Hi thefizz - welcome failte.
28mm was often the first extra lens acquired by slr owners, for its general purpose wide angle. Everyone made one and there are loads out there, easily acquired for the price of a meal or less.
I have tried most of the ones that might be mentioned, without reaching a clear conclusion I'm afraid. Most are really quite good, centre frame, stopped down a bit. If you check out my
review of the Hoya 28mm (rebadged tokina) the performance is pretty typical, and similar to that of eg Sigma Miniwide II, Tamron Adaptall 02B, several of the vivitars. Overall I would tend to place the pentaxes slightly ahead, technically (eg architecture): I took a bunch of shots M vs K 28-3.5's and most of the time struggled to distinguish between the two. I still have the K-28-3.5 but I have to say if I reach for a 28 it tends to be the vivitar 28 f2 - the kiron made one, not the komine mentioned above - for the convenience of the PKA mount and I like the rendering. I have the komine as well but my kiron seems to have better colours and perform a bit better.
My other usual test pic is the castle, and I have to say I am still looking for the 28 that makes my cry "gotcha". It has reached the point actually where I wonder if it is something about using these film era lenses on DSLR, a technicality that escapes me, that means that off centre performance tends to disappoint - even on apsc. The sample pics below are typical.*
Finally, don't dismiss the 18-55mm kit lens. Slower at 28mm than all the vintage 28's but you have AF, the kit lens performs well in the middle of the zoom range and the OOC rendering will be brighter and contrastier than any of the vintage ones. Horses for courses...
*perhaps field curvature is more of an issue on dslr -
Dan Eurrits test pics are interesting.
This is a direct link to his Sony A7R composite test pic (20MB) comparing Pentax M 28mm f3.5; vivitar (kiron) 28mm f2; Olympus 28mm, Canon FD 28,, Minolta Celtic 28mm; at f10 if my reading of the
test description is right