[Watson]

I love Pentax cameras. They are so well built and just "feel" right to me. Despite this I switched from my K511s to a Nikon D800. The only reason I did this was because I never felt comfortable with any crop sensor camera. I used 35mm film cameras for decades before digital came out and I only use prime lenses, so my brain is now hardwired to the focal lengths of full frame lenses. Full frame may or may not be actually any better in terms of IQ but I don't care, full frame just feels right to me. The D800 was great except it never really felt as good as my Pentax. The "fun" factor was gone even though it was full frame. I finally figured out why I felt this way a few weeks ago. The damn thing is too big and heavy. Attach even a prime lens like the Sigma 50mm 1.4 (Art) to it with the battery grip attached (which I added just make the grip feel right) and this camera is a heavy monster. Hauling it around is a chore. Recently, at a camera store I tried the Sony A7R with the native Zeiss 55 mm 1.8 lens. I was instantly in love with this camera. It has faults but these are of no consequence to me compared to the pleasure of having a light, small, high resolution camera again. I bought it and no I don't plan on buying any adapters to use any of my huge Nikon lenses because to me this would defeat the purpose of going small again. On the other hand I might do so with some Pentax lenses. I don't think I have any that are full frame but if anyone has any suggestions on buying older pentax lenses that are small and full frame I am open to suggestions.

[luftfluss]

Well, which Pentax lenses do you have?

In my experience, all the Takumars are good, although you don't get the best modern flare-resistant coatings.

If you check out Pinholecam's posts, he uses Pentax glass with his Sony.

[stevebrot]

I don't think I have any that are full frame but if anyone has any suggestions on buying older pentax lenses that are small and full frame I am open to suggestions.

That would pretty much include all non-DA series primes up to about 200mm focal length.


Steve

[Watson]

Well, which Pentax lenses do you have?

In my experience, all the Takumars are good, although you don't get the best modern flare-resistant coatings.

If you check out Pinholecam's posts, he uses Pentax glass with his Sony.

I only have DA class lenses, none of which I believe are full frame compatible except perhaps the 55mm 1.4 ( but I bought the Zeiss 55 mm with the Sony so I don't need it.

[aleonx3]

Oh, wow... with any K, M, A, m42, F, FA lenses... you are all set. I think m42 lenses (like Takmuars) probably have the best bang for the buck. Good for you and happy shooting!

[osv]

i did a bunch of field curvature tests on the a7r... the pentax-m 28/3.5 is clean across the frame, it's a winner, and it's fairly cheap... sony is releasing a 28/2 in a few months that could be good.

i would pass on the small 35/3.5 tak, it's not bad but it doesn't compare to the pentax fa35/2... the sony fe35 looks good, but it has issues with excessive vignetting, that get corrected in-camera, and it's pricey.

for 24mm lenses, the canon fdn 24/2.8 is a winner, under $100... most of the legacy 24mm competition, including pentax, have way too much field curvature.

for 90-100mm lenses, the tamron sp is outstanding, but so are others in that focal length.

for 200mm, minolta has some 4 group/4 element(?) formula primes that are outstanding, and i think probably the same thing for the minolta 4/4 135mm prime.

[Christine Tham]

I love Pentax cameras. They are so well built and just "feel" right to me. Despite this I switched from my K511s to a Nikon D800. The only reason I did this was because I never felt comfortable with any crop sensor camera. I used 35mm film cameras for decades before digital came out and I only use prime lenses, so my brain is now hardwired to the focal lengths of full frame lenses. Full frame may or may not be actually any better in terms of IQ but I don't care, full frame just feels right to me. The D800 was great except it never really felt as good as my Pentax. The "fun" factor was gone even though it was full frame. I finally figured out why I felt this way a few weeks ago. The damn thing is too big and heavy. Attach even a prime lens like the Sigma 50mm 1.4 (Art) to it with the battery grip attached (which I added just make the grip feel right) and this camera is a heavy monster. Hauling it around is a chore. Recently, at a camera store I tried the Sony A7R with the native Zeiss 55 mm 1.8 lens. I was instantly in love with this camera. It has faults but these are of no consequence to me compared to the pleasure of having a light, small, high resolution camera again. I bought it and no I don't plan on buying any adapters to use any of my huge Nikon lenses because to me this would defeat the purpose of going small again. On the other hand I might do so with some Pentax lenses. I don't think I have any that are full frame but if anyone has any suggestions on buying older pentax lenses that are small and full frame I am open to suggestions.

Just about any lens with an aperture ring will work. I like the A series lenses.

Warning: wide angle lenses generally are soft in the corners and may have vignetting on the A7R. Example: FA*24 is rather soft in the corners at f2, but pretty sharp end to end at f8.

I'm pretty much sticking to the FE lenses going forward - since the ones that have been released so far are so good there is no reason to use adapted lenses. I'm going to mothball my Pentax lenses until there is a Pentax FF, but I may take them out occasionally and use them on the K-01 just for fun.

Lately all my shots have been exclusively FE55 or FE35. Now that I have the FE16-35, I am adding that to the mix. Once the 90mm macro, 35mm f1.4 and 28mm plus converters are released next year I will pretty much have a full FE system and I can be 100% native.

[Na Horuk]

Nice story. I remember some Pentaxians saying the A7 has poor ergonomics and annoying Menu, but it is definitely a nice, compact FF with a lot of options for adapting lenses from other systems. Hope you enjoy it

[LFLee]

Well, which Pentax lenses do you have?

In my experience, all the Takumars are good, although you don't get the best modern flare-resistant coatings.

If you check out Pinholecam's posts, he uses Pentax glass with his Sony.

I believe "he" is a "she".

[pinholecam]

I believe "he" is a "she".

Noo.... no... certainly He.


TS, the Pentax legacy primes are certainly one of the best choices out there for the A7 (I can't be too sure about the A7r though due to pixel density differences).
Well built, usually smaller and feels right sized on an A7, generally warm colors, contrasty look. (wrt similar lineage SLR options)

Legacy wides 24mm and lower, I do think more modern options would be better (but pricier of course except the Samyang 14mm)


The 'picky best lenses' option is a mix and match from various brands.
There is just no one brand that can give a full sweep of good lenses at all focal lengths (esp when you add in the realities of cost, size, weight, build, look, etc)
That is at the price of adapter juggling and added adapter size/weigth.
So I tend towards either one brand per outing or at most 2 brands.

I'm really a poor judge of lenses (which is why I seldom sell any of them).
I tend to like to see the character of each lens rather than emphasize their flaws (all have them).


For the Pentax lenses.
Wides -
FA20/2.8 smaller than most and real nice punchy o/p (beats Canon FD20/2.8 and a $900 Voigtlander 21/1.8 for this aspect); but field curvature (focus using the side and f9-f11 to work around this); last 1/10 of frame not that good imo.
K24/2.8 - Works fine on A7. O/P often has good contrast and 'bite'. A bit weaker off center because of field curvature but at 24mp pixel density, its still ok. OSV used it on the A7r and did not like it though. So take note.
(The K24/3.5 has the same characteristic from what I tried)
M28/2.8 seems to work fine if stopped down, but I don't have the lens, only seen samples of stopped down performance.
FA*24/2 - not good off center at f8 (perhaps field curvature but did not check); Good as a shallow DOF wide, not that good as a landscape lens to me (big; costly - so I rather just use the K24/2.8)
Kiron 28/2 - Ugly bokeh but crazy sharp from f4 onwards.

FA35/2 - very good, no issues at all. Still my fav 35mm.
Tak 35/3.5 - I don't really like 35mm slower than f2 actually. Good performer and really small. But FA35 is the better (in fact Frank compared lots of the legacy 35mm except FA31ltd and FA35 is certainly one of the top if not the top)
I also had the FE35, nice contrasty look typical of Zeiss. AF just felt too 'typical CDAF' to me in poorer light and I like the option of more subject isolation via DOF so 35mm @f2.8 is just not a fav. for me since I have other options.
Then there is strong vignette for a 35mm f2.8 which is corrected via PP, and that played with my mind (ended pixel peeping too much on the edges and corners to see if the file broke up under PP )
So sold it. (mixed feelings about it though.. at times, it was real nice)


Pentax 50mm ( I have all of them ) - All good.
IMHO, the FE55/1.8 may be sharper (esp. off center wide open) but the Pentax (as with most other 50s) are often good enough and have their own character. I dislike the optical vignette (at its price) for the FE55 in some situations.
But all 50mm imo will have their weak areas when it comes to bokeh in some bkgnd types/situations.

Special mention to the K50/1.2 - really one of the best f1.2 50mm's out there.
IMHO (and pref), better 'reliable' bokeh in more situations than even Rokkor 58/1.2 and FD55/1.2 (and Revuenon 55/1.2).
Smaller too.
If you look for other characteristics for the bokeh, then the others could be your best choice, so really subjective... as said its MHO.


FA ltd - safest bet.
Well built, very sharp, very nice drawing style.
FA77ltd tops the 3 imo.


Pentax 85mm (I have almost all the lens designs short of the Tak 83) - All good. K85/1.8 (or the SMC Tak85/1.8 ) is the best of the bunch for sharpness, CA resistance.
But then the M85/2 warts and all (poor CA and veiling flare) is so portable and such a joy to bring around 'just in case'.
FA*85 - Legendary; as good as any 85mm f1.4 out there (or even f1.2); But often too big for my pref (more of a speciallist lens imo like if going out for an assignment rather than for a tour)


F/FA100/2.8 macro - seldom can go wrong with a macro lens.

K135/2.5 - good contrast, drawing style and colors. Much better working distance on FF than on aps-c imo. Just get this one if on a budget and considering only on 135mm.
A135/1.8 (not mine) - very nice, but really rare and imho, its at collector's price nowadays esp if comparing to 135/2 options out there for Canikon.
FA135/2.8 - sharp, small, built in hood (real convenient and nice), good colors and good contrast. Too bad its also very good for CA and focus throw is too short and loosey because its a fast AF lens.
Tak 135/3.5 - surprisingly very nice on FF (did not like it much on aps-c); one of the most reliable 135mm f3.5 out there (others give good bokeh at the cost of flare resistance; lower contrast; sharpness, etc .. so as said, the Tak is good old reliable )


I'd take any of the listed lenses out for the day w/o a qualm (sold the FA*24/2 btw, one of the only FA* I have sold ).
None are perfect (no lens is), but the generally are 'up there', imho.

[Watson]

Noo.... no... certainly He.


TS, the Pentax legacy primes are certainly one of the best choices out there for the A7 (I can't be too sure about the A7r though due to pixel density differences).
Well built, usually smaller and feels right sized on an A7, generally warm colors, contrasty look. (wrt similar lineage SLR options)

Legacy wides 24mm and lower, I do think more modern options would be better (but pricier of course except the Samyang 14mm)


The 'picky best lenses' option is a mix and match from various brands.
There is just no one brand that can give a full sweep of good lenses at all focal lengths (esp when you add in the realities of cost, size, weight, build, look, etc)
That is at the price of adapter juggling and added adapter size/weigth.
So I tend towards either one brand per outing or at most 2 brands.

I'm really a poor judge of lenses (which is why I seldom sell any of them).
I tend to like to see the character of each lens rather than emphasize their flaws (all have them).


For the Pentax lenses.
Wides -
FA20/2.8 smaller than most and real nice punchy o/p (beats Canon FD20/2.8 and a $900 Voigtlander 21/1.8 for this aspect); but field curvature (focus using the side and f9-f11 to work around this); last 1/10 of frame not that good imo.
K24/2.8 - Works fine on A7. O/P often has good contrast and 'bite'. A bit weaker off center because of field curvature but at 24mp pixel density, its still ok. OSV used it on the A7r and did not like it though. So take note.
(The K24/3.5 has the same characteristic from what I tried)
M28/2.8 seems to work fine if stopped down, but I don't have the lens, only seen samples of stopped down performance.
FA*24/2 - not good off center at f8 (perhaps field curvature but did not check); Good as a shallow DOF wide, not that good as a landscape lens to me (big; costly - so I rather just use the K24/2.8)
Kiron 28/2 - Ugly bokeh but crazy sharp from f4 onwards.

FA35/2 - very good, no issues at all. Still my fav 35mm.
Tak 35/3.5 - I don't really like 35mm slower than f2 actually. Good performer and really small. But FA35 is the better (in fact Frank compared lots of the legacy 35mm except FA31ltd and FA35 is certainly one of the top if not the top)
I also had the FE35, nice contrasty look typical of Zeiss. AF just felt too 'typical CDAF' to me in poorer light and I like the option of more subject isolation via DOF so 35mm @f2.8 is just not a fav. for me since I have other options.
Then there is strong vignette for a 35mm f2.8 which is corrected via PP, and that played with my mind (ended pixel peeping too much on the edges and corners to see if the file broke up under PP )
So sold it. (mixed feelings about it though.. at times, it was real nice)


Pentax 50mm ( I have all of them ) - All good.
IMHO, the FE55/1.8 may be sharper (esp. off center wide open) but the Pentax (as with most other 50s) are often good enough and have their own character. I dislike the optical vignette (at its price) for the FE55 in some situations.
But all 50mm imo will have their weak areas when it comes to bokeh in some bkgnd types/situations.

Special mention to the K50/1.2 - really one of the best f1.2 50mm's out there.
IMHO (and pref), better 'reliable' bokeh in more situations than even Rokkor 58/1.2 and FD55/1.2 (and Revuenon 55/1.2).
Smaller too.
If you look for other characteristics for the bokeh, then the others could be your best choice, so really subjective... as said its MHO.


FA ltd - safest bet.
Well built, very sharp, very nice drawing style.
FA77ltd tops the 3 imo.


Pentax 85mm (I have almost all the lens designs short of the Tak 83) - All good. K85/1.8 (or the SMC Tak85/1.8 ) is the best of the bunch for sharpness, CA resistance.
But then the M85/2 warts and all (poor CA and veiling flare) is so portable and such a joy to bring around 'just in case'.
FA*85 - Legendary; as good as any 85mm f1.4 out there (or even f1.2); But often too big for my pref (more of a speciallist lens imo like if going out for an assignment rather than for a tour)


F/FA100/2.8 macro - seldom can go wrong with a macro lens.

K135/2.5 - good contrast, drawing style and colors. Much better working distance on FF than on aps-c imo. Just get this one if on a budget and considering only on 135mm.
A135/1.8 (not mine) - very nice, but really rare and imho, its at collector's price nowadays esp if comparing to 135/2 options out there for Canikon.
FA135/2.8 - sharp, small, built in hood (real convenient and nice), good colors and good contrast. Too bad its also very good for CA and focus throw is too short and loosey because its a fast AF lens.
Tak 135/3.5 - surprisingly very nice on FF (did not like it much on aps-c); one of the most reliable 135mm f3.5 out there (others give good bokeh at the cost of flare resistance; lower contrast; sharpness, etc .. so as said, the Tak is good old reliable )


I'd take any of the listed lenses out for the day w/o a qualm (sold the FA*24/2 btw, one of the only FA* I have sold ).
None are perfect (no lens is), but the generally are 'up there', imho.

Wow, thanks for all of the detailed information. Incredibly helpful. Pentax still has one thing going for it above all other companies ie the users of this Forum. Way better than any other forum as far as being helpful and providing solid information.

[6BQ5]

I only have DA class lenses, none of which I believe are full frame compatible except perhaps the 55mm 1.4 ( but I bought the Zeiss 55 mm with the Sony so I don't need it.

The DA 35mm f/2.4 works as FF lens. I used it on my ZX-60 in Av mode. It doesn't have an aperture ring though. Maybe you could have some pre-drilled lens caps to simulate apertures?

I think there are other DA lenses that work as FF, especially the longer focal length models. There's a thread on it here :

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/31629-da-le...ts-thread.html

[pinholecam]

Wow, thanks for all of the detailed information. Incredibly helpful. Pentax still has one thing going for it above all other companies ie the users of this Forum. Way better than any other forum as far as being helpful and providing solid information.

You are welcome.
I sort of got tired of all the no FF (Pentax's fault) and people (People's fault) who jumped ship, becoming very disgruntled and mean, who keep lingering on here carrying the message "I've jumped ship, my new xxx is soooo.. good, and all you guys are suckers"


So my message is different.
The Pentax lenses are viable, unique (size, price, weight, look, etc) and it is worth staying with Pentax even if only for the lenses.


Some samples from a few of the lenses.


SMC K24/2.8




A50/1.4




K85/1.8




FA31ltd




FA*85/1.4




F100/2.8 macro



---------- Post added 11-20-2014 at 05:50 AM ----------

FA77ltd




K50/1.2




K135/2.5




FA43ltd




DA40XS




M85/2

[luftfluss]

^^

This is what happens, at the convergence of ability and opportunity.

What does it say about me, that both flowers remind me of aperture blades?

[LFLee]

Noo.... no... certainly He.
o.

what? ... not that it matter... but I am confused.