Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Pentax Lens Review Database » Film Era Pentax K-Mount Lenses » Non-SMC Pentax Zoom Lenses
Takumar-A 28-80mm F3.5-4.5 Review RSS Feed

Takumar-A 28-80mm F3.5-4.5

Reviews Views Date of last review
15 57,781 Mon October 29, 2018
Recommended By Average Price Average User Rating
47% of reviewers $27.67 4.47
Takumar-A 28-80mm F3.5-4.5

This manual focus zoom lens is similar to its PENTAX-A series counterpart except it has a macro mode with a close focus distance of a mere 24 cm. Neither lens is SMC coated.

Takumar-A 28-80mm F3.5-4.5
©, sharable with attribution
Image Format
Full-frame / 35mm film
Lens Mount
Pentax K
Aperture Ring
Yes (A setting)
Automatic, 8 blades
8 elements, 8 groups
Mount Variant
Check camera compatibility
Max. Aperture
Min. Aperture
Min. Focus
24 cm
Max. Magnification
Filter Size
58 mm
Internal Focus
Field of View (Diag. / Horiz.)

APS-C: 55-20 ° / 46-17 °
Full frame: 75-30 ° / 65-25 °
No dedicated hood
No dedicated case
Lens Cap
Metal push-on
Weather Sealing
Other Features
Diam x Length
69 x 82 mm
456 g
Production Years
1984 to 1988
Engraved Name
TAKUMAR-A 1:3.5-4.5 28-80mm
Product Code
User reviews
No SMC coating
Manual FocusAperture RingAutomatic ApertureFull-Frame SupportDiscontinued
Price History:

Add Review of Takumar-A 28-80mm F3.5-4.5
Sort Reviews by: Date | Author | Rating | Recommendation | Likes (Descending) Showing Reviews 1-15 of 15
Site Supporter

Registered: March, 2011
Posts: 944
Lens Review Date: October 29, 2018 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: $20.00 | Rating: 1 

Pros: low price, "A" aperture, close focusing
Cons: flare, field curvature, build quality, 90 focus throw is too short, value
Sharpness: 5    Aberrations: 1    Bokeh: 6    Handling: 5    Value: 3    Camera Used: Pentax K-5IIs    Focusing: 4   

All of the 28-80's good qualities are washed away by an amazing ability to flare.
I've owned several cheap, bottom of the barrel quality lenses, but I've never used one with less flare resistance.
Veteran Member

Registered: July, 2007
Location: North West UK
Posts: 382

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: March 3, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $12.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Cheap "Macro" Good stopped down
Cons: Lacking contrast wide open, Loose focus ring
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 7    Bokeh: 7    Handling: 6    Value: 8    Camera Used: K-3   

I found this bundled with a couple of other lenses in a second-hand camera shop dirt cheap.
Is it any good? Well if price was the only thing, then superb! But of course price is only one thing.
Happily though, it is quite good fun to use.
Wide open, it lacks contrast, but then again, the K-mount Taks were not renowned for contrast wide open.
Stopped down it does come alive with nice contrast and bokeh.
Macro mode is quite good really, but don't expect 100mm Macro in this lens.

Well it is cheap feeling, and the focus ring lacks any sort of control, it is too loose really.

Overall, it is a good lens albeit not outstanding, but if you do find one for peanuts like I have, then why not go for a punt, You can always sell it on again for a tenner, and have fun in the meantime.

[IMG]Praying by Iain, on Flickr[/IMG]
Forum Member

Registered: October, 2013
Posts: 94

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: October 30, 2013 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $5.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp, 'macro' mode
Cons: Sloppy focus, metering
Sharpness: 10    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 7    Handling: 7    Value: 10    Camera Used: K200D   

Ok I got mine free because the ebay seller failed to notice scratches (well it cost me 3 postage) and first impressions are it's a) heavy and b) difficult to focus with the viewfinder on my K200D. Exposure has also caused me problems but that's just user error.

Having now got the hang of it I have to say it is as sharp as any lens I've tried, so I'm wondering why it scores so low. I wonder if people haven't bothered to learn how to use it? Getting the right aperture and shutter speed and focus takes time and patience, but get it right and it will produce pin sharp images - no room for improvement. Hence it must get a 10/10 for sharpness.

As mentioned by others, it's main appeal is 'macro' mode for close focusing.

This is just a test shot of course, under weak artificial light, but it shows the IQ.

One peculiarity with mine is the focus and zoom rings seem a bit sloppy or made of very bendy material so they can 'grind' when turned, sounding like the lens glass is being ground to dust. Took me a while to work out it was nothing serious.

I'd say to anyone who can be bothered to use a manual lens, especially if you have live view, pick one of these up. If it's in good condition pay a little more for it because it is a very capable lens. All you have to do is learn how to meter with it.

Another in natural light, 'macro' f/8 1/20s ISO 400 croppd and resized, a little u/s mask. No other edits.

A wider shot, very difficult to focus with my K200D but at f/16 I got it more-or-less right. I am liking the colours with this lens, it seems to distinguish subtle shades well.. Cropped, resized and u/s mask. No other edits. 35mm f16 1/20s ISO 400
New Member

Registered: July, 2013
Posts: 1
Lens Review Date: July 23, 2013 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: $125.00 | Rating: 2 

Pros: Inexpensive
Cons: Myriad
Sharpness: 4    Aberrations: 5    Bokeh: 5    Handling: 2    Value: 3    Camera Used: Pentax 35mm   

This is the only Pentax Corp. lens that I was dissatisfied with. Lost my A series 28mm f2.8 on a hiking trip, and replaced it with this thing. Bad choice.

Poor construction - the focus barrel wobbled noticeably in use, and it rotated forever through the focus range. The zoom ring was way too loose to hold a setting. Taking any kind of action or snap-focus shot was an exercise in frustration. Used it for some scenic work, but it was nowhere near as sharp as my primes or the 70-210mm A series f4 it accompanied.

Actually, I'm surprised that people are still using these. I disposed of mine at least 10 years ago.
Forum Member

Registered: August, 2011
Location: Essex
Posts: 97
Lens Review Date: September 19, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $25.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: easy use, fast to focus, rather light, good macro setting, Durable
Cons: none
Sharpness: 7    Aberrations: 7    Bokeh: 6    Handling: 9    Value: 9    Camera Used: Pentax ME   

I've been using this lens for over 3 years, now and i can say that it is a good valued lens. It came bundled with my Pentax ME, since then i still use this lens on that camera and find that it produces good photos, the handling of the lens is very good as it is has smooth focusing, allowing for fast focusing. I also found that this lens is rather sharp compared to other 28-80s found on the market toda y, it has stood the test of time well, It may not be SMC coated, but it still holds a go od contrast and sharpness.

I took these with my ME using this lens, Boots 200 ASA film
Veteran Member

Registered: April, 2009
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 964
Lens Review Date: June 16, 2012 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: N/A | Rating: 5 

Pros: handling
Cons: overall performance
Sharpness: 3    Aberrations: 4    Bokeh: 3    Handling: 9    Value: 4    Camera Used: K1000   

I'll try to be objective in this review because my heart says love it but my brain says it sucks Let me explain:
This was my first and only lens for years as it was kitted with my brand new K1000 back ~ 1989. More than 23 years later, both are still in perfect working order.
This lens taught me a lot about photography in my early days. I used the close focusing macro mode frequently. Back then, a teenager me had no idea was multicoating was, nor DOF, nor the concept of sharpness at different apertures. Being a poor IQ performer, especially wide open, I was always blaming myself and pushing to become better. Since 99.99% of my prints were 4x6 (or the even cheaper Clark's 3x2) it was "adequate" back then. My favorite part of it is handling. It still moves smoothly and zooming in for precise focusing and metering then zooming back for proper composition became second nature.
Bottom line, no, I won't use it now but it did contribute to the history of my photography. And for that I can not simply disregard it as useless.....
Site Supporter

Registered: April, 2011
Location: Lost in translation ...
Posts: 17,407
Lens Review Date: February 11, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $25.00 | Rating: 5 

Pros: "A" lens, "proxi-photo"/macro use
Cons: See the previous reviews above
Sharpness: 5    Aberrations: 5    Bokeh: 6    Handling: 5    Value: 6    Camera Used: K-5, K-r   


OK, the "impulse" purchase of this lens was an error on my part, but sometimes I cannot resist and LBA gets the best of my better judgment.

No need to further whip a "dead horse" ... this lens is really poor except for maybe "proxi-photo" close focus situations ... otherwise it's almost a good paperweight to have on one's desk to fiddle with every now and then.

I'll be kind and give this lens a "5" ... solely because of its "close focus" capabilities. Enough said. Allez, J
Junior Member

Registered: December, 2011
Posts: 27
Lens Review Date: December 4, 2011 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: $5.00 | Rating: 2 

Pros: Inexpensive
Cons: Poor image quality
Sharpness: 2    Handling: 8    Value: 2   

After testing and using this lens, I concur with the mediocre review. This lens will take pictures if that is all you need in a pinch, but that is about as good as it gets. Because I have a 18-55m kit lens that came with my Kx, I regret purchasing this lens, but for $5 US I thought it was worth a chance to see how it would perform under the conditions I like to take pictures on my Kx. My kit lens (DAL 18-55mm) far out performs this lens. I was hoping the extra distance in the zoom would help me, but the images weren't nearly as clear as my 18-55.
Veteran Member

Registered: February, 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Posts: 1,678
Lens Review Date: September 8, 2011 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $15.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Nice Macro Lens, decent Bokeh. A Macro only lens IMO
Cons: Poor contrast, not great for "normal" use
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 6    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 7    Value: 8   

To me, this is lens is ONLY used for macro and I only keep this around because A. it's damaged and has little to no resale value and B. It produced a few of my favorite macro pics I have taken.. in part because of its "damage" The front barrel for focusing can unscrew without a stop/lock in it at all.. letting me get a bit of extra focusing distance in macro mode, sometimes very handy!
Here's a sample.
Veteran Member

Registered: January, 2007
Location: Newcastle Australia
Posts: 5,281
Lens Review Date: April 29, 2011 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: N/A | Rating: 1 

Pros: Look like a lens on the surface
Cons: Not effective as a lens, I would call it a toy
Sharpness: 3    Aberrations: 3    Bokeh: 2    Handling: 4    Value: 1   

Poor focus, soft, poor feel, front element too close to edge of lens.
Does produce photos, but poor quality photos at best.
At long end 80mm, VERY poor performance, but then maybe it is my lump of rubbish lens.
Veteran Member

Registered: April, 2010
Location: NY
Posts: 523
Lens Review Date: April 16, 2010 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: N/A | Rating: 3 

Pros: Keeps dust and mice out. Can make pictures.
Cons: Cheap construction. Not sharp.

This is what was on my Hong Kong K1000 brand new from Service Merchandise in 1989. It fell apart twice, the second time shedding it's trunnions all over Colorado. In a pinch, I gave up and replaced it with the first thing I found, an SMC 50mm f2. The first set of prints I got back after replacing the Takumar 28-80mm...I almost fell over!
So that's what a lens is s'posed to do!
One positive thing about this kit zoom is that it taught me what a real lens is NOT! One negative thing was that it jaded me against all kit zooms until good ol' Ken Rockwell convinced to give the plastic Nikkor 28-80mm a try.
Now I know that my very first new camera wasn't a cheap toy that took mediocre photos, the LENS was!
I do have some beautiful 4x6's from back in the day so I can't say that this glass is incapable of decent images. But what a gap between this thing and a real SMC.
Site Supporter

Registered: June, 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Posts: 17,253

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: November 10, 2008 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $25.00 | Rating: 6 

Pros: Cost, A lens
Cons: non SMC coating

This lens probably gets a bad rap mainly because it doesn't have the smc coating and many have the misconception that it is not coated. It is coated however. It is an A lens however and will work with cameras that recognize that feature.
Loyal Site Supporter

Registered: January, 2008
Location: Paris, TN
Posts: 2,981

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: July 12, 2008 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $6.00 | Rating: 5 

Pros: It will produce pictures
Cons: Just not great images

Jul '08

That old Pentax film body you keep in bubble-wrap under the seat in the pickup truck? Here's the perfect lens for it.
At 28-80mm it has the range to efficiently record things that need to be documented for working purposes and if it comes to an ugly end somehow there won't be many tears shed.
On the plus side it's built like a tank and can take a bump or two (although you want to protect it from dust). But mostly it has a useful zoom range and the macro mode adequately provides for those times when a good close-up view is needed.
Pictures for the cow-doctor, timber cruiser, survey crew, a breaking news story or insurance agent can be valuable in time saved and mistakes avoided.
For efficiency, today I'd rather have a cheap P&S digital but if you've already got this lens, an old ME, P3 or K1000 body and a roll of 400 ISO print film you have a very useful working tool that deserves respect as such.
I think of it as the zoom lens equivalent of the old M-42 f1.8/55 prime on the SP's.
Edit: Oct '09

If you live in a rural area, you know there's always some @#%#@ dumping an unwanted pet on your property on the theory you really need one more mongrel to feed. Usually ya have to do what ya have to do but once in a while one comes along that works so hard just for a place at the dinner table you have to give it a chance.

I don't expect this lens'll ever make the show circuit on style alone. But it really does live in the truck as mentioned above and I was just reminded how often it helps with the daily activities. Along with some other utilitarian tools and the third best binoculars it's just always there when I want it and I never have to baby it. I doubt I'd ever replace it and I might pass it on to someone that needed it, but I certainly won't abandon it.

My point is that too often we rate things (and people) against some unfair comparison or standard. I'd bump this up to a 10+ if I wasn't afraid it would skew the results for the rest of you.
Every photo isn't destined to be a 16x20 inch work of art.

Giveaway winner!

Registered: December, 2007
Location: beantown
Posts: 944
Lens Review Date: January 4, 2008 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: $29.00 | Rating: 2 

Pros: Almost heavy enough to hurt someone in a pinch.
Cons: Not quite a lens
Sharpness: 7    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 6    Handling: 8    Value: 5   

I've used it and based on my findings, I will admit that light does pass through the glass inside it's housing, so I can't be too harsh. The aperture seems to act funny in my example when changing from 28 to higher it would slowly move the aperture. As noted by the previous review the front most element is easily damaged if not careful. My used example has scratches the produce a nice flare effect so yet another reason not to give a 1 rating. Its coating is almost as simple as a lens from the 50s and the chromatic-abrasion is very noticeable under bright conditions greater than dawn or dusk. If you like auras and mood rings then this is the lens for you...macro...more like an extended short focus. The short throw of the focus might be that they reserved the last bit of the turn for the macro mode. All seriousness aside, the lens will provide pictures and if you are a good photographer you can get super results with this lens if you keep it in your forgotten photo gear bin at home.

Update: The addition of an adjustable hood helps, but the non-smc glass is at time still unforgiving... at least in my version.
Lens Review Date: May 25, 2007 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: $40.00 | Rating: 4 

Pros: Feels sturdy, looks nice, decent macro mode
Cons: easily damaged front element, vignettes at wide end, lots of distortion, poor focus "feel"

This lens is identical to the Pentax -A (non-SMC) lens listed above so everything here applies to both.

The focus ring moves through a very short arc making accurate focus at the long end difficult. There is noticable distortion at the wide end. The front element is easily damaged. I used this lens for a few years and was not upset with its performance, but I was never impressed either. The third party Samyang zoom I had was actually a better overall lens.

Although it is slower, the FA 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 (which is universally panned) actually outperforms it in all but macro capability.

I wouldn't pay more than $20-30 for this lens, it isn't that good.
Add Review of Takumar-A 28-80mm F3.5-4.5

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:38 AM. | See also:, 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?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]