Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Pentax Lens Review Database » Film Era Pentax K-Mount Lenses » FA Zoom Lenses
SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F4-5.6 [IF] Review RSS Feed

SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F4-5.6 [IF]

Sharpness 
 7.2
Aberrations 
 6.8
Bokeh 
 6.2
Autofocus 
 7.2
Handling 
 7.7
Value 
 7.0
Reviews Views Date of last review
14 47,480 Tue October 25, 2016
spacer
Recommended By Average Price Average User Rating
86% of reviewers $117.54 7.21
SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F4-5.6 [IF]

SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F4-5.6 [IF]
supersize
SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F4-5.6 [IF]
supersize
SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F4-5.6 [IF]
supersize

Description:
This lens was designed by Tamron and therefore does not resemble other FA-series lenses.



SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F4.5-5.6 IF
Image Format
Full-frame / 35mm film
Lens Mount
Pentax K
Aperture Ring
Yes (A setting)
Diaphragm
Automatic, 6 blades
Optics
15 elements, 12 groups
Mount Variant
KAF
Max. Aperture
F4.5-5.6
Min. Aperture
F22-32
Focusing
AF (screwdrive)
Quick-shift
No
Min. Focus
50 cm
Max. Magnification
0.18x
Filter Size
62 mm
Internal Focus
Yes
Field of View (Diag. / Horiz.)

APS-C: 55-16 ° / 46-13 °
Full frame: 75-23 ° / 65-19 °
Hood
PH-RBH62
Case
S90-100
Lens Cap
Plastic clip-on
Coating
SMC
Weather Sealing
No
Other Features
Diam x Length
72 x 74 mm (2.8 x 2.9 in.)
Weight
305 g (10.8 oz.)
Production Years
1999 to 2002
Engraved Name
smc PENTAX-FA 1:4.5-5.6 28-105mm IF
Product Code
27678 (silver/black)
Notes
Was available in silver and silver/black
Variants
Silver and silver/black
Features:
Screwdrive AutofocusInternal FocusingAperture RingAutomatic ApertureFull-Frame SupportDiscontinued
Sample Photos: View Sample Photos
Price History:



Add Review of SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F4-5.6 [IF]
Author:
Sort Reviews by: Date | Author | Rating | Recommendation | Likes (Descending) Showing Reviews 1-14 of 14
Site Supporter

Registered: June, 2016
Location: Paris
Posts: 80
Lens Review Date: October 25, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $50.00 | Rating: 1 

 
Pros: it's written Pentax on it
Cons: everything but the brand
Sharpness: 5    Aberrations: 5    Bokeh: 1    Autofocus: 5    Handling: 8    Value: 1    Camera Used: K-1   

if you're shooting digital, don't even bother.
one of the worst lenses out there.
iphone lens is better.
   
New Member

Registered: November, 2013
Posts: 5
Lens Review Date: August 4, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $60.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: good lens,but not so good for full frame
Cons: some CA's; unfortunately
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 7    Bokeh: 8    Autofocus: 9    Handling: 8    Value: 7    Camera Used: k-5,k-x,k-200d,sfx,z20p,mz-5 etc.   

very similar to the TAMRON lens a sharp lens for much fun for APS-C

what about disadvantages: only some CA's in the corner at wide angle and wide open some flare, unfortunately.

stopped down to f8-11 - as usually - this lens makes no problems for photo shootings:.
good contrast, nice colors (a few warm).but wide open not really sharp

my recommendation for 18x24mm-sensor (8 points), but stopped down as mentioned.

ps. lower sharpness in the corners when using full frame (analogue or digital) - only 7 points, Pentax 35-105 seems to be better for K1 (or 2.8/28-70 will be best solution)
   
Site Supporter

Registered: April, 2011
Location: Lost in translation ...
Posts: 16,379

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: September 6, 2014 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: N/A | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Sharp enough, range for me, IF ...
Cons: None really for the price and my use of the lens ...

Bonjour,

I picked up a silver copy of this lens without a hood at my local B&M photo shop for 40 about a year ago (forgot to review, oops). A good price for an excellent shape copy that I wanted to use as a "walk about lens", a nice range on APS-C for my style and needs. I knew that this lens was of a Tamron origin, and being a big Adaptall-2 fan (19AH, 52BB, 55BB, 01A, etc.) and having had a nice SP AF 90/2.8 Di Macro, I wanted to try this one out.

Overall pleased with the performance of this AF zoom lens for what it is and agree with the majority of the positive evaluations preceding mine. Please know that I saw the lens in shop, reviewed its reviews here on PF to be sure, and then went back to purchase it. Maybe will post some (newer) sample images later.

Salut, J
   
Site Supporter

Registered: June, 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Posts: 3,064
Lens Review Date: December 19, 2013 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $12.97 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Handling, sharpness, exposure
Cons: Low contrast, hefty
Sharpness: 7    Aberrations: 6    Bokeh: 7    Autofocus: 8    Handling: 8    Value: 9    Camera Used: Pentax K-30   

I bought this lens off of eBay with a ZX-10. It was clean in the pictures but it arrived infested with fungus. I received a large partial refund which brought the effect price of the lens down quite low. Most of the fungus was on the front element but there is also plenty now spawning inside the lens too. My review here will try to take this into account.

Pros:
The lens is bulky enough to have good handling without being too huge. It has a power zoom function if I'm not mistaken and that motor no doubt takes up space.I found the zoom ring easy to grasp. The focus ring is relatively short throw when used in manual focus mode.

It's a relatively close focus lens at it's maximum 105mm focal length. I would not call it a macro lens by any stretch but it's nice to photograph big things up close to fill up the frame.

I like the aperture ring.

The lens is relatively sharp across its full range and when used nearly wide open but it could be sharper if it had more contrast. More on that below.

Front element does not rotate during focus which is nice for filters and tulip style hoods. My copy came with the OEM hood which is plenty big and probably deep enough.

Although it is made of plastic it feels sturdier than most of the other F, FA, and FA-J lenses.

Flare was very minimal here, if any! Same with aberrations. I noticed some color shift in some conditions where high contrast was necessary like outlines of dark mountains against a bright sky. It was manageable.

Neutral:
It has a metal mounting surface which some may like. I'm always neutral on this. It makes the lens sturdy at the expense of additional weight.

The widest aperture is f/4. That's not necessarily bad since I mostly shoot from f/5.6 onward for the most part no matter what the lens. Still, I think bigger glass has the potential to be sharper as long as you have a good hood and can manage any flare.

Cons:
I did notice that contrast is a bit low. Shooting in RAW allows me to compensate in post processing by boosting the definition and mid contrast settings in Aperture. That increased sharpness quite a bit. Adding some edge sharpening and RAW fine tuning brought this lens up to snuff as far as I'm concerned. I wish this wasn't necessary. The FA 28-105mm f/3.2 in comparison has much livelier colors and deeper contrast and having that negates the need for as much post processing.

The colors were a bit dull too and this could be from a lack of contrast too. I could boost the vibrancy and saturation to make up for it. Again, my FA 28-105 f/3.2 does not have this issue.

Conclusions:
Overall, I think this is a very nice lens. It could be better but it's definitely not bad. I like that it could be nearly wide open and stopping it down to f/8 to f/11 allows the capturing of very sharp images. However, be aware that contrast can be low which affects color rendition and sharpness. Most of this can be compensated for in post processing but if you're a JPG shooter then you may have a different experience. I found out after I got this lens that it is a Tamron design but with Pentax's own electronics and coatings. My personal experience with Tamron has been lack luster and I think that is partially reflected in my time with this lens.

I mentioned that this lens has fungus but I don't believe it's enough to adversely affect IQ. It takes quite a lot of obstruction and damage to break a lens and it's always quite surprising how forgiving modern lenses can be in these terms. The small lack of contrast was seen throughout the frame and not just in certain spots where the fungus may have been concentrated. If there were definite areas then I would blame the fungus.

I also mentioned the FA 28-105mm f/3.2 as a point of comparison. Although that lens currently has a lower rating on the forums here, I would say that lens outperforms this one. It's sharper, more contrasty, and very lively in terms of colors. That lens is definitely not as sturdy as this one but I consider all F, FA, and FA-J lenses to be fair weather devices. If you had to pick one then pick that one!

With all that said, I will be looking for a replacement of this lens if the price is right.

Here are some sample shots taken with this lens. There was a fair amount of post processing but it still shows what can be accomplished and crafted with this lens.


IMGP0280 by Never Off, on Flickr

I think this shot shows the potential of this lens at f/6.3 in mid-zoom at 50mm. Lots of detail despite the JPG compression.


IMGP0234 by Never Off, on Flickr

Full on zoom to 105mm and the firing of the pop-up flash to highlight the fine details of a feather stuck in a tree. Since the DOF is razor thin up close at 105mm I stopped down to f/11.


IMGP0241 by Never Off, on Flickr

The blue sky is a bit exaggerated but the contrast of the clouds is about right. It took some work to get this but it's possible. 28mm focal length at f/11.
   
New Member

Registered: July, 2012
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 17
Lens Review Date: December 21, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $250.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Lightweight, cheap, good IQ, FF compatable
Cons: limited range compared to modern zooms
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 7    Bokeh: 7    Autofocus: 7    Handling: 8    Value: 8    Camera Used: Pentax Kx, K5iis. K1   

I posted this previously in the wrong category.
I obtained it new from a shop in Perth, Australia. Whilst not a match for the 18-135 in range and possibly sharpness(from observations...not actual use) its a very very good option for the budget conscious.

This lens has stayed on the camera and replaced the 18-55 kit lens. I dont really miss the 18-28 and the 55-105 is a bonus as a walk around lens. What gets me on this unit is that its relatively sharp all through the range and across the whole picture (not the edge fall off experienced on others)

Ive never seen a full lens test which shows the sweet spot, but one can imagine somewhere at the mid range and f8 ?? but it even gives good performance at 28mm right across. Possibly because its a Tamron copy with Pentax name and coatings, gives it a bad name, but it really is a decent lens for the $$$$

This is highly recommended. Especially if you want to get someone started in photography, The Kx/Kr and this lens would be a great beginner kit, giving superior IQ than many other latest brand kit offerings. I appear to be raving over a '7' lens, but let's face it, it's not a high quality lens, just punches well above it's weight and gives good allround results.

If Pentax ever goes FF, then I also have another option. I definite sleeper and well worth it if you can find one on ebay.

Addendum: The more I look at photo's taken with this lens compared to those with my newer lenses (12-24, 50-135 and Sigma 17-50) and K5IIs, the more i'm impressed. I would love to see resolution figures. Perhaps I have the lens made by employee of the month, but it's a revelation!! Just reliably sharp.

Addendum II: using it on the K1 now and really encouraged by the results. Keen to get the new version but this old girl delivers very well with a little mush at the very edges wide open .... otherwise it's a very very good way to get started at FF.
   
Pentaxian

Registered: June, 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 5,624

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: August 18, 2011 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $40.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Great value, solid feel to the lens, dedicated lens hood, good range
Cons: Slow, not the best IQ, mine has zoom creep at 28-35mm
Sharpness: 7    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 7    Autofocus: 7    Handling: 8    Value: 9   

I got this lens to replace the 18-55mm version I kit lens for my daily use in the range between 35 and 100. It's a pretty good replacement for the kit lens, especially considering I got it for $40.

The lens IQ is pretty good for the price. Center sharpness is better than the kit lens. Best sharpness is achieved at F8. The chromatic aberrations are very well controlled, I didn't really spot anything crazy. Corner sharpness isn't very great, about on par with the kit lens. I don't really miss the 18-28mm that the kit lens gives vs the 55-105 I get from this lens because I was going to relegate wide angles to proper UWA lenses. This lens WILL flare though, when dealing with shooting towards the sun. It's unavoidable.

The bokeh of the lens at wide open and 105mm is alright. It is a little noisy depending on the background, but it isn't tremendously bad. The bokeh at the short end (28mm) is pretty nonexistent.

The autofocus of the lens is pretty good - as good and sometimes better than the kit lens. It's nothing to rave about though. The reason why it's good is because the focus throw is something like 30 degrees. It's tiny. Manual focusing with this lens is pretty damn hard.

The handling of the lens is where it's good and bad. i like this lens size. It's nice and bulky, without being too huge. It's got a huge zoom ring that feels wonderful to spin. The clip on hood is a very nice touch (I hate screw on hoods), and the plastic doesn't feel so bad. The only issues I have with the build is that the lens creeps from 28-35mm due to the weight. I don't know if this is normal for the lens or not, but it's quite annoying.

For $40 bucks, I'd recommend this for people who want a short zoom and want to keep it cheap. It's definitely a good replacement for the kit lens, provided you don't mind missing out 18-28mm. It doesn't look that bad, and it can get some sharp shots. I pretty much use it for walking around in the daytime.

Pictures:


100% crop of the center at 28mm F8.0




   
Senior Member

Registered: September, 2009
Posts: 158
Lens Review Date: December 25, 2010 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: N/A | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: good size, good colour, good contrast
Cons: bad quality control, elements out of alignment

i think i got one of cola's rejects from above.

First the good stuff: In the hand this is a nice feeling and looking lens at this level of plasticity. Everything looks and feels nice for plastic stuff. That is, good metal construction has a certain fluid, silky feel, and so does good plastic construction have a certain feel that's specific to those materials: you say to yourself; Boy that's cheap, but pretty good! And it's kinda cute looking!

The bad: As a lens, mine sux. It just doesn't sharpen up until f11. Colour and contrast are both great. With it i shot a couple of sets of colourful and contrasty, blurry shapes.

Thing is, one can tell from looking at the image files that the blurriness comes from assembly and quality control issues and that with the luck of the draw one might end up with a sharp copy of this lens.

i didn't. And, according to cola above, he got one good one out of 5 which means that chances are, 4 out of 5 of you won't. Them's long odds.

EDIT: scored another sample of this lens, a well assembled one. Happier with it: sharper all around. Quite useable wide open which is good considering it's already f4-5.6. Sharp in the center, blurrier away from it with a curved field of focus. Better stopped down. On a tripod, a couple stops down and focused manually it's sharp enough for me, softer when hand held and autofocused.

The images get messy abruptly when they go out of focus at or near wide open, not the smooth transition one gets with a good prime lens. Seems to be one of the two major down sides of this lens. The other is the small max aperture which causes me to use it at very low shutter speeds at the times of day i like to shoot.

Focus throw is short. Focus ring is well damped enough that's not a huge problem.

Having used it a bit, find that it seems to be meant for near subjects. Those come out quite nice. Distant subjects like landscape shots so far don't turn out so well. Mebbe field curvature, mebbe i need to focus manually. Still going up the learning curve.

Good Points: great colour and contrast, sharp enough to be useful espesh for near subjects, no big flare problems, stubby and short for this zoom range-- doesn't look like i've mounted a bazooka on the camera, light and easy to handle, good construction for a plastic lens, IF.

Bad Points: poor transition from in focus to out of focus, with typical zoom lens look to out of focus areas at the borders of the frame (which in general makes me say; Oh yeah, cheap lens), small max aperture, find it difficult to get sharp results across the frame with distant subjects, and what isn't sharp tends to strike me as messy.

With an APS-C sensor camera has the equivalent zoom range of a 42-157.5mm lens on a FF camera.

will improve my score of this lens from 3 to 7.
   
Inactive Account

Registered: June, 2010
Posts: 54
Lens Review Date: November 28, 2010 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $90.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Very sharp, useful range of focal lengths
Cons: Useless lens hood on digital, build quality issues
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 7    Autofocus: 7    Handling: 6    Value: 8   

I have two copies of this lens. Both are sharp across all focal lengths. 28-105 on an APS-C body gives a very useful range, from mild wide angle to medium telephoto. It's great as a walk around lens with nice image quality.

Resolution
Results of an informal resolution test are shown below. Lacking an AF 1951 chart, I used a barcode from a battery blister pack. The field of view was 38 inches. At 105mm f5.6 (wide open), 1.5 lp/mm on the subject was just barely resolvable. This turns out to be about 61 lp/mm on the K-x sensor. At 105mm f7.1 (2/3 stop down), 2 lp/mm on the subject was again barely resolvable. This is about 82 lp/mm on the sensor. These numbers are limiting resolution values, so contrast is fairly low at maybe 3% or so.

Close up shot of barcode.


38 inch width.


100%crop at f5.6 (check out the thin line above the 2 in "40293")


100% crop at f7.1: (check out the lines above the 3 in "02381")

Build Quality
I've noticed two things, on both copies. One: the front element was slightly loose when I purchased it (used). This is apparently a common issue with similar Tamron designs as well. I used a clean suction cup to tighten the element.

Two: when the lens is in portrait position with the body's right hand grip on top, and zoomed to 70mm-105mm, the optical image "shifts" laterally slightly when the focus ring crosses the 5ft mark. This occurs on both copies. This also occurs from 28mm-70mm, but the effect is less pronounced. It does not occur in any other orientation of the lens (e.g. right hand grip on bottom, or any other angle). It does not occur in any other focus distance. It doesn't affect autofocus; the body is able to autofocus just fine even with the shift. The only time this is an issue is if you're doing a portrait position focus stack and just happen to cross the 5ft mark. A shift correction in PP makes everything line up ok.

Sample Images
Here, a very slight amount of purple fringing is visible near the top left. This is at f7.1, for a completely blown highlight. CA isn't much of an issue.


The lens also has modest close focus capabilities (about 1:5 magnification). Minimum focus distances and fields of view at those min distances are listed below (all values for digital body).
28mm: 36cm min distance, 22x34cm coverage
35mm: 41cm min distance, 20x30cm coverage
50mm: 38cm min distance, 14x20cm coverage
70mm: 36cm min distance, 10x16cm coverage
105mm: 35cm min distance, 8x12cm coverage

No crop on this hibiscus:


Summary
This lens is a great performer, and when available can typically be purchased at a reasonable price (I found copies for $70 and $110 US, used).
   
Site Supporter

Registered: March, 2008
Location: Israel
Posts: 943
Lens Review Date: November 17, 2010 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: N/A | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: IF, range, light weight, build
Cons: harsh bokeh, flares easily, sharp only if well stopped down

This lens is decently built being re-badged Tamron, as far as I understand. It produced decent pictures, but I had to stop it down a stop or two. I did not quite like its bokeh and it was rather prone to flare despite the SMC coatings. Basically it is just a notch above the regular kit lens (of the film era), having slightly more convenient range, IF and build.
   
Site Supporter

Registered: October, 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 5,124
Lens Review Date: May 9, 2010 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $235.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Decent IQ and FL range on film.
Cons: Too slow and plastic build.
Camera Used: K Series film bodies (K1000, KM, KX, K2, K2DMD)   

I bought the FA 28-105/4-5.6 [IF] new in September 2000, as a one lens option for when I travel light. I wanted something to cover the popular focal lengths (28 135mm) on a film camera. The FA 28-105 does this pretty well and just falls short in the telephoto department. The FA 28-200/3.8-5.6 AL would have been perfect, but cost more than what I was willing to pay at the time. I bought the FA 28-105 to use on my old Pentax KX manual film camera.

The Good:
Optically the FA 28-105/4-5.6 lens is quite good and I have no issues with it. Is it as sharp or does it have the same IQ as a prime lens, no but its not bad either. I have taken a lot of great pictures with it.

The Bad:
The FA 28-105/4-5.6 is slow and is best suited for daylight shooting. (I have a K500/4.5 super telephoto that is faster than this lens at 105mm!!) Ideally the FA 28-105/3.2-4.5 AL would have been a better choice, but it also cost a lot more.

The Ugly:
All my other lenses are Pentax K series primes. Comparing the build quality and looks of a FA lens to a K series is amusing, the FA looks like an ugly plastic toy in comparison. However to be fair the FA 28-105/4-5.6 has lasted 10 years and not fallen apart, so it may look cheap but its durable enough.

I dont use the FA 28-105/4-5.6 much anymore, as I have gone back to a prime lens kit. This prime kit gives be more flexibility, improved IQ and speed over the FA 28-105/4-5.6.

Sample shots taken with the FA28-105/4-5.6. Photos are low resolution scans from original slides.


Camera: KX Film: Kodak Elitechrome ISO: 100




Camera: KX Film: Kodak Elitechrome ISO: 100

   
Forum Member

Registered: April, 2010
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 81

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: May 3, 2010 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $110.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Lightweight and sharp
Cons: I wish I'd got a black one!

I bought this lens (a used silver one) to fill in between my DA 16-45mm and my Tamron SP 60-300 MF lenses. This model seems to be frowned on a bit because it was made by Tamron. This is odd because the Tamron version generally got good reviews and I think with SMC coatings, the Pentax version would be even better. Anyway I like it. It is pretty much as sharp as my DA 16-45mm and quite light. The travel on the focus ring is a bit short, but this is only a problem when focusing manually. I have now upgraded from a Samsung GX-10 to a GX-20 and the 28-105mm works very well on that camera too. I've noticed minimal CAs, although I do find it produces pictures that are ever so slightly colder than the 16-45mm. Well recommended!
   
Loyal Site Supporter

Registered: January, 2008
Location: Henry, TN
Posts: 2,850
Lens Review Date: March 13, 2010 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $145.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Good IQ, light, versatile coverage.
Cons: Not an F2.8 solution

This is the tweaked and re-badged Tamron designed lens; if you're comfortable with the mid-range Tamron zooms you'll like this one.

Another lens I wouldn't have gone looking for but I got it with other lenses and found it to be my choice of mid-range zooms. It fits nicely between a DA 16-45 and a Tamron 70-300 Di or equivalent for outdoor use and provides similar IQ and typical Tamron rendition. There's enough FL-overlap to avoid frequent lens swaps among these three lenses.

I've replaced it with a Tamron 24-135 simply for its added range as a single lens solution for rural road-side shooting, but the 24-135 is quite noticeably bulkier and heaver. For my purposes, it made a very compact, satisfactory 2-lens package paired with a DA 16-45 and played well enough with a Tamron 1.4x TC that I usually didn't bother to pack a longer lens.

This FA 28-105 comes close enough to the Tamron 28-75/2.8 in practical results and has the extra reach and light weight to be my choice for a day out if F2.8 wasn't needed. Not a great macro substitute but useable in the close-up flower-shooter role.

Mine happens to be the silver version and doesn't look bad on the black bodies IMO. It would be a snazzy kit lens for a silver KX and its size doesn't overwhelm the smaller bodies like the bulkier F2.8's.

I keep coming back to the DA 16-45 as a comparable lens - it's versatile, economical and offers equally pleasing results. Well worth considering as an economical addition to the DA 18-55 with useful overlap and equal or better IQ IME.

H2
   
New Member

Registered: April, 2009
Location: HAMBURG, GERMANY
Posts: 4
Lens Review Date: February 27, 2010 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Solid build, good range, sharp, fast focussing, full size circle
Cons: not a 2.8 ;-)

Have the silver version - its a TAMRON zoom - made for PENTAX, but with original PENTAX electonic inside and with the ASAHI PENTAX SMC coating. I could select from 5 new versions - it was interesting : One was perfect - three were okay - one was bullsxxx. If you are lucky you can have a really good lense - IMHO a perfect "walk around" lens. Solid build quality and fast internal focussing. Works on my PENTAX K-X (12MP) wonderful.
   
Junior Member

Registered: April, 2008
Location: South Wales UK
Posts: 48
Lens Review Date: July 22, 2009 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $100.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Cheap and cheerful.
Cons: For the price,none.

Bought the silver version of this s/h for 69 (UK) to fill in between the Pentax 18-55 kit lens and my Tammy 70-300. Ok so it's not the fastest lens in this range but for the money (not a lot to spare with me ) I think I got great value. Pictures seem reasonably sharp to my eye and colours fairly accurate. Shutter is smooth, the zoom also and autofocus is quick. As I already have 62mm filters for the Tammy 70-300mm zoom there were no add-ons required as extra expense. This lens is Tammy spec and I have no complaints with their equipment. As a hobby photographer it fits in well with my fairly humble requirements and I'm happy with it.
Add Review of SMC Pentax-FA 28-105mm F4-5.6 [IF]



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:30 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top