| Author: | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Posts: 14 | | Review Date: August 3, 2019 | Recommended
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | sharp | | Cons: | many CA's | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 2
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 5
Camera Used: kx k200s ks1 sfx z20p mz5
Focusing: 7
| |
here Pentax forgot one ore two achromates !!! The same problem as with the M42 4/300  | | | | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Location: Ladysmith, B.C. (Vancouver Island) Posts: 3
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 10, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $14.50
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Constant f/4, awesome silent manual zoom and focus, nice optical qualities | | Cons: | What's to complain about? | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K-5
| |
I can't believe I only paid $15 Cdn for this thing. This is a great lens. Nice bokeh, colour, decent sharpness and macro's not bad either.
Some people tend to pooh pooh this lens because it's a Takumar and doesn't have SMC coatings. Funny, nobody else's lenses have Pentax SMC coatings either a no one gets too concerned about it.
As for CA, I've seen some of the newest lenses suck really bad and do far worse than this lens, so I just don't consider them to be an issue in this case.
I have some expensive gear and not so expensive gear and this lens regardless of price is just a joy to use. Photographed a couple of my daughters high school improve shows with it and got some great shots from the cheap seats. Took it on a little hike through a park and got some really fun close-ups and scenics. It might show slightly more flare wide open than say a $1,500 or $2,000 unit, but that can work to your advantage, otherwise use a hood or watch your angle to the sun.
Here's a couple shots of a fern front I shot handheld, wide open in open shade on the park walk.
This is just a fun lens to shoot with.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151739835560666&set=pcb.1015173983...type=1&theater
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151739835550666&set=pcb.1015173983...type=1&theater | | | | | Junior Member Registered: June, 2013 Location: Tottenham, ON Posts: 48
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 27, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $17.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Inexpensive, Auto Aperture | | Cons: | Rough Zoom & Focus | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 7
Value: 9
Camera Used: Pentax K-x
| |
I'm not an expert by any means, i'm actually a beginner at DSLR. Great inexpensive starter zoom lens. Takes great pictures for a $17 lens. The one I bought off ebay didn't even look used. Here's a few sample photos, mostly at f4 and couple macros of a dragonfly and decorative frog.
 | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: December, 2008 Location: NJ, USA Posts: 428 | | Review Date: September 29, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | cheap, macro | | Cons: | bad mechanics, poor optics. | | Sharpness: 5
Aberrations: 4
Bokeh: 5
Handling: 2
Value: 7
| |
I bought this lens at a flea market in 1993 to use on my Program Plus. I used a bit on digital but in the interveining years I became much more selective about optics.
The biggest issue is the mechanical quality. The lens is a push - pull zoom with the focus ring also being the same mechanism for zooming. the zoom on mine was very loose and will slosh back and forth. it appears to be pretty common with lens.
Optically on digital, nothing to rave about. Lots of CA, poor contrast and not very sharp....
Decent macro but as you all know, you can do much better.
Bottom line- Pretty poor. I sold mine awhile ago and have not looked back.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2010 Location: British Columbia Posts: 13
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 21, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | sharper at 200mm then dal 50-200mm, cheap | | Cons: | sensitive hit or miss focus, could be cause its a bit loose | |
I'd give this lens a rating of 6.5 if i could
I got this lens in a package when i got a Pentax ME for a 50mm f1.7 lens it came with.
I use a pentax kx and so far only have 2 zoom lenses that reach 200mm, one is the takumar-a the other the kit 50-200 dal lens.
I choose the takumar 90% of the time over the kit lens if i'm in need of a zoom. the takumar is much faster and quite a bit better for lower light shooting then the kit lens. Results are much sharper at 200mm with the takumar, the kit lens gets pretty soft near the top.
Although both lenses leave a lot to be desired, but for the money spent I cant complain about the results of the takumar.
i'll try to post some pics soon once I figure out how its done. im still pretty new on the pentax forum.
| | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2009 Location: Bucharest Posts: 17
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 11, 2010 | Not Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | cheep | | Cons: | sharpness, color rendition, zoom/focus sistem | |
I had this one but I sold it right after my first experience with a real lens (M 50 1.4).
For the price I payed and being the first lens I bought in this focal range I have no regrets. It was nice to play with. In comparison with the A 35-105 f3.5 IQ is quite poor. In terms of color, contrast or even sharpness I would prefer to crop an image taken wit the 35-105 at 105 than taking one with the Tak at 200.
I recommend it if you are curious of the 100-200 focal range and do not want to invest much. For a maximum of $50 it is worth the price.
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: January, 2008 Location: Paris, TN Posts: 3,349
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 13, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Light, one-touch, good close-focus capability, fixed aperture | | Cons: | Zoom ring could be stiffer | |
Although not fully SMC, this lens seems to have multi-coating and unexpectedly good optics. It comes from that era when cost savings were made with plastic bodies but the optics were Auto Takumar quality and rendering. This is a Taiwan-assembled lens similar to the CPC line of quality industrial optics. It later was later re-named "Pentax-A'.
There's not a great difference in IQ from f 5.6 to f 16 and the fixed aperture pays dividends when manually focusing; even with a 2x TC or polarizing filter.
PF/CA is very unobtrusive except when hard pressed in the silly "bare branches against the sky" shot. Much better than the typical economy 70-300 zooms IMO and easily fixed in PP.
It holds its own in a comparison with the DA 50-200, SMC-M 80-200/4.5 and Super Tak 200/4 in typical shooting situations and has the advantage of a useful macro mode at 200mm where it fills the frame with a lens cap at arm's distance. Results with a good quality 1.4x or 2x TC are as good as any lens of this class and a makeshift, AE-capable extension ring makes it a good choice for casual bug-safaris.
It's a little long at 6 inches/12.5 cm (common for decent IQ in this class) but is light enough for a day on the trail. It's a one-touch zoom.
If you can forgo AF, this lens should provide a fine, all-around solution for the backyard garden/squirrel shooter or as a trail companion to a light 28-50 prime or zoom . It's about half the weight of a Tamron 70-210/3.5 (19AH).
I wouldn't hesitate to acquire one for $35-45 if I needed to fill this focal length range with a low cost MF zoom. I'd also recommend it to someone wanting to explore the close focus world of 200mm zoom-macro lenses.
09/2010 -
Did some head-to-head comparisons with the Tam 19AH and an SMC-M 80-200/4.5. Was again impressed with the IQ of this lens. From f5.6 up all were virtually identical in sharpness, color and contrast with the Tam Mdl 19AH as an acknowledged standard of quality for this class of glass. The coating on this lens may not be SMC but it's hard to tell it's not in normal use.
I was looking for an excuse to sell this one when I did this quick comparison but I didn't find it today.
If you'd like to save $100+ and carry half the size and weight of the Adaptall-2 SP 70-210/3.5 this is a real bargain with no practical difference in field results and it has PK/A functionality built in. Consider it cheap training wheels for an upgrade to the 70-200/f2.8 glass.
H2
| | | | |
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 6, 2008 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | durable, affordable | | Cons: | manual focus | |
I used this lens on my Pentax K1000 and Pentax PZ-20 (film cameras) with very good results. I sold it off when I saw a Pentax F 100-300 in the used camera store window.
I think the Takumar-A 70-200 performs better than the Pentax F 100-300; however, it does not have autofocus which may be a concern to most digital shooters these days.
| | |
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
