| Author: | | New Member Registered: October, 2022 Location: Gosford, NSW Posts: 8
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 29, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | light weight, good feel, easy to use, useful zoom range | | Cons: | IQ not great at wide open with zoom at less than 50mm, no macro | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: K70
| |
I bought this almost pristine copy for my K70 after being pleasantly surprised by its sibling FA 35-80 I recently acquired. The ricoh web site https://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/lens/k/standard/smcpentax-fa28-105 shows this lens as being 'drip proof' , which could be a bonus, except it also mentions that this lens has quick-shift which it clearly does not, so I should probably take that 'drip proof' with a grain of salt.
My non-expert testing involves going to my local children's playground that has a grainy soft-fall surface, and I can see what grains (and stray leaves) are in focus at various aperture and zoom settings. By sitting in the same location and focusing on the same spot on a particular piece of play equipment I can then later compare against shots taken on other lenses.
I was hoping that this lens might provide slightly more zoom range than the FA35-80mm for not much increase in weight.
However, at open aperture with zoom ranges between 28 and 50mm, it is quite soft at the edges. On full-frame I can only imagine it would be far worse. Stopped down ( to f11, say) it is quite good throughout the zoom range on my K70.. Open from 60mm to 105mm it is also quite good.
Autofocus is swift and fairly quiet. handling is good; it is fairly light and feels robust with its metal mount and the controls work as they should. My copy does not have any issues with its aperture ring connection to the body. There is no macro feature, although close focusing at max zoom gives a slightly larger image than the sibling FA35-80mm.
For my purposes, I will go back to the FA35-80mm. But I would recommend this as a fairly cheap zoom for walkaround shooting.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2019 Posts: 6 | | Review Date: November 17, 2022 | Recommended | Price: $15.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Overall design and build quality; sharpness; colour rendition | | Cons: | With copy #2: none. With copy #1: "A" setting? Somewhat low overall contrast? | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-3; K-5
| |
SMC Pentax FA 28-105mm F4-5.6 [IF] on Pentax K-3, full auto
2nd UPDATE Wednesday 06 Sept 2023:
I've been using this excellent lens on my K-3 exclusively since the last update. More as testing and exploration of capabilities and limitations, during that intervening time I've captured perhaps 800 images mainly in the close proximity category of the very few bumblebees we've had here on the hillside this Summer, plus some wasps and butterflies as well in unusually low numbers (images to come). Also some landscapes when they have been visible -- the ff smoke has been terrible throughout, not only interfering with visuals but respiration!. I've managed a few "texture" items such as wild berries, dying leaves, early morning dew, and so on (again, images to come).
About the 2nd copy of this lens: I'm very happy with this acquisition for all the good reasons that appear in the two previous reviews (below). It's turning out to be such a useful and good quality lens in all respects that now it's moved to the "top of the heap" in terms of daily use. I especially like the colour rendition, sharpness, AF, and ease of use. Although not in the past month, I still make good use of my Tamron 18-200 and Tamron 28-300 which I also like very much, but for slightly different (and in some cases, vastly different) purposes and reasons.
For the time being this Summer I haven't had the time to use dedicated macros or do a great deal other experimentation. Perhaps time and opportunities will open up a bit more later in the Fall and in the Winter. We can hope.
As far as a simple, light, very high quality (physically and optically) lens goes, this SMC Pentax FA 28-105mm F4-5.6 [IF] is my "choice de jure" right now. Highly recommended.
I mention colour rendition above, but the sample image I've provided is a B&W version mainly in honour of Ansel Adams who has provided me with decades of inspiration. Also in recognition of the fact that yesterday a person could actually see the mountains for a change.
Onwards / cheers / Blueleezard
1st UPDATE Thursday 11 Aug 2023:
You can read (below) my first rather lengthy review of my 1st copy of this SMC Pentax FA 28-105 F3.2-4.5 AL [IF]. Now I have bought a 2nd copy of this lens through eBay. Reason #1: cheap. Reason #2: cheap. Reason #3: advertised as "near mint" (how many times have we seen these words? But the seller had a 100% rating ...) ... Reason #4: I liked the 1st copy in many ways but was troubled by the observed "problem" with contrast--scare quotes because I'm not really sure it was a "problem" but it sure wasn't a "feature".
This wasn't overwhelming but seemingly always present, and I could not see (with very close examination) or determine a cause. This contrast "problem" (only with the 1st copy) was and still is unlike any of my other lenses of which I have many in the livery, including some decades-old, all metal-and-glass, fully manual classics which still work perfectly and are as clear as the proverbial bell. Maybe it's just an idiosyncratic expression of that bug-bear known as "haze"? I don't know ...
Anyway, copy #2 arrived and after a few hundred image captures on the K-3 -- outdoor / in-the-field testing with lots of "macro environment" and intentional weird lighting challenges (such as shooting into the Sun, also very strong backlight, etc. etc.) -- I find that the 2nd copy has all the good features of the 1st copy as noted (see below), AND I am very happy to report that the rather unsettling contrast "problem" seen with the 1st copy just does not exist with the 2nd copy. No signs whatsoever.
The seller's words were accurate. This copy #2 really and truly is "near mint" -- in superb condition and optically pristine. Zero on the complaint or "questionable" fronts.
Luck of the draw I suppose. I'm very glad this 2nd copy is now finding its way into being used a lot. I really appreciate the "perfect" size, heft, bulld quality, convenience, full camera (K-3, K-5) complementarity, very high level of ease-of-use, responsiveness, and in particular the (what I think is) amazing sharpness of this lens, especially in "closest focus possible" situations. AF is superb. This 2nd copy outperforms my beautiful A-series manual 50mm f/1.7 which (aside from dedicated macros) has already done very well in every respect regarding images cropped to the max.
More experimentation will continue. I am liking this SMC Pentax FA 28-105 F3.2-4.5 AL [IF] very much -- such a pleasant surprise.
Best wishes to all / cheers / BlueLeezard
--- ORIGINAL REVIEW BELOW THIS LINE ---
Dear all:
I'd read the reviews of the this SMC Pentax FA 28-105 F3.2-4.5 AL [IF], and -- depending on what seemed to be the individual copy -- this lens was reported to be optically better than expected (especially with colour rendition), but had some limitations depending on chosen focal length.
It was also seen to be operationally reliable and reasonably well-built. Negative comments were few and seemed almost idiosyncratic. Not having a "designed-in" macro wasn't a problem for me -- user photos showed it could still get in reasonably close to a small subject, especially with good cropping. And, with plenty of other lenses already on hand, even more "real macro" wasn't essential for me. But then, I wasn't sure about how some problems as reported seemed to appear with one camera, but not with another. That seemed puzzling.
My overall impression prior to purchase was: this is kind of a "ho-hum" lens that performs reasonably well overall, can provide pretty good results in many circumstances, but perhaps also cause some disappointment in others. Plus, 28-105mm is not a very wide zoom range, so it has relatively limited utility nowadays. Personally, I prefer to have at least 18mm at the wide end. Plus, I had to admit I really didn't need yet another lens, either.
Just about everything caused me to retain the view that this was a "walk-away" lens, not something that would join my "daily walk-around" lens selection. It seems to perhaps be almost a middle-of-the-road curiosity, something to read about with mild interest from time to time.
But, out of the blue, an unbelievably great deal from Japan showed up on eBay. This became an easy decision -- no bullet to bite here. I'd bring it into the family, try it out under different circumstances and in different conditions, and learn from the experience. All good.
The lens arrived in exceptionally clean condition showing no damage or wear. The objective lens was perfect. The outer edge of a small, faint, partial fingerprint on the rear lens element was easily removed with proper lens cleaner. A complete desktop inspection with magnifying glass and appropriate point-source lights revealed no fungus, haze, separation, residues of any kind, and no notable internal dust. All component extensions and rotations functioned quietly, smoothly and perfectly. The "handshakes" between the lens and my K-5 and K-3 cameras revealed no immediate control or connection problems. Again, all good.
Now, after four or five days and many hours each day of literal "walking around" in early Winter outdoor / low Sun angle / snow glare conditions -- alternatively hooked up to both my K-5 and my K-3 -- following below are my comments for this SMC Pentax FA 28-105 F3.2-4.5 AL [IF]:
LIKES (stuff that causes me to be more than pleased with this lens)
-- high level of build quality, good weight + "heft", perfect size, great placement of controls + ease of use
-- hood and both original caps remove, install, secure and function perfectly (no failures; not at all "fiddly")
-- even in cold weather, AF is very fast, quiet + surprisingly accurate at all focal lengths (no "hunting" of note)
-- even in cold weather, zoom + MF are firm, neither tight nor loose, appear "naturally damped", minimal zoom creep
-- centre + edge-to-edge image sharpness at all extremes + mid-ranges appears very good to excellent
-- very little lens flare or notable CA when shooting into challenging Sun, highlights, or contrasty subjects
HO-HUM (stuff I didn't know about -- not bothersome; just need to accept and get used to it)
-- bokeh is OK, but seems less interesting / impactful than what I see in many of my other lenses
DISLIKES (stuff that causes me to wonder about or be potentially dissatisfied with this lens)
-- "A" aperture setting doesn't establish 100% connection unless lens is lightly "rocked" back and forth a few times
-- highly subjective, but overall image contrast seems very slightly compromised in all shooting circumstances
SUMMARY
This is not a particularly new lens in terms of design or production. However, just through dumb luck, it's "new to me" -- and this particular copy is in excellent condition overall. I should point out that my base of comparison ranges all the way from very good single focus "classic" Pentax lenses, now decades old, to a few excellent "modern" Pentax (and other) glass.
I would be the first to admit that some of what I like about this SMC Pentax FA 28-105 F3.2-4.5 AL [IF] is on account of personal taste and not just technical performance of the product. However, as I use it more and more, I am beginning to think that the good things about this lens could usefully guide overall lens design and manufacture across the board, for all brands -- in particular: how the design in this instance has come together so well with regard to materials, workmanship, fit and finish, apparent durability, reliability and functionality, simplicity and ease of use. I am thinking here mainly about how any lens "package" could be generally improved in these areas.
It may sound weird (like dreaming about that impossible perfect lens?), but it has crossed my mind that I'd probably far better like and even make better use of a few examples of my exceptional modern glass (already featuring wider zoom ranges and 1:1 macro capability) if these "packages" were somehow transformed so as to combine their exceptional capabilities with the very good “usability” features of the this SMC Pentax FA 28-105 F3.2-4.5 AL [IF].
It's not like I am wishing that examples from my already great glass could somehow be shoehorned into the "externalities" of the SMC Pentax FA 28-105 F3.2-4.5 AL [IF], or that the "personality" of this particular Pentax lens ought to somehow be "imported" into the personalities of other lenses. No. I am thinking more that the inherent design features and manufactured product characteristics of this particular Pentax lens would likely enhance the overall functionality, usability, durability and ease of use of many other lenses.
I'll keep my eye on the apparent and very minor "low contrast" of this particular copy of this lens. It's not clear to me (please accept the terrible pun) what, if anything, might be generating this observed condition.
Best wishes to all / cheers / BlueLeezard
| | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2020 Location: Evansville, IN Posts: 17 | | Review Date: June 4, 2022 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | price, light weight, vibrant color | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: K-1
| |
As the reviewer below mentioned, this is a good travel lens for casual landscape, portrait and general photography / family use. It will vignette (see photo) and it's not highly sharp even stopped down, but photos all come out nice enough especially outdoors, or indoors with flash. For those who usually prefer/own only prime lenses but want something versatile for travel, this lens works out well - available on the internet markets often enough, at a fraction of the price of the recent D-FA 28-105, and at about half the weight. Autofocus works just fine for me - I had no problems with that whatsoever on the K-1. Polarizer can be used easily if desired.
 | | | | | Senior Member Registered: October, 2018 Location: Paris Posts: 215
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 20, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | compact, versatile range | | Cons: | optical quality in some situations | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 5
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: K1
| |
This lens is really far from perfect but i like it.
Let's begin with what's wrong :
- Borders can be really soft especially at long end
- Chromatic aberrations
- Important vignetting.
So why still I use and like this lens ?
- This is a perfect zoom for travels : compact and versatile. I liked my tamron 28-75, I like even more my HD D FA 24-70, but they take a lot of place in a luggage ! What I gain, i use it to take some primes. This zoom is a lot lighter and offer a significantly longer max focal lenght.
- The colors here have really something. Forgot pixel peeping and look and the global result : this lens produce very bright images, and I still am surprised each time I use it.
- It's not a constant F/2.8 lens but F/3.2-4.5 is very usable without pushing the ISO too high when you lack some light, and you can even produce some bokeh
One picture is better than words : this one by nightime during a trip in Japan, with bokeh (at 60mm) and vivid colors in the background
So this is not the best lens you'll ever use, but you can rely on it for what it is good at : traveling, colorful pictures and even low light situations.
| | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: April, 2007 Location: Toronto/Victoria Posts: 460
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 4, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $125.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Surprisingly sharp, great value, great IQ | | Cons: | Build quality could be better, screwdrive AF, CA | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-1
| |
I had a mediocre silver copy of this lens from 2005 on my *ist DS. I repurchased a black one used from The Camera Store for C$180 for my K-1 in 2017 and for the price it blew my mind.
It is a very compact lens for its range and speed (58mm filters). The IQ is excellent. Sharpness is surprisingly good all the way to the corners and the most noticeable weakness is a fair bit of red/blue CA. However, I'm happy to use it as a travel lens and would say its sharpness is better than my FA24-90 at the expense of slightly less versatile zoom range. They both have similar IQ overall including the CA.
The colours are also very good, and I've noticed that many ghostless SMC lenses share a similar trait that friends have historically referred to as "clean laundry".
The screwdrive AF is fine, but I've been spoiled by SDM/DC lenses. It also lacks WR/AW of course.
If you get a good copy and don't mind losing the modern functional features of the DFA28-105, this is a very good lens even for more than what I paid for it.
| | | | | Digitiser of Film Registered: March, 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,674
6 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 17, 2018 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Film-era rendering, good contrast and colour, nice bokeh | | Cons: | AF hunting | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 7
Value: 7
Camera Used: Pentax K-3
| |
I picked up my copy (in black) as part of a very inexpensive job lot from a local seller, and it came with the original hood.
It's compact, light and reasonably solid, although it doesn't feel as robust as the FA primes.
Optically, it's decent on APS-C. Colours and contrast are nice, and there's plenty of detail in the centre when stopped down just a little. Rendering is unusually decent given the class of lens. Out of focus highlights have a slight ring around them, which can often suggest bokeh will be rather "busy", but that's not the case here. At maximum aperture, out of focus highlights are circular, but become progressively more hexagonal as the diaphragm is closed down - yet they're never harsh or angular, suggesting that the blades are at least partially rounded.
Wide open, it's a little soft and displays "blooming" around bright edges. There's also some blue fringing in slightly out of focus bright edges, due to longitudinal chromatic aberration, and it's especially noticeable at longer focal lengths. Stopping down quickly reduces the extent of both effects, as you'd expect.
From 28 to approximately 70mm, the lens is actually usable in the centre wide open, but benefits significantly from being closed down one or two thirds of a stop to increase detail and reduce the effects of CA. Above 70mm, it really needs to be closed down by a minimum of one third of a stop for acceptable results, and two thirds of a stop for good results. Casual testing suggests it's at its sharpest in the centre around f/8 at all focal lengths, which is no surprise. For decent edge sharpness on APS-C at any focal length, expect to use f/8 and narrower.
The Achilles Heel of this lens is AF at longer focal lengths (especially the longest). On older bodies such as the K10D it will often fail to achieve focus, but even on my K-3 it requires a clear and contrasty target, especially in less than ideal light. As a result, one needs to consider the AF target a little more carefully than with some other lenses.
I can't speak for its performance on full-frame, but on APS-C it's a versatile and optically-pleasing lens if the focal length range works well for you. For a film-era zoom lens, it performs well, and I'm fond of the rendering - but I have no doubt whatsoever that the new D-FA28-105 will be far, far superior in resolution and CA correction, especially in the borders and corners. Which lens renders more pleasingly will depend on your personal preferences.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: March, 2010 Location: Chiang Mai, Bologna, Amsterdam Posts: 1,198
5 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 13, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $130.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Quick AF, very good IQ for the price, rather fast | | Cons: | Not-so-great construction (like other "silver" FA zooms) | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-1
| |
Just bought two examples, I will test them and probably sell one.
The first arrived a couple days ago. It's in spotless condition and with the original shade.
Paid 110 euros shipment included (about $130).
Many reviewers don't consider shipment, but it's part of the total cost, and should be included.
If we don't buy our lenses from a brick-and-mortar shop, usually we pay for VAT and/or shipment. I don't see why that expense shouldn't be added.
I don't own the new D FA 28-105mm, but I have read a post from a user who compared the two lenses. The most important differences are WR and faster, smoother AF. The IQ of the new one seems to be only marginally better.
My rating reflects that. If the new lens could get a 9, the old "silver" FA version deserves a 8.
I gave an overall of 9 cause some old reviews reflect a negative judgement due to AF problems with old digital bodies.
I briefly tried the lens on a crop body, a K-01. The AF worked as expected.
This is the first review on full frame. My first example of this lens works very well on my K-1. The AF is fast, in a kind of abrupt, violent way, because of the short travel. Sometimes I have the impression that it's focusing so fast that it gets past the point of accurate focusing, and has to adjust a little to lock perfect focus.
The lens is light and easy to handle, but it extends a lot to reach the longes focal.
The build seems to be in line with other silver zooms of the same generation. Though it seems better built than the other two lenses of the same "family" I already have (Pentax-FA f/4-5,6 35-80mm and Pentax-FA f/4,7-5,8 100-300mm). Unlike the other two, the 28-105mm has a metal bayonet, not a plastic one. Another difference is the presence of an aspherical element (the other two have normal glasses).
All three lenses have a better optical performance than their older F and FA counterparts. Considering the abysmal build it's quite a feat! The 35-80mm is very wobbly and plasticky, and the 100-300mm is also very cheaply made. I opened the latter to clean some fungus. In reality the problem was different (two flower-like principles of separation in a cemented doublet), but the group would have been uncleanable, because it's encased in a molded plastic abomination that can't be opened!.
The 28-105mm shares the same mechanical concept but is not wobbly and feels more substantial (I guess has more metal in it). Of course the pleasure of handling a K or A* series is miles away, but in the end it's not as terrible as I feared. The lens is quite pristine though, I don't know how it would stand heavy prolonged use.
The optical performance at 28mm and 50mm is very good for a consumer zoom. At 105mm it's not as sharp, but still more than decent at mid diaphragms. I expect some distortion at 28mm, but I had no time to test.
I didn't test vignetting either. From the first generic pics it seems well controlled, for a consumer film-era zoom.
The quality of my first round of pictures confirms my opinion. From my personal experience I can say that the latest generation of consumer FA zooms for film cameras were extremely well designed, and even on digital are definitely better than comparable zooms of the F and (non-silver) FA series. Because of the poor build quality, I'd stick with gently used examples (or buy hem from a reliable source).
I already knew that this lens performs very well on digital APS-C. I found that even on full frame the pictures are crisp, contrasty and with strong pleasant colours.
I shot all the photos with the hood on. The front element is very exposed, and the minimum focal is 28mm. The use of a proper hood is recommended. The original one is petal shaped, bayonet mount, and can be reversed. IIRC it should be possible to find a cheap compatible chinese hood on eBay, if the original one is missing.
I mainly use fast MF primes, mostly shot wide open (or barely stopped down), but there are situations, and subjects, that require the use of an easily portable AF zoom. I have 3 or 4 fast, recent objectives that rival primes in optical quality, but unfortunately they are huge bazookas  Often I end up leaving them at home cause they take a lot of room and the weight is excessive.
The answer is to go out for a walk with a single "generic" zoom, or choose a couple of small zooms that will leave some room in the bag for more "specialistic" objectives.
In my experience, the Pentax-F 35-70, Pentax-FA 28-70 f4, Pentax-F 70-210 are all good enough to compete with decent primes, but this zoom is the only one with a range of focals wide enough to be considered a true generic lens.
As soon as I get the second example I will continue the test, and will edit this review according to my findings.
Would be nice to compare this lens with two other Pentax film era zooms I have: the earlier FA Powerzoom and the F 35-105mm (which has macro range).
To give an idea of the size of the lens at 28mm and fully extended at 105mm, and how it looks on my K-1, here are 3 pics:
Here one photo of a bad, bad boy who ate in a few hours half of a young jackfruit tree I planted in my yard (grown from the seed of a fruit I ate a few months ago).
This image show this lens at its worst. Closest focusing distance and zoom fully extended (105mm).
The optical performance degrades in a visible way approaching the longest focal. Optical quality is definitely better at 28mm and closer to infinity.
I think this is characteristic of the design, cause I received the second example, and it performs the same way. Sorry for the grainy picture, it was shot at 5000 ISO.
 Caterpillar eating my tree by spaulein, on Flickr
 K_1_4795 by spaulein, on Flickr
 K_1_4809 by spaulein, on Flickr
The second photo is shot almost wide open, and it shows the great colours and the "pop" of this underrated lens.
The third gives an idea of the impressive sharpness stopped down.
All pics were converted to JPG (cropped and resized 50%), with basic PP.
EDIT:
Back to this review after a few years.
For its price this lens is just great.
If you (like myself) like to shoot with fast manual focus primes, this lens is a practical fill-in that can come useful any time an AF zoom for walk-around photography is needed.
I had no chance to compare it with the recent DFA version, but I'd be pretty sure the difference isn't so incredible.
It's relatively fast, it's more than sharp enough, focuses well on the K-1, feels light in the hands but still robust enough. The original shade works great.
I still can't understand why anybody sane enough to write on a computer keyboard would ever give this lens an average evaluation of 7.55, while the original FA version, which is worse in any possible way, gets a very good 8.60. I'm so surprised!
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Posts: 3,348
8 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 3, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Excellent colors, very light weight, metal mounting surface | | Cons: | Feels fragile | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 4
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 7
Value: 9
Camera Used: Pentax K-30
| |
This lens is a design of dichotomy. Let me cover them as pros/cons.
Pros:
First and foremost, the greatest performance factor here is the color rendition. I don't know what Pentax did but they did it right. The colors are deep and vibrant without being saturated or artificial. I shoot in RAW and this makes post processing much easier. That said, if you wanted to go for an artistic saturation then it is very easy to achieve.
I found this lens to be decently sharp despite what others have said. It is at least on par with the 18-55mm kit lens in most situations. Maybe their autofocus needs adjustment? (i.e. front / back focus adjustment) Like any lens you should learn its strengths and weaknesses. Even a $1k lens used the wrong way can produce bad images. In general, you can f/8-it and forget about it. Slight aberrations are present in some cases but aren't terrible or distracting.
This lens is a bit larger with a f/3.2 opening. It's incremental probably over a f/3.5 but I'll take it!
It has plenty of hand holding reach at 105mm and is decently sharp there. Beyond that you should have a different lens anyways (and a tripod).
Neutral:
It has an aperture ring so this lens could be adapted to other systems.
The mounting surface is made of metal for those that care about that sort of thing.
The shortest focal length is only 28mm but it was designed during the film era for a film camera. From that perspective, 28mm is just fine.
Some would say that this is a con but I call it neutral. It does not have any macro capability. I think that for macro photography you should have a dedicated lens for that. Closest focusing distance is 6 inches which can still provide decent close-ups.
Mine came with the stock petal hood which is nice but I think any other petal hood would work too.
Cons:
This lens does tend to cause focus hunting. I think its because the lens is so lightweight that the screw drive overshoots the focus point. The camera then needs to reverse the motor a bit only to overshoot again. Focus is achieved and it gets it faster than most contrast based systems but the hunting is noticeable. Some people have said that they hold their finger against the moving focus ring to slow it down. I use continuous focus and track my subjects. It works out well although this does drain the battery.
Being so lightweight the lens does feel fragile. Internal bits can torque and bend if you poke around with your finger. You can feel the mirror and shutter fire through the body of the lens. If all you do is handle the zoom ring then you'll probably be OK.
I wish the lens had a bit of a barrel extending beyond the body. The front element almost protrudes beyond the end. Put that lens cap on carefully!
Bokeh is there but it's nothing like a Helios 44M.
Conclusion:
I think this could make a great walk-around lens. It's a great lens for events like birthday parties, weddings, nature walks, etc. The colors are phenomenal and that alone makes up for any cons that I could find with the lens! Focus performance can be iffy for some but I find it adequate. The lens is very lightweight which is good for carrying less heft but bad for durability. I would be hesitant to travel on an airplane with it unless I can hold it or have it in lens case and inside a durable travel case. I would happily recommend this lens with some warnings. This lens does not tend to appear for sale very often so I am happy I have it!
Samples:
Nothing speaks better than samples. Here are some scaled-down images from my flickr account. There was very little post processing in most cases except for a tad of sharpening. The sunrises had some additional processing to balance out the extremes between light and dark and to exaggerate the colors a bit.
100% crop of a close focus 
28mm wide angle view of a yard 
1600 ISO shot at somewhat close focus of apples 
Somewhat exaggerated colors from a sunrise 
Nice blues from a sunset about to occur | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: March, 2007 Location: Atlanta Posts: 31 | | Review Date: May 3, 2013 | Not Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Good range, 3.2 @ 28mm | | Cons: | Won't focus on DSLR bodies | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 6
Value: 7
Camera Used: MZ-5n
| |
This is like the tale of two lenses. It was my go-to walk-around lens in my film days. The silver finish complemented my MZ-5n well and I made quite a few really nice photos with it.
Once I moved to digital, I had to all but retire this lens as it had serious focusing problems with my *ist-d. It has the same problems with my K10 and my daughter's K-r.
I was really bummed.
Honestly though, I find that on crop sensor cameras, that 28mm short end isn't sufficiently wide for my walk-around lens.
Anybody with a film camera want to buy this?
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: December, 2009 Posts: 325
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 2, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $180.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Color Rendition, Size, Weight | | Cons: | Sharpness | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-7, K-5
| |
This lens is great for walking around. I've owned two due to LBA. As others have stated color rendition is definitely up there and bokeh isn't bad either! It's reasonably fast aperture is handy, but it isn't all that sharp and CAs can be an issue unless you stop down. Overall, the lens is a great value and a good, slightly faster alternative to the kit lens even though it is not sharper. The color rendition alone may make it better for some photographers.
The Pied Piper by Manila Vanila, on Flickr
IMGP2175 by Manila Vanila, on Flickr
Palace Hotel by Manila Vanila, on Flickr
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: June, 2012 Posts: 49 | | Review Date: October 31, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | AF issue is not a problem on Pentax K-30 | | Cons: | a little bit AF issues with K-r and K200D | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: Pentax K-30
| |
This lens is a sleeper. I have a black one which produce awesome pictures and dovetails nicely with my black K-30. The AF issues, a little bit hunt at focal length over 80mm and apertures lower f/5.6, will gone, if you use it with the new Pentax K-30  .
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: February, 2010 Location: Northern Michigan Posts: 6,173
15 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 13, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $180.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Superb color rendition; well suited for landscape work | | Cons: | Some optical shortcomings at the wide end; potential auto-focus issues | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 4
Handling: 8
Value: 9
| |
This lens is a bit of a sleeper. It does have some issues; hence the (relatively) low rating given by some of the other reviewers.
I bought the lens as an upgrade to the A 35-105/3.5. That old A series zoom, while a very fine lens, does tend to show its age in landscape work. The FA 28-105 enjoys the advantage of later technology, particularly in terms of flare control and color rendition.
Indeed, it is in color rendition that the lens really shines and the primary reason I purchased it. The colors this lens produces are somewhat unique in the Pentax lineup. Generally speaking, it features the usual FA, rather than DA, profile, with brighter blues and somewhat cooler colors than what we generally find with the DA lenses. What distinguishes the FA 28-105 from other FA lenses (excluding the star and limiteds) is the colors are a bit brighter and have more pop.
In terms of resolution, the lens tends to run from good to very good, except at the wide end of the lens, where border to border sharpness suffers, even at f8 or f11. The far corners also remain a problem through the entire range of the lens, even when stopped down. Likely, this problem would be worse on FF or 35mm film.
There's quite a bit of distortion on the wide-end. I haven't done any scientific tests, but I would contend that it's significantly worse at 28mm than the DA 16-45 at 16mm. CA issues also tend to create issues at the wide end, including some nasty red and green fringing that can be difficult to remove in post.
In short, most of the optical problems with the lens are concentrated at the wide end of the lens. From about 40mm to 90mm, the lens performs quite well, and it's more than decent at 105mm.
Build quality for the lens is, at best, merely adequate. This is largely a plastic lens which, unlike the A 35-105, will not likely stand the test of time. On the plus side, the lens is compact and light, coming in at less than half the weight of the A 35-105 and the DA 16-50.
The chief weakness of the lens, however, involves its tendency to exhibit autofocus issues. This is by far the worse autofocusing lens I've ever run across. While I can usually coax it toward accurate results in landscape work, in non optimal indoor light it's wildly inaccurate and hardly useable (at least with the K-5: haven't tested it on any other camera). Since I bought the lens solely for landscape photography, this is not a problem for me; but it may be a problem for others. (I would also note that not everyone has reported issues with the AF on this lens. For some people, the AF seems to work fine.)
How does the lens compare to others in its range? Below are brief comparisons:
A 35-105: The FA 28-105 is sharper in the center between from about 40mm all the way to 105. At the wide end, the FA is considerably less sharp as one moves away from the center. Throughout the rest of the range, the differences in border to border sharpness become less significant. The FA also has a bit more contrast and a clear advantage in color rendition. The 35-105 renders more nicely than the 28-105, with better bokeh, more attractive rendering of lines and transitions, and better rendering of depth. In other words, the A 35-105 is better for portraits and still life, the FA 28-105 is better for landscape.
DA 16-45: At 28mm, the DA 16-45 is clearly better across the board. At 45mm, the differences aren't so striking. Indeed, the FA 28-105 may be a bit sharper, particularly in the center. Neither lens has an advantage in color rendition. They render colors differently from one another, but both are, in their own unique ways, excellent.
DA 18-55: At 28mm, there's not much difference in center resolution. The DA kit zoom has a palpable advantage toward the borders, at least at close range. At longer focal lengths, resolution improves for the FA and worsens for the DA lens. Moreover, despite the slight resolution disadvantage at 28mm, the FA 28-105 nonetheless tends to produce better images at that focal length (and all others) due to better contrast and much more striking color rendition. There's more to a lens than just resolution.
Examples (all at f8):
At 28mm:
100% resolution:
At 50mm:
100% resolution:
At 60mm
At 105mm:
100% resolution:
 | | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2011 Location: Tuktoyaktuk, NWT Posts: 6 | | Review Date: March 27, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $70.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Light weight, internal focus, lens hood, non-rotating front element | | Cons: | Looks and feels a little cheap | |
Although I initially rated this as an eight, today I tried hard to find faults with this lens but couldn't so I am rating this a nine because the image quality is good with my copy and it focuses fast and accurately. No it isn't as good as the FA 28-70mm f4 but that lens is a constant aperture zoom which is a big plus. I find that I have gotten sharp images with decent contrast and no examples of extreme CA. It is even fast enough to use indoors without a flash as long as you use high ISO and noise reduction software.
I know the silver finish on my is a little cheap looking but the lens works, very well. I own a *istDL in the Canadian colour, silver, and this lens looks more at home here than on a black camera. The build quality is typical of FA lenses from that particular aesthetic era, a little loose and plastic but not to the point of causing any problems, and the internal focus makes it fast even on the old DL.
Overall I like it, it works very well on my DL and my K20D but will see very little time on that camera since it is practically welded to the *istDL. I understand that some people have had serious issues with this lens but when you get a good one it is very good indeed.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: February, 2011 Location: California Posts: 32
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 10, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: $118.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | Fast Focus, Light | | Cons: | IQ | |
I got this lens today. Took it out and did a dozen test shots against other lenses I have. It was obvious that I really is not producing clear, sharp images in comparisons. It is as weak as its plastic construction would make you think it would be. It won't be in the collection long.....
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: August, 2010 Location: Leeds Posts: 152
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 9, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: $180.00
| Rating: 4 |
| Pros: | Nice zoom range, light and compact | | Cons: | focus problem | |
This is a lens I really wanted to like. I had a Sigma 28-105, but sold that to buy this (as I thought this lens would be better).
I have now bought two copies of this lens, and returned both. Basically, both have problems focusing - especially at the 105 end. At least 50% of the time it wouldn't focus. It would get to the point of focus, but then the focus confirmation light would flicker but fail to lock (similar to what happens if just slightly too close for a lens to focus).
I don't know if it makes any difference which camera this is used on, but I have a Pentax k-r. (Worried it was a problem with the camera, I took the second lens into my local camera shop and - with their permission - tried the lens on their K-r and a K-7, and had the same problem.)
Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/128551-pentax-...#ixzz1AYOdcvAl
Otherwise, I would have definitely wanted to keep this lens.
As such, I would only recommend this lens if you are able to try it first, to check it focuses okay (or at least check that you can definitely return it).
To be honest I wasn't sure how to rate this, but rated it on my experience.
As I have bought two copies of this, the price given is (roughly) an average of the two.
| | |
![SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 AL [IF] Review RSS Feed](https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/images/rss/rss_feeds14x14.gif)
![SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 AL [IF]](https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/44/SMC_Pentax-FA_28-105mm.jpg)
![SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 AL [IF]](javascript:update('https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/44/SMC_Pentax-FA_28-105mm.jpg');)
![SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 AL [IF]](javascript:update('https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/44/smc_Pentax-FA_28-105_3_2-4_5_ALIF_optics.jpg');)
![Add Review of SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 AL [IF]](https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/images/digitalvb/pentax_red/buttons/addreview.gif)
