mountains and deserts with just a Vivitar-Komine 28/2 CFWA (close-focus wide-angle, US$18), exploiting its 'normal' viewpoint. But it's not wide. My wide primes are the 16/2.8, 21/3.8, and 24/4 I mentioned, or a Paragon-Cimko 24/2.8 (US$10). My ultrawide zoom is the Tamron 10-24 (US$375 with discount coupon). That decent Tamron is the cheapest way into ultrawideland.

The terrible truth: good-wide-fast-cheap are mutually exclusive. Oh bother.

Marc Sabatella · 10-20-2011, 11:35 AM

The lens you already own is, presu,ably, the 18-55. If a lens you are considering isn't less than 18mm, then it isn,t wider, period. doesn't matter if it'snew or old, AF or MF, digital or film, APS-C or FF, etc. The focal length got to be less than 18mm to be wider than an 18-55.

10-16-2011, 09:55 PM	#1
Culture Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Vaasa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 818	Porst 35mm/ 2.8 Hi, I am eyeing this porst 35mm/2.8 apparently wideangle manual lens. I have been trying to find something about it on the net but can seem to find anything. Anybody know anything about it? If this is actually a wideangle lens is it wider than my DA L lens at its shortest focal lenght. Of course one of the advantages of this lens is that it is fast compared to my DA L.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Regarding Porst 135mm f2.8 PK Manual Lens	gut1kor	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	4	05-27-2020 02:37 AM
assembling:Porst Color Reflex Mc Auto 1.2 55mm	willdmo	Pentax Lens Articles	7	10-10-2011 03:05 AM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron 18-250, Porst 55mm f/1.2 and some accessories	gawan	Sold Items	8	04-23-2011 02:32 AM
For Sale - Sold: PK Porst Color Reflex MC Auto 1.2/55mm :in EU (Worldwide)	ovim	Sold Items	3	10-30-2010 03:43 PM
PORST Weitwinkel 35mm 3.5 + images	Igilligan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	01-21-2009 03:11 PM

10-16-2011, 11:37 PM	#2
hcc Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,005	35mm is not really wide angle. However you may find some relevant info on another Porst 35mm at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/47532-porst-we...-5-images.html (in this forum) Hope that the url will be of interest...

10-16-2011, 11:39 PM	#3
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	I have an M42 Porst Weitwinkel (wideangle) MC 35/2.8, probably made by Tokina, that is pretty good. Porst, like Vivitar and Hanimex, was a seller of 3rd-party lenses and bodies. Some are quite good and some aren't. What's the serial number on your lens? That might identify the lensmaker. 35mm is NOT wideangle on your Kr; it's long-normal or short-tele. On the Kr, 'normal' is around 28mm and is sometimes called wide-normal. [There are reasons that I won't detail right now.] You start getting wide at 25mm, on down to 21mm and 18mm, and ultrawide down below 17mm or thereabouts. I've seen that 28mm manual lenses are quite common and can be very cheap. 35mm MF glass is more scarce and costly; 24mm is MUCH more so usually. Fast 28's (like f/2-2.5) needn't be expensive; mine all cost under US$20, sometimes MUCH less. Fast 35's needn't be too bad. Fast 24's definitely aren't cheap; my Vivitar-Kiron 24/2 in PKM mount was US$130 and that was a bargain. Bottom line: Don't expect the Porst to be wide or really fast. It's likely a decent standard lens.

10-17-2011, 12:22 PM	#4
SOldBear Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Alameda, CA Posts: 3,206	A while back I had a Porst and a Chinon 35mm F/2.8, both M42 mount. Except for the label, I couldn't tell them apart.

10-19-2011, 10:07 PM	#5
Culture Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Vaasa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 818 Original Poster	Sorry I was a little busy. So couldnt get back to you guys. Thanks for all the info. RioRico thanks for that explanation. Helped much. I did not go for the lens. I am now pondering over an smc pentax-m 28mm 2.8

10-19-2011, 10:41 PM	#6
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by Culture I did not go for the lens. I am now pondering over an smc pentax-m 28mm 2.8 It's quite a decent lens. I use mine mostly for 'scapes, stopped-down a bit. Be sure to see the lens reviews here, and the eBay COMPLETED LISTINGS for actual sale prices. Good luck!

10-20-2011, 04:20 AM	#7
Culture Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Vaasa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 818 Original Poster	Yeah I have gone through the review that is why I am getting it. From the reviews it sounds decent. Btw are there many manual wideangle lenses? I dont see any for the k-mount in the review listing. It will be nice to have a cheap wideangle lens in the kit.

10-20-2011, 10:29 AM	#8
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	This Vivitar/Tokina I just got might be a version of the Porst: Originally posted by Culture Yeah I have gone through the review that is why I am getting it. From the reviews it sounds decent. Btw are there many manual wideangle lenses? I dont see any for the k-mount in the review listing. It will be nice to have a cheap wideangle lens in the kit. We have to rely on what people were buying for film cameras for the cheap stuff, and on 35mm film, a 24mm lens has an awfully wide field of view. Most people already have a version of the DA 18-55, or can get one used for less than $100. To get wider than that, at similar quality, for less than $100, there might be one or two lenses around. Maybe the Tamron 17mm f3.5 or something. I think I would save time and get something shiny and new instead.

10-20-2011, 10:31 AM	#9
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by Culture Btw are there many manual wideangle lenses? I dont see any for the k-mount in the review listing. It will be nice to have a cheap wideangle lens in the kit. Like I said, 28mm isn't really wide. And good cheap wide lenses are rare. There's no stock of wide vintage glass because that was exotic, back in the day, when 21mm was ultrawide and 16mm was fisheye. The best cheap wide option for Pentax is the kit.lens set to 21-24mm, and f/4 or beyond. You might find decent 24mm primes for not too much. I'll list an M42 Sigma-Z 24/2.8 on eBay soon. (I MUST!) I sometimes see 24's in Nikon, Olympus OM, or Yashica C/Y mounts (all easily modded for Pentax) sell for fairly low prices. And you might find an M42 Lentar-Tokina 25/3.5 for under US$50. For more money: The Vivitar-Kiron 24/2 in PKM mount is somewhat over US$100 (and a very nice lens). The M42 Tokina-made (branded as Lentar, Vivitar, Soligor, etc) 21/3.8 is quite decent, and a bit under US$100. Going wider, the Zenitar 16/2.8 (mine is PKM mount) is slightly fishy and very nice optically, around US$200. Everything wider costs more unless it's stolen. Wide adapters suck. Avoid them. A 28mm is a great walkaround focal length. I've spent days in mountains and deserts with just a Vivitar-Komine 28/2 CFWA (close-focus wide-angle, US$18), exploiting its 'normal' viewpoint. But it's not wide. My wide primes are the 16/2.8, 21/3.8, and 24/4 I mentioned, or a Paragon-Cimko 24/2.8 (US$10). My ultrawide zoom is the Tamron 10-24 (US$375 with discount coupon). That decent Tamron is the cheapest way into ultrawideland. The terrible truth: good-wide-fast-cheap are mutually exclusive. Oh bother.

10-20-2011, 11:35 AM	#10
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	The lens you already own is, presu,ably, the 18-55. If a lens you are considering isn't less than 18mm, then it isn,t wider, period. doesn't matter if it'snew or old, AF or MF, digital or film, APS-C or FF, etc. The focal length got to be less than 18mm to be wider than an 18-55.