| Author: | | Forum Member Registered: February, 2020 Posts: 88
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 3, 2022 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | lightweight, nice colours and reasonably sharp | | Cons: | Nothing worth mentioning really | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K30, K70
| |
I really like this lens. Its small, light and covers the range for most walkabout uses.
Whats more the colours are lovely (I tend to slightly underexpose anyway to sqeeze the most colour from a camera) and the autofocus is very fast and nearly always accurate.
I have its 80-200mm and 28-80mm siblings and this is the best in my humble opinion.
At the moment these can be found for less then £20 on ebay and if you got a copy that was as good as mine you should be delighted.
I can never remember which picture was taken with which lens or camera so today I popped out and took the attached pictures with this lens and a K30.
   | | | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: October, 2019 Posts: 120 | | Review Date: March 13, 2022 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | lightweight, free, decent bokeh | | Cons: | lens flare, Aberrations, slow | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 5
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K70
| |
I got the lens for free from my sister, so complaints won't be from me
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: June, 2021 Location: United States Posts: 48
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 28, 2021 | Recommended
| Rating: N/A |
|
I bought this lens to take to the beach and other harsh environments when I did not want to take more expensive lenses.
I am very satisfied with the sharpness and colors of the photos it produces. The lens focuses quickly and accurately and is capable of producing nice clear nice photos. I am not a professional photographer, but I have used many lenses over the decades and I am very satisfied with this lens. I have read some negative reviews of this lens and I may have purchased a better than average example, but for whatever the reason, I am pleased with the lens and the photos it produces.
attachd are a few test photos I shot today with the lens.    | | | | | Senior Member Registered: May, 2021 Posts: 168
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 2, 2021 | Recommended | Price: $29.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Lightweight, inexpensive, good zoom range with APS-C camera | | Cons: | Slightly soft image at 35mm end and has some aberrations (easily correctable) | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 9
Camera Used: K10D
| |
This is a nice lens to be used as a general walk-around lens. I bought it to replace an SMC-DA 18-55 AL II kit lens that had become increasingly de-centred.
The lens is lightweight and has fairly good image quality for its weight and price. Its colour rendition is good, giving images with vivid colours. With an APS-C camera the lens loses its wide-angle view, but its focal range is still very useful. On the other hand, when mounted to a crop-sensor camera, the lens' effective focal length is increased into a medium telephoto lens at the 80mm end.
At the 35mm end the images tend to end up a bit soft. The sharpness increases towards the 80mm end. The wide end also has a little bit of barrel distortion, which may be visible at certain images of buildings or other scenes that have long, straight lines across the frame. There's also some chromatic aberration in high-contrast areas, as well. However, I've found these flaws are fairly easy to correct during post-processing. One disadvantage of this lens is that the front of the lens rotates as the lens is focusing. If the lens is used with a polarizing filter, the user must remember to always focus the lens first and then adjust the polarizing filter.
Edit 04/2022: Added a couple of pictures taken with this lens. I like it a lot and I've found it to be a nice walk-around lens.
 Buildings in evening light by Arttu Räsänen, on Flickr
 Reflection by Arttu Räsänen, on Flickr
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2020 Location: Regno delle Due Sicilie Posts: 4
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 15, 2021 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 9
Camera Used: k-70
| |
 | | | | | Senior Member Registered: April, 2012 Location: Endeavour Hills, Victoria, Australia Posts: 210
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 17, 2019 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, great contrast, great colour | | Cons: | Not quite wide enough for full frame | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-1
| |
The lens that nobody loves! Try it on a K-1 and I think you may be very pleased. This was shot in Hosier's Lane, Melbourne Australia. K-1 coupled with the 35-80. I have nick-named this the "Canon lens" as the images remind me of what I perceive a Canon DSLR can produce. Hmm, maybe that will not endear me to this group!
 | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: April, 2009 Location: Athens, Greece Posts: 187
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 25, 2019 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharpness | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 1
Value: 6
Camera Used: K20D
| |
This is always my forgotten lens that I remember when one of my other lenses breaks. I've had it since 1995 when I got it as a kit lens with the PZ20. It's old and grumpy with a stiff zoom ring that jams but it takes some incredibly sharp photos.
I remembered it again while looking through the lens reviews and seeing all the complaints about sharpness. So I'll post a few that I took when I was using it on my K20.
Uneditied except for exposure
 [
This was shot at ISO 1250 53mm f4.5
While some people have had bad experiences with the lens, as it is dirt cheap, it may well surprise you.
| | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2016 Location: Arkansas Posts: 13 | | Review Date: February 25, 2019 | Not Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 2 |
| Pros: | range on FF, it's a lens, decent construction | | Cons: | slow as in glass and AF | | Sharpness: 1
Aberrations: 3
Bokeh: 4
Autofocus: 2
Handling: 6
Value: 2
Camera Used: K-1
| |
I've had this lens for a little while but didn't use it much on my k20, though it was satisfactory. Bought it mainly for the price in anticipation of the day I would get a K1 and would need a kit lens to get by until I could afford a better lens for the superb K1. Well I tried it out this weekend on my K1 and I was shocked at how bad the pictures were. They were so bad I thought I had the setting of the camera goofed up! No contrast, no sharpness, no saturation, slow AF, imprecise AF at times - other than that it was fine... It was so bad the first thing I did on returning home from the trip using it, was to go to the store and order a lens that befits the K1.
I had thought older film lenses would be just fine, and that all the DA, DFA, DG, DC, etc. lens manufacturers were dishing out were just to get us to buy more lenses. This may be the case with some of the limiteds and * lenses, but not with the average film era lenses - or at least not this one. Hopefully my K1 will forgive me for having ever put this lens on it.
BTW, my DA 35L 2.4 works great on the K1 as does my DA 70 LTD with some limitations. Now I am eagerly awaiting my D FA 28-105. I chose it over the D FA f2.8 24-70 since most people suggest the sharpness, etc. is on par for the most part and I have the 35 for indoors and 70 and a nice 105 for portraits already.
 | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2010 Location: Southern England Posts: 594
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 11, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Sharp at the long end, lightweight, cheap | | Cons: | Soft at the wide end | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 8
Camera Used: K-50
| |
Just to sum up:
Goes from pretty soft at the 35mm end, getting sharper as you move up to the 80mm end, at which it's quite sharp.
Colours and contrast are OK.
A little flimsy feeling, but light and fast-focusing.
I've tried a couple of the optically identical (?) FA35-80 too, and all are very similar (though one is slightly decentred).
Would recommend on the proviso that it's cheap, and that you don't mind that it's distinctly soft at the wide end.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: May, 2016 Location: South Florida Posts: 36
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 23, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Great value, decently sharp stopped down, good color rendition, light weight. | | Cons: | Front element rotates with focus, soft in corners, build quality plasticky. | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-1
| |
For $20 this is a fantastic bargain. When I ordered my first digital Pentax, the K-1, I was not sure if it would be a keeper and I wanted an inexpensive lens to learn on. The K-1 proved to be much to my liking and the 35-80 a pleasant surprise! I've subsequently bought several other lenses but still find my $20 lens on the camera more often than not. Sure I'd probably prefer a 24-90, but until I can find a decent one, I'm happy to use the F 35-80
   | | | | | Senior Member Registered: May, 2009 Location: Delaware Posts: 177
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 20, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $15.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharpness throughout range, great color rendition | | Cons: | Plastic build, although does have a metal lens mount. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K200D, K50
| |
I picked this lens up from a $15 flea market SF1 and initially tried it out on a K200D with good but not spectacular results. More recently, I have used it on a K50 with really good results and conclude that the autofocus on the K50 is more accurate.
This lens delivers surprisingly sharp, contrasty images on the K50 with excellent color rendition and smooth, pleasing bokeh. Autofocus is fast and accurate, although it does hunt in very dim light. On a crop sensor it is the equivalent to a 50-120 lens. It has a plastic build and is not the best lens for manual focus. On the other hand, it is quite light. It's a good lens for people and portraits, one of the hidden gems in the Pentax legacy lens lineup.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2014 Posts: 1,018
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 19, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $29.99
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Excellent color rendition and sharpness. | | Cons: | Overpowered by bright light, so stop it down and use a hood. | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K-3II
| |
An incredible sleeper lens. At a cost of less than $30, it's extremely sharp and has great color rendering. It is remarkably lightweight, and accepts 49mm screwthreaded accessories such as hoods or filters. This lens is easily on par with an 18-55 AL in terms of rendering/color/af speed. The fine focus ring is a little light, but that makes it really quick to adjust. The lens also handles flare rather well. Works great with pixel shift as well.
The biggest detractor to this lens is that harsh light will wash out the rendering, so it needs to be stopped down a good bit. In high contrast images (bird on branch against cloudy sky is an example) you do get some purple/magenta fringe, but that's easily managed.
Overall the low rating this lens has been saddled with should be considered a bit inaccurate. If I were to assign a hard, personal score to the lens, I'd give it a 7.85/10. It is most certainly worth the money if you get a decent copy.
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: October, 2012 Location: Medina, OH Posts: 7,110
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 1, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $5.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Bargain price, reasonable sharpness | | Cons: | Subject to flare, noisy, flimsy construction | |
I was pleasantly surprised in using this lens that I thought I was supposed to hate. Perhaps my expectations were so low that anything good about it would have impressed me. I find that the lens is capable of making very good images, plenty good enough for everyday, non-professional use--kid photos, party gatherings, documentation of events, that sort of thing. I am not comparing it to my 31, 43, and 77 limited lenses, of course, or even to better quality zoom lenses. Value is excellent as I only paid a computed $5.00 when I received the lens mounted on a Pentax P-3 film camera for which I paid only $15.00--so $5 for the lens and $10 for the camera. Value is excellent and it makes a good camera cover even if you do not use it to take photos!
| | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2015 Posts: 7 | | Review Date: September 10, 2015 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Passable image quality, superb colours, light and compact, inexpensive | | Cons: | Could have a wider f-stop, could be better built and weather sealed (it's not!) | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 7
Camera Used: Pentax K-50
| |
I'll just start by saying this review is based on my initial impressions of this lens, garnered through about three hours of shooting time with it mounted on a K-50 body. The reviews posted so far have been a mixed bag, with some users obviously having received a good copy of the lens, while others seemingly discount it without giving photos showing its perceived shortcomings. From the outset I'll make it clear that my copy seems to fall into the former category and that I'm generally pleased with its optical performance.
When I got it, I really didn't know anything about this lens aside from it was an inexpensive mdel from the early 1990s. In fact, I was told by the dealer that it was strictly manual focus and I was really quite surprised to find it has a decent auto-focus (AF) mechanism as part of the package. But I needed a next-to-nothing zoom that would give me a bit of reach with a high-resolution APS-C sensor, and this one did fit the bill, AF or not. It turned out all of my shots were taken using AF, since I wear glasses which makes focusing manually a chore. I found the AF to be accurate and fast in the conditions it was tested (if not a bit noisy).
But my surprise did not end with my discovery that this lens does have AF; after taking a few pictures I was happy with its optical resolution and even more taken by the spectacular colours it produces in my photos (I'd say it looks just like slide film to me, but better).
I consider my lens to be optically sound. Mechanically, it is alright when you consider it is of lightweight and plastiky construction (do not abuse this lens!). I would certainly recommend it anyone looking for a small zoom to carry around and get some good pictures with. Just keep in mind its focal range: 35-80mm doesn't give you much in the way of field of view, so I think it's best suited when you want to more-or-less isolate your subject(s), and not for things like wide-open landscapes.
Here are some sample photos I took with my Pentax K-50 mounted with the SMC Pentax-F 35-80mm f4.5-5.6 lens (all are purely out of camera JPEG images, as taken, with no edits):
https://500px.com/photo/121156341/ducks-by-ex-camera?from=user_library
https://500px.com/photo/121161007/duck-riparian-landscape-by-ex-camera?from=user_library
https://500px.com/photo/121159253/duckling-1-by-ex-camera?from=user_library
https://500px.com/photo/121160661/duckling-3-by-ex-camera?from=user_library
https://500px.com/photo/121198383/pecking-by-ex-camera?from=user_library
https://500px.com/photo/121164897/hut-roof-by-ex-camera?from=user_library | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2012 Posts: 17
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 24, 2015 | Not Recommended | Price: $7.00
| Rating: 2 |
| Pros: | Nice colours | | Cons: | My copy isn't sharp compared with my other lenses at any aperture, | | Sharpness: 1
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 1
Handling: 6
Value: 6
Camera Used: Samsung GX-20
| |
This came in a bundle with an MZ-50 and an F 100-300 f4.5-5.6. Cosmetically all looked super. I took them outside to check that they worked. The F 100-300 annoyingly doesn't autofocus accurately enough, but the F 35-80 f4-5.6 is just awful. A shot down the garden 35mm f11, and I struggled to make out the bricks in the chimney stacks of the houses behind. So I set up a comparison between this, the very similar FA 35-80 f4-5.6, and various other autofocus lenses that I own. I tried autofocus, manual focus, live view, enabling and disabling Image Stabilisation, and varying the aperture up to f8. Nothing made much difference. The F 35-80 f4-5.6 gave the worst results of any of the lenses tried.
The FA 35-80mm f4-5.6 was better.
All the others were MUCH better in terms of detail captured and absence of aberrations; the other F's, the DA 18-55's, the Powerzooms, the FAJ 28-80, the other FA's ... the list goes on.
This F 35-80mm f4-5.6 is the worst-performing Pentax lens I have ever owned. I have looked closely at my copy for subtle signs of damage, and can see none. I'm sure that the reviewers who have found their copies of this lens to be sharp cannot have imagined it, but equally neither have I, nor presumably have the other reviewers who have panned it. I can't recommend it, and I'm in no hurry to buy another on the off-chance that it will be O.K..
| | |
;)
;)
