| Author: | | Veteran Member Registered: August, 2017 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 550
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 23, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $89.99
| Rating: N/A |
| Pros: | Good Clarity for Close Up Modeling Work | | Cons: | Does not work well with standard MACRO attachments | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 9
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-50
| |
I use this for close up (face) modeling. It provides good clarity and sharp focus. For a camera manufacturer's lens it is 2x better than the kit lenses, but trails behind some equivalent lenses for add-on manufacturers. For the price point, it is a good buy for an amateur or semi-pro (which is the category I put myself in). Probably not for full time pros, as there are other, more expensive options with slightly better optics.
| | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: September, 2018 Location: Poland Posts: 1,800
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 6, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $95.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | image quality, price | | Cons: | for the price - nothing | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 8
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-50
| |
I bought this lens new in 2018 and have been using it quite a lot with my K-50. Image quality is ok wide-open (certainly usable) and very good stopped down.*The 2.4 maximum aperture is not very fast, but for the price it's fair and I've been using it wide-open in many low-light situations (like concerts).
Build quality: it has kind of plastic feel, but apart from that it seems fine - I've been treating it like every other lens and nothing bad happens. Plastic lens mount doesn't fall off  *
AF works well, a bit noisy like every other screw-driven lens. Altogether I like this lens a lot and I can recommend it as an everyday prime.
A few pictures below.
F/2.4:
F/2.8
F/5.6
F/22
 | | | | | Junior Member Registered: June, 2015 Location: Százhalombatta, Hungary Posts: 37
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 8, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $105.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Fast, lightweight | | Cons: | Poor constrution, useless wide-open | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 6
Value: 7
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K10D, K-5
| |
I got mine second-hand when I still had my K10D. Unfortunately mine had sever back-focusing, so I had to resort to manual focusing and a split-screen on the K10D. It didn't get much love from me on that body. Then I switched to my K-5, which can store different calibration settings for different lenses and it came to life. But I still don't like it that much. The reason is that I thought a similar FOV to a 50 would be great on APS-C. Which is half-true, but unlike a nifty-fifty, this lacks a shallow depth of field, so it's not nearly as impressive or useful on APS-C. Though the lens covers the full-frame image circle, it lacks an aperture ring, so its' use is pretty much limited to a few automatic film bodies or a K-1. Forget using it on manual bodies altogether.
Construction-wise this lens is very poorly made: all plastic, even the mount and it's not internal focusing either. The focusing ring rotates while focusing, so make sure you don't hold it by the focusing ring during AF operation, or you might damage the camera/lens. Doesn't look durable either. Pretty much useless at f/2.4 for far-away subjects. Stop it down and it starts to shine: it's very sharp really. For close-ups even wide-open could be used. As a positive, it's cheap at least. It's screwdrive based, so it grinds when focusing.
Don't think that my review is biased or anything: it's a light, sharp and cheap prime and is good for... say street photography, or perhaps landscapes, just don't compare it to legacy glass quality or even higher-end primes. It's a prime kit lens.
| | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2015 Posts: 17
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 4, 2019 | Not Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Price, weight, image quality | | Cons: | AF, fringing, axial CA, cheap | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 2
Handling: 7
Value: 8
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-r, K5ii
| |
This was my 1st lens upgrade after DAL 18-55 kit lense. Image quality improvement is noticable and lens was long my favorite. It gives you 1st sense of pro lens after you get a camera. I use it on K-r and shot a few paid jobs with it. It enables better image quality in low light, with it's f2.4 apperture.
It is lightweight and gives very good image quality. Plastic mount never wasa problem. It have that chep press-on back lens cap which I replaced with twist one from eBay. What a difference - but that costed 10% of the lenss
It is great lens until you experience better. Lens have quite pronounced purple fringing (which is easy correctable), but also annoying axial chromatic abberation (which is not correctable). Shooting with shallow DOF on rough/contrasty surfcace at angle it is affected by axial CA. Product shot on rough suirface at strong light will be affected. For normal street or portrait shooting it is not and issue.
Autofocus:
Bad AF reminded me to review this lens, because it enjoys so overstated score regarding AF. It is so unreliable in less than perfect light and it hunts, or just locks out focus, especially on moving people. AF needs really steady target to lock properly. Similar mediocre AF performance can ebe expected from DA 70 mm F2.4 limited, which have even better score regarding AF. Both lenses utterly sucks in low light enviroment in comparison to even cheaper DA 50 mm F1.8 which is my now favorite lense, since it is REALIABLE and give me consistent results - but it have the worst score for AF among the three. It just locks fast accuratelly whether 35/2.4 or 70/2.4 will hunt and fail. It hase the worst AF performence of all lenses I ever had.
It is noticably faster than DAL 18-55, but it is re-fining focus a lot with quite some delay in between - so in the end focus procedure takes longer than on DAL 18-55 and it often fails, where 18-55 or 50-200 just locks in the first attempt correctly. This is no problem for taking pictures of monuments, but for moving people it is. DA50/1.8 surprisingly have no issues at all. It just locks with minimal or no corrections. No several AF presses to focus, no frustration.
Do I reccomend this lens:
DA35/2.4AL is fun lense and can give nice results but AF is of type that brought Pentax bad reputation. If your eyes allow accurate AF or you will use it in LV or AF is not your main concern, this is great lens. But for enyone expecting to have AF at least usable in a live event as late night dance, this lens is not for him.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: July, 2017 Location: Tbilisi Posts: 18
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 19, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Price, Bokeh, Colors | | Cons: | Resolution, Unimpressive Photos (No "Character"), Fringing | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 7
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K50
| |
Been a while that I could buy this lens, so this will be a large one.
First I should tell some about me so that you can know how you should read it: I have been using only the manual Takumar 3.5/35, Helios 2/58, and M3.5/28 for a really long while. I was sick of the shots that I missed because of poor focusing, or having to focus every second for even the least important shots. I would love to have a 24-70 (as we all would do, I believe) for the focal length, or 1.4/50 or 1.8/77 for their amazing micro-contrast and real photos, yet I could hardly afford 100 dollars and this is all I could get.
Comparison: Takumar 3.5 vs Pentax 2.4
I have to admit, I love the images that Takumar produces. When you nail the focus, 9/10 times you'll find a wonderful pop of your subject. The colors, the way that it renders shadows, the resolutive power...
It is the best lens that I could have owned so far and except its poor maximum aperture, I could compare it to Summilux 1.4/35 with no hesitation. It is really an amazing piece of glass, maybe one of the very few Japanese glasses that can compare with the "superior German quality" as we call in my country.
This little guy, as its price suggests, is nothing close to that and when I have time, I would prefer Takumar on my camera. Both of the lenses need some PP so I would prefer a 3D pop over a "still image".
Now let's start with this guy...
3D Capability
Little to none. I have been trying to fins some setting in which it can produce those stunning photos, but there is no chance to do that. Some very few photos had this quality in them, yet they were just few exceptions and were not really "popping". This is a huge dealbreaker for me, as it was the reason that I had my Takumar on 9/10 times except when I was to do portraits, and makes me "cold" towards this lens.
Resolution Power
Unlike many "modern" people, I do not do pixel-peeping. It is an utterly unnecessary and, for me, stupid practice. In the best case, we look at our photos at the regular screen size, or a bit bigger (maybe 2000px most?), and that is what almost any of us need (except few who would not use this lens anyway).
I shoow RAW normally, and I am mainly against reducing noise. My Takumar gives me photos at 6400 ISO at K-50, and I can use them in color even with no worries. It has amazing resolution power. This guy though, with its coating and supposedly better optical formula, makes me doubt if I should go up to 1600. I am supposed to be able to use 6400 as well with this, no? Or it should at least compete with Takumar? But it does not.
Does it mean that it produces noisy photos always? Well, for me yeah. Either my eyes are so used to the noise of Takumar, or my copy is bad. Because I do not want to believe that at 1600 ISO this guy produces noticeable and disturbing noise.
Sharpness
The lens is fairly sharp for its price. Half of my photos are "sharp", and the other half are sharp. By "sharp", I mean good enough for an image yet not as it should be for a good photo. So the other half are, well, "cream of the bunch". I yearn for the quality of 1.8/77, absolutely no questions.
Here I should repeat: I look at the frame overall, I do not pixel-peep. So if a frame is sharp, then it looks sharp the way that it is not cutting-edge sharp but it is as sharp as it should be. The more it resembles reality, the better it is. This guy fails me in that sense too. Not that it is bad for the buck, but it is bad for what it should do if Takumar is a rival of it.
Bokeh
Not the best, not the worst. There are times, especially in B&W shots /and comparably closer shots, it looks pretty fine. I do not have much complaints with it.
Colors
Well well, we like Pentax because of its colors. Right?
I tend to warm the colors some (a lot?) so that it gets closer to Pentax colors. I need to increase saturation almost always even after dehazing, and this is a negative thing for me. When I was shooting JPEG though, just dehazing and adjusting the colors some helped most of the time. So it is not bad I believe.
Haze, Flair, Fringing
I hate the fact that I need to dehaze even with a new lens, which makes me wonder if there is any lens with which I can shoot JPEG with twisting the in-camera settings and using SOOC photos.
It is rather good with flair and I never had a problem with except one or two shots over around 500 (or 700 shots).
When full open, the lens suffers from fringing, both green and purple, whenever it can and it goes at f4 or later generally. This is a very weak point of this lens and a disappointment for me.
Focus
Generally good, sometimes front-focusing, sometimes back-focusing. Probably the 2.4 vs 2.8 case makes it problematic. Not bad though. Not bad at all.
Some people here mentioned about the sound of the screwdriver but come on, the camera makes a huge sound while shooting anyway and the screwdriver does not make more noise than that. What's the whim?
It is fast enough on K50, and apparently on K5-ii (and in later models) it is even faster. I did not have problems though. I shoot portraits or still images almost always, so I do not know how it would be with action.
B&W
This lens is not made for shooting B&W. I love to shoot B&W yet this lens forces me to turn to color. Its rendering of shadows is not good enough as I said, yet there is something with its blacks too. There sure is something wrong with it.
As a Result...
I have said bad stuff above but it is because I compared it to one of Pentax's best lenses (and my expectations as a result). But given that I paid 100 dollars overall (including shipment to Georgia, the country in the Caucasus, from the US), it does not do a bad job at all and if I was making money in dollars, given the little amount that I'd have thrown for this lens, I'd even say that this is good. But, again, after using an amazing glass for a long while, it did upset me some.
It produces decent images. You will not regret them. It is definitely better than the kit 18-55, which is not a lens even, and an okay toy to play with, but do not expect wonderful results from it. It will give you fine enough images, but not photographs as Takumar or Helios does. Yeah it does its job but nothing more.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: March, 2017 Posts: 66
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 30, 2018 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp, compact | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-S2
| |
I have it on my camera for 90% of time. It can deliver excellent sharp pictures with nice colours. It was the first prime I bought as new and it was a good investment.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: May, 2015 Posts: 33
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 13, 2018 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: Pentax K-5II
| |
For 150euro this lens is awesome.
It is made from plastic, but a good quality one. It is very light, very small and does an excellent job.
Sharp, great bokeh at 2.8 and very nice colours.
I also own Pentax DA 16-50 f2.8 and even the 35mm is 5 times cheaper, it ca be compared with the 16-50/f2.8 at 35mm focal legh.
I can say is a great lens for holiday when you want a light camera on your shoulder that could take awesome pics.
I have attached some photos.
  | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: December, 2010 Location: Phoenix Arizona Posts: 893
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 24, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $169.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | light weight, compact, sharp | | Cons: | Plastic lens mount | |
I bought this lens as a "walk-around" lens for my K-X. With that body, it makes a very light weight, compact assembly. The image quality is great, I have nothing bad to say about it. Especially for the price1
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: July, 2016 Location: Patrick Co. Virginia Posts: 1,534
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 30, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $125.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharp, reasonably fast, light, accurate, simple bokeh | | Cons: | Not weather sealed. | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-50
| |
For me, "for the money" usually means I can afford to try one. I was given this lens for my birthday and it now stays on my k-50 except for birding and wildlife shots. The "cheap plastic" lens on my "cheap plastic" camera that weighs less than my g1x "compact" makes it a goto for just about everything now.
edit: It does not focus quite to infinity on stars(hits end stop) which is a minor bummer.
[Update a year later]: This lens is still getting much use, even though I now have the 18-135mm ed wr I always wanted. I'll review that one later. I concur with other reviews about it causing focus issues. I say causing because so much of the focusing duty belongs to the camera, but obviously something in the lens is responsible or all lenses would have problems. It's holding up nicely despite bouncing around in a lens bag attached to my grab-n-go pentax onesie(old school) by the clip and cord.
I wish I had gotten some funky color. because it really is terrific on Pentax the Red my k-50.
This is about a 1:1 crop
  | | | | | New Member Registered: April, 2011 Location: Dorset , UK Posts: 6
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 18, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $90.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | price and image quality | | Cons: | none at this price point ! | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K-70
| |
unbelievably cheap lens (Ł60.-) !
AF is noisy on Pentax K-70 but quite fast and accurate.
IQ is great at f5.6 and f8 and it focuses quite close !
Should be in every Pentax bag (-:
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: December, 2013 Posts: 796
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 14, 2018 | Not Recommended | Price: $110.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Light, cheap, sharp | | Cons: | Slow, bad bokeh, no quick shift, plastic, not WR | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 5
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 9
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: KP, K-30
| |
This lens has a good image quality even wide open, but the aperture is too slow for a prime lens. It can't produce a decent bokeh. I've got it as a wider alternative to my DA50, but it doesn't work. While it was good for landscapes or buildings, it wasn't good for street portraits or indoor full body portraits. The separation wasn't enough.
My main problem was that I could produce near the same quality with an F2.8 zoom lens. The Tamron 17-50 for example small enough to give an alternative to this lens.
Here are some examples:
 IMG170616_0001 by Benjámin Czétényi, on Flickr
 IMG170617_0004 by Benjámin Czétényi, on Flickr
 IMG170603_0408 by Benjámin Czétényi, on Flickr
 IMG170603_0374 by Benjámin Czétényi, on Flickr
 IMG170603_0411 by Benjámin Czétényi, on Flickr
 IMG170604_0474 by Benjámin Czétényi, on Flickr
| | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2017 Posts: 1
5 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 29, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $98.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp Fast Cheap | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K3
| |
 Just picked up a used copy for under $100.00 Excellent walk around lens on my K3. It's very sharp and fast. Love the focal length. Might become my new favorite.
Shot taken hand held with K3 Jpeg.
| | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2018 Posts: 8
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 9, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $65.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | contrast, flare resistance, sharpness, price and bokeh | | Cons: | Vignetting wide open, minor CA, sometimes busy bokeh | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: Sony a7
| |
I like this lens a lot on a Sony a7. It is really sharp and contrasty wide open. When stopped down the sharpness is nearly excellent across the frame. For an APS-C lens this is quite remarkable. It vignettes wide open, but the sharpness in the corners isn't that bad.
The bokeh is good but under some circumstances it can be a bit too busy.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: January, 2018 Posts: 47
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 28, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | price, general image quality | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K-1, K-7
| |
I have seen several of these lenses for sale recently with very attractive prices. I picked one at 65 EUR and have seen several other copies at equally low price point. Another deciding factor was that, although a DA series lens, it has been reported as being useful with K-1 at full frame mode as well.
Admittedly, with K-1 in FF, there is some vignetting. I have made no systematic test with see how much or at which f stop. However, my judgement is that this lens is still useful with K-1 for many purposes. I am attaching a f/4.5 image to show some rather obvious vignetting in the image. Still - I have seen some worse examples of vignetting in crop sensor cameras with DA lenses. It is controllable with this lens, if you can avoid situations where you will need to increase the contrast in post processing (as that will bring the vignetting more clearly visible).
With a crop sensor camera, I most recently shot at f/8 and the image quality is superb. Probably it is so even at larger apertures as well. Where I live, it often rains, so this is not going to be my most typical walkaround lens, but clearly this is a very good lens with any of the crop sensor bodies.
 | | | | | Senior Member Registered: September, 2014 Location: Nelson Posts: 266
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 7, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $121.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Price, price and price. | | Cons: | None. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-S2
| |
There's a bit of a cult that's developed around this particular lens. I was sceptical (as I am by nature) until I used it. Colour, contrast and ability to resolve detail are just superb at any price point. As a low light indoors option it's a honey
Handheld @ ISO1600, jpg straight from camera.
 | | |
;)
;)
;)
