| Author: | | Forum Member Registered: September, 2006 Location: Queen creek, az Posts: 81 | | Review Date: May 10, 2007 | Not Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 4 |
| Pros: | cheap, ok stopped down. no ca that I have seen | | Cons: | not sharp wide open, fairly cheap build | |
Inexspensive lense to go on my zx-60. Shows its true colors on digital. Not the best contrast and soft until almost f8.
| | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: August, 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 797 | | Review Date: January 8, 2008 | Not Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 2 |
| Pros: | Small size, light weight, autofocusses quickly, nice focal length indicator, includes aperture ring, convenient 49mm filter size. | | Cons: | Poor resolution, even stopped down. Lacks the contrast and vibrant colour of other SMC lenses. Lack of ribbing on the slim focus ring reduces the usability of the lens for manual focus. | |
I only kept this lens for a few weeks. The lack of sharpness is immediately apparent, even when reviewing photos on the LCD of a DSLR.
Even on a 1.5x crop DSLR, the corners are very soft when wide open. Unfortunately, even the centre of the frame is quite low resolution, so stopping down the lens only improves things a little bit.
There was no noticeable vignetting.
If this lens had performed better optically, it would be a dynamite little daylight street lens because it focuses quickly and is light and stealthy. Unfortunately, the IQ was so disappointing that I never wanted to actually use the lens.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: October, 2007 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 273 | | Review Date: April 15, 2008 | Not Recommended | Price: $15.00
| Rating: 1 |
| Pros: | Light | | Cons: | Soft, vignettes, CA | |
It's a piece of crap. You can see how soft it is even in the viewfinder. Don't buy this lens.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: October, 2006 Location: NJ USA Posts: 13,072 | | Review Date: July 23, 2008 | Recommended
| Rating: 2 |
| Pros: | small and light... free? | | Cons: | poor contrast, resolution, vignettes on 35mm | |
The problem with this lens is that it isn't so horrible as to be good (in a Holga / Lensbaby way). On my ZX-10 it vignettes noticeably, gets an antique looking loss of resolution at the edges, and isn't too sharp in the middle either. Actually, that is its one application: source material for fake vintage photography.
On digital the worst of the vignetting is avoided, but it still isn't much to see.
And the aperture is painfully slow.
On the positive side, it's light and small and takes 49mm filters. Which makes it a poor paperweight.
| | | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2008 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,165 | | Review Date: July 26, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $6.50
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Good color rendition, light weight, inexpensive | | Cons: | Slow aperture, not wide angle | |
I had read these reviews and almost didn't buy this lens even though it was under $10. I am so glad I did! I find it reasonably sharp even wide open, maybe I got a better copy than the other posters. I have taken some lovely pictures with it. The auto-focus works well, it is compact, and it will focus close enough to get flowers to fill the field. It's too slow to use indoors unless with a flash, which I haven't tried, but it is great for hanging in the backyard with the kids trying to get some shots without disturbing them at play. It's certainly not a limited lens, but decent enough for everyday use. I really like how color comes out with this lens, less bright than with DA series lenses but still very intense. For a reasonable price I would definitely recommend picking one of these up.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: November, 2008 Location: North Carolina , USA Posts: 2,271 | | Review Date: May 31, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $15.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Price , reasonably sharp, good color | | Cons: | CA in backlit situations, | |
I have only used this lens on digital bodies and have not had a vignetting problem. Did experience CA in a backlit shot through the woods with snow. This lens came on a used camera which I bought to get another lens. I figured why not at least try it and was pleasantly suprised especially after reading the reveiws here. This has become my "beach lens" , I'm satisfied with the IQ if I'm not looking for that "special shot" and I don't cry if it's windy and a spec of sand hits it.
Would I suggest that everybody go buy one NO, but if one comes your way and you need a knock around lens try it you might like it.
In short I think this lens has been seriously under rated and I prefer it to quite a few lenses that cost me more and have since been sold .
| | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2009 Location: Norfolk, England Posts: 19 | | Review Date: October 25, 2009 | Not Recommended | Price: $10.00
| Rating: 2 |
| Pros: | cheap | | Cons: | very soft, all over | |
I thought I had a damaged lens, fogged up or similar, then I read these reviews ! It's an AWFUL lens !!  | | | | | Junior Member Registered: June, 2010 Posts: 47
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 13, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | No CA, sharp at the right aperture, lightweight | | Cons: | You need to know the right aperture/focal length combo to get the sharpest picture | |
First of all, I think it would be helpful to add a field in the lens review for what camera you are using the lens with, this can make a big difference.
I am using this with the k10d for my review, maybe this lens sucks with a 35mm, but I find it to be surprisingly good. I also mainly shoot landscape and from a tripod, I think this makes a difference too.
I took this thing out and did some testing on it. I have found that each focal length has the right aperture for the sharpest image (not overall, just what you are focusing on). Also, there is virtually no CA on this lens with the k10d even wide open which is extremely uncommon, especially for a lens made for full frame. I have CA issues with just about every other full frame lens I own, because the smaller sensor in essence magnifies any CA issues. Again, this may just be an optimal compatibility thing with the k10d.
I found at 35mm (about 50mm equiv. on a 35mm camera) it is reasonably sharp at f/4 and produces really nice blurring towards the edges. Some list this as a downfall, but this is what you typically want wide open, and would be great for portraits. We dont want everything in the photo to be sharp in a lot of cases, that is the beauty of aperture. This being said, a wide open aperture and just about any other focal length does in fact produce an unsharp image, even in the center. But since I rarely use a wide open aperture, this is not an issue for me, personally.
Here is what I found as far as best aperture/focal length combos for getting the sharpest image on what you are focusing on. Of course since these are stopped down and it is not a very fast lens, you will need a tripod in many situations.
35mm = f9
50mm = f11
70mm = f18-20
Another pro, the weight... yes, it is not as strong of build as something heavier, but if you are careful with your lenses, this shouldnt be a huge issue.
If having a fast lens and sharp lens to the corners on wide open apertures is what you want, this lens is not for you. If you use a tripod and shoot landscape, this may very well be the lens for you. Keep in mind, my rating also corresponds with the value for the price. If this lens cost me 300.00, you better believe it would not get a 7. Since I typically use the sharpest f/stops (listed above) it is not very important to me to use the whole gamut of f/stops. I also gave it an 8 to boost up the average rating which in my opinion is too low. Also, I own the Pentax-f 35-70mm. That one is a better lens, so if you can find one of those for cheap, pick up that one vs this one. That one also has macro capability.
| | | | | | | | Review Date: July 19, 2010 | Not Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 4 |
| Pros: | Small | | Cons: | Not sharp, need to be severely stepped down | |
Not worth the bother and this is relatively similar to the base kit 18-55 in terms of quality except you loose the wide angle.
| | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2010 Location: North Carolina Posts: 7 | | Review Date: August 12, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $17.00
| Rating: 8 |
|
Recently picked up this lens for a "song ", used it on my K10D to take snapshots at my wife's familly reunion. The pics had good color and were clear ... not bad for a $17 knock about. I,ve wasted more money on other equipment that I wasn't half as satisfied with !
| | | | | | | | Review Date: September 4, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Very sharp, resistant to flare. | | Cons: | Not very robust, limited zoom range for digital. | |
My own example of this lens gave high contrast sharp pictures on film, and what also really pleased me was that I could take sunset pictures without those horrible aperture shaped bright blobs appearing in the picture (due to internal reflections off the glass) and without loads of flare. The SMC coating really does the business.
In that respect it was almost as good as a prime lens, and far better than most wider ranging zooms with more glass elements.
However, it feels a bit delicate and didn't inspire me with confidence when out mountaineering. The older 35-70 lenses, both manual and autofocus, feel much better made, although I don't reckon they are any sharper.
When I went digital it didn't really work as a back-up lens since 35mm isn't wideangle on digital, so I sold it on and rely on the 28-70 f4 zoom as my back up now (similar image quality but more useful range).
| | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2010 Location: Bechout Posts: 2 | | Review Date: November 1, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 5 |
|
I bought this lens together with a MZ camera.
The first results were suprising. A nice soft image, perfect for people.
I would not recommend this lens if you are looking for crisp, sharp results.
I used the lens withouth a shade, resulting in a flair. A shade is recommendable.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: August, 2010 Location: Winnipeg MB Posts: 350 | | Review Date: January 8, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $9.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Very good IQ, no creep on zoom and focus, flare control, metal mount. | | Cons: | none | |
I use this lens on MZ-5N and it consistently gives me good quality pictures. I shoot most of the time in 50-60mm focal length; the sharpness is almost as good as FA43 with better DOF. This is an under-rated good lens. The macro works much better than F35-70mm lens.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,223
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 31, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $35.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Quick focus, light, in the 35-80 mm range, sharp and neat colors, easy to carry around, price, good for portraits, and lanscapes | | Cons: | None so far (I am not sure if the previous reviewers were talking about this lens) | |
    
I bought this lens and ebay and did not use for six months because the price was so low that I thought was a piece of crap. Plus the reviews of certain members did not help. However, during a rainy day, when I did not want to take my nice lenses out, I took this one, and voila!! eureka. I found out that this is a wonderful lens, easy to carry around, light, quick focus, sharp, etc. I am using it on a Kx dslr. Judge for yourself, see the photos, those were taken in a rainy day without sun, or minimum sun through the clouds. One image is worth 1,000 words, here are few thousand words. I would like everyone to back their comments with images.    
You should be able to see larger versions of these photos in my albums
Here are some more photos taken with this wonderful lens:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54927073@N04/5305408686/lightbox/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54927073@N04/5305408786/lightbox/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54927073@N04/5304803919/in/photostream/ | | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2009 Location: CA Posts: 3 | | Review Date: February 12, 2011 | Not Recommended
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | Inexpensive, light | | Cons: | Plastic, soft, vigneting | |
Got it as a part of a kit in 1998. Very soft up to F8, shows some vigneting. Nice results in bright light, however. Don't use it any more.
| | |
;)
;)
