| Author: | | Pentaxian Registered: January, 2018 Location: Jersey C.I. Posts: 3,597 | | Review Date: December 29, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Wide range & aperture ring | | Cons: | No zoom lock | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax *ist
| |
I'd owned the Tamron Adaptall-2 m/f version of this lens for many years, was totally satisfied with it and eventually had to retire it when internal fungus reduced the contrast excessively and repair was unavailable.
The temptation had always been there to replace it, but, having moved to APS-C digital, an economically-priced 18-200mm seemed to make more sense.
Then this example turned up on eBay, complete with caps and hood, for £20 and no-one else was interested 
As I've been indulging in a personal "film renaissance" for the last 12 months I decided to treat myself ... glad I did!
| | | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: June, 2021 Location: Ogden, UT Posts: 54
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 15, 2022 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Affordable, Versatile, Not Heavy | | Cons: | Loose(ish), pictures are flat | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 5
Autofocus: 5
Handling: 5
Value: 8
Camera Used: K10D K-3 ii
| |
This was the 1st "new" lens I bought for my K10D (summer 2021). Works great on my K-3 ii also.
It is a good lens overall for general use. I hike with my camera, and this lens likes to telescope out while I'm hiking (loose'ish). Makes for a lot of camera and lens slapping when it telescopes during a hike and starts clacking off my hiking poles or bouncing off my body.
I can't say it is a bad lens for photographs since I am an armature, and still expect to do a little work in Darktable with all the images I take, but none of the images I've taken with this lens catch me in the feels (My Tokina AT-X 24-40 is my current fave - but I've got high hopes for a Sigma DC Macro 17-70mm that's in the mail).
Bokeh is smooth and uneventful and my images are decent even opened all the way up at either extreme (f/3.8 28mm or f/?.? 200mm).
I would recommend this lens if you're looking for a versatile zoom, don't' have a lot of money, and want the auto focus (Most of my lenses are -M or -A) and don't want to pack prime lenses. This is my newest lens, so it is the one I've usually got with me when I'm traveling light.
Side note: This lens kills my K100D Super after about 3 pictures. That poor camera has to sit w/out a battery or lens on it for a few days before it will play again.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2015 Posts: 53
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 26, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $75.00
| Rating: 4 |
| Pros: | weight | | Cons: | difficult to focus on manual. not actually 200mm | | Sharpness: 4
Aberrations: 4
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 5
Value: 5
Camera Used: K-1 super-program
| |
We bought this lens to extend our long focal length range. With a Nikon 200mm by chance right there, we discovered something odd.. This 28~200 isnt actually 200mm on the long side. We put it on 2 different bodies [film an digital], the result is the same. My best guess is the 200mm is more like 160 or less.. [I can post comparative images in a few]. This fact came as a surprise and Ive seen no mention of it on-line anywhere. It's a huge difference and disappointing if you thought you were getting a 200mm.
dw
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: March, 2018 Location: Ruhrgebiet / Germany Posts: 57
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 9, 2019 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | cheap, small, light weight | | Cons: | flares, low contrast, max aperture F4 at K-1 | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: Pentax K-1 (II)
| |
Tested at Pentax K-1 Mark II
A nice bokeh over the entire focal length range but no high contrast and soft colours - at night there are massive flares above aperture F8 and above F16 i get starburst (sixfold)
This Lens is really cheap and small with a big range between 28 - 200 mm and with a really nice bokeh, that's the advantage I see.
Conclusion: A good all round lens for the daytrip - i´ve paid less than 50 Euro for this lens
85mm /F5,6 
113mm /F5,6 
28mm /F20 
28mm /F5,6
28mm /F8 | | | | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: April, 2018 Location: Ottawa Posts: 8,419 | | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Posts: 14
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 30, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | very sharp beween 50 and 135mm | | Cons: | some CA's, sometimes visible (stopping down reduces them) | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: k-5 k-s1, k-x,k-200d.fuji x-e1 fuji x-T100
| |
an often underrated lens
************************************
MY TIP: increase ISO up to 800
************************************
a good allrounder, BUT YOU MUST STOP IT DOWN 
you must sharpen it a few and eliminate some CA's by Phsh. afterwards, big posters available.
++ nice colors,
++ very good contrast,
+ but some reflections sometimes visible against the light (have all super zoom lenses)
O wide open at the extreme ends not so sharp and some visible CAs - especially in the corners
++ excellent sharpness between f 9-13
++ very good sharpness from 50 up to 135 mm (nearly no CAs visible)
++ and excellent macro shootings with extension tube 36mm at f 11 in this zoom range possible
The difference between the SIGMA and the PENTAX 28-200 lens is due to better CA reduction of PENTAX, when stopping it down. So it seems to be very similar to the last TAMRON 371D 28-200 super lens, which is much more improved in relation to the earlier versions.
For this big zoom range 8,5 points and full recommendation | | | | | Forum Member Registered: February, 2014 Location: Warsaw Posts: 76
5 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 17, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $110.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Versatile, good AF, good range, sharp as for zoom | | Cons: | flare easily, slow | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: k-500
| |
I was looking for versatile lens. First I was anxious about this lens, it is quite old zoom designed for SLR and for brief moment I was even considering purchase of almost twice the price used Sigma 18-200mm. At the end I went with Pentax and I don’t regret it.
Lens is quite big and heavy but also very well made and quite nice looking attached to camera.
First I compared it to kit 18-55 lens and I was surprised that effects for around 28mm was almost identical in every aspect (I was expecting 28-200 to be worse).
At FL 28mm and wide open it is a soft, it starts to be sharp at 5.6 and gets best results for 7.1-8.
I took few pictures with 200mm FL and was also surprised. Despite the fact that at full open picture came a bit soapy stepping it down a bit made it clear and sharp. Much sharper and cleaner than I expected.
At 200mm wide open 5.6 it is a bit soft, it starts to be sharp at 7.1 best results from 8-12.
So, as for zoom with such zoom range it is reasonably sharp. But don’t expect it to be prime sharp
The biggest issue with this lens is that there is a bit of purple fringing and lens can flare easily. Also it needs to be stopped down.
As general purpose zoom lens it is good especially for its price I got mine in almost mint condition with hood for around 110$.
So if you are looking for cheap versatile day lens and you don’t need wide angle it is worth considering.
 | | | | | Senior Member Registered: April, 2014 Location: Colorado Posts: 116
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 13, 2014 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Versatile, good AF, good range, looks fancy (haha) | | Cons: | heavy | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-r
| |
This lens is the reason I have a Pentax DSLR. I inherited it from my dad, who had it on a film SLR (I don't remember which one, it may be in my basement somewhere but has a stuck mirror so is no longer functional). I have no idea what he paid for it, but he probably bought it new 15-20 years ago. I really liked the lens, and a guy at a camera store told me it was "new enough" it should be fully functional with a DSLR. It is! Mine has a hood (flower-style plastic), so obviously I haven't had to find one. I also already have a UV/haze filter for it, as well as a polarizer (which I guess could be expensive given it's a 72mm lens?).
I've nicknamed this lens my "lens of versatility" because I can just do so much with it. If I can only take one lens with me, this is the one I grab. I've had no issues with focus, cropping, sensor size problems, etc. It's not the best in low light, being a bit of a slower lens, but I have gotten some ok indoor (horse show) shots with it. I've gotten some lovely ones outside with sharp near focus and beautiful far blur.
The only drawback for me is it's heavy. I'm used to it now, but if I'm shooting a lot without rest, my wrist (already weak from injury) gets a bit tired. Could just be me, though!
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Posts: 3,348
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 27, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $74.99
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Range, sharp, accurate metering, colors | | Cons: | Can flare easily, big, heavy, hard to find OEM hood | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 4
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 6
Value: 8
Camera Used: Pentax K-30
| |
There are a few variations of this lens available under brand names such as Tamron, Sigma, and even Quantary. Pentax had theirs as well and the difference between theirs and others is the coatings and the custom electronics. Otherwise, I think (and I could be wrong) the general optical design is the same.
I paid a total of $74.99 for my copy with the Pentax OEM bayonet hood. The hood was purchased separately from the lens.
Pros:
The focal length range of 28-200mm is very versatile.
My K-30 meters very accurately with this lens. I do not find myself with over/under exposed photos.
The colors are in between neutral and saturated. Maybe vivid is a good description.
Focusing is quick and accurate on my K-30. There is very little hunting unless I'm shaking the camera a bit and it decides that the focus point has been changed.
It is a full frame lens. The APS sized sensor in my K-30 crops out any soft corners. I can also use a narrower hood since vignetting effects are cropped out too.
The lens is decently sharp. Stop it down to somewhere between f/8 and f/11 for best results. I can get good sharpness from 28mm to about 150/175mm. After that I think either my hands shake too much or the light must be stressing the optical design. I would not hesitate to use the lens at the full 200mm. It's better than missing the shot completely.
Bokeh can be smooth and creamy but you have to work it into your shot.
It has an aperture ring. I used to be neutral on this but if I ever adapt this to a Q series camera then an aperture ring suddenly becomes very useful!
Despite having a bayonet hood mount the lens does have filter threads.
Neutral:
The lens/body mating surface for those that care for it. I'm personally OK with plastic if it is engineering correctly.
Cons:
This lens is a beast to handle. It's big and heavy. Zoom throw is relatively short so it can be hard to fine tune the focal length. It can also be a bit stiff since the lens elements have to move around a lot with very little actuation from the zoom ring (think of a bicycle with a high gear ratio that is hard to pedal).
The OEM petal style hood can be hard to find. A rubber hood can work too. You absolutely need a hood of some kind!!
Going on with the hood, this lens can flare very easily - even with a hood. I think it has a lot to do with the massive size of the front element. Personally, I am thinking of putting a tube over the OEM hood that I can slide forward to block out errant light.
Conclusion:
Like every lens, this one has its strengths and weaknesses. My first shots with this lens were done with no hood - not even a rubber one - and my shots were lacking contrast and definition. Everything flared. On the one hand I was disappointed but on the other hand I recognized the dream quality you can impart to your images if you can play with the light. A simple rubber hood reduced the flare significantly. The OEM hood took it up one more notch. Some have called these super zooms "vacation lenses". It's the lens you take with you on vacation to capture your memories vs. creating a fine art image. I would generally agree but I also think that an artist can create fine art with a piece of chalk just as well as with a pencil or a brush. I have snapped some lousy images and I have also snapped many good images as well.
I would say that if you can get this lens at good price (especially with the OEM hood) then it's worth it. Don't trip over your feet to get this one. I would save the tripping for my FA 28-105mm f/3.2 lens and my Super Lentar 35mm f/2.8.
Here are some sample images. Some of the color depth was lost during the conversion to JPG but this is still very representative of what the lens can produce.
IMGP7994 - Version 2 by Never Off, on Flickr
IMGP8957 by Never Off, on Flickr
IMGP8978 by Never Off, on Flickr
IMGP9022 by Never Off, on Flickr
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: May, 2012 Location: Phoenix AZ Posts: 1,047 | | Review Date: July 16, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $75.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Good zoom range, macro ability, comes in silver, solid feel | | Cons: | Kind of soft, it's really a Tamron lens, max aperture | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-5
| |
I own the silver Pentax K-5 and wanted a nice walk around zoom with far reach . I also wanted it to match my silver body. This seems to work out perfectly. It feels real solid, the thick rubber grips are nice and has a nice lens hood. It does however do some focus dancing from time to time. I bought this lens for $75 which is great for this type of range. choosing this or the DA 18-135mm WR I would have to say if you don't need the WR and are on a budget this lens is the best. One thing i have to note is that I do beleive this is actually a Tamron lens branded for Pentax. Perhaps Pentax contracted Tamron to make their cheaper lenses at that time. but anyway you can find a Tamron lens with these exact same specs just with a slightly different tread on the zoom grip and different colored numbering on the focus grip. The lens cap is the signature Tamron lens cap but with the word Pentax instead. All in all it's a great lens to have when you need zoom.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: August, 2010 Location: Toronto Posts: 13,667
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 18, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | good range (particulrly on film) light fast af | | Cons: | soft at longer than 135, low contrast, not super sharp | |
I've had both the Pentax and the Tamron variant on this lens (the Pentax came with my mz5, the tamron was a replacement after the dog knocked it out of my hand and it was damaged)
Like all the above I think this is probably an undervalued lens to some degree. I've traveled a lot with this on the mz5 and got some very good results from wide to say 135 or so and acceptable results beyond.
I also used it pretty extensively on my early digital (*istds) for lack of an alternative. Z
Zoom creep is an issue when shooting down from above particularly. without the hood it can be pretty soft (In bright daylight i usually shot with a CP attached)
At the price it is available at now i would think it's a pretty reasonable little travel lens and that is why i still have mine for the most part
If you are looking for an inexpensive superzoom to experiment with and aren't expecting the iq of some of the newer ones or primes you will be pleasantly surprised. if you are a little more demanding of the lens though you llikely want to look at other alternatives.
this would have been one of my early digital shots with this lense
IMGP0380-01.jpg by Eddie Smith, on Flickr
| | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2009 Location: Chattanooga, TN Posts: 7 | | Review Date: December 5, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Size, design and construction | | Cons: | Soft at long focal lengths | |
Like several of the other posters I just really like this lens. My favorite lenses are wides but for an all purpose lens this fits the bill for me. Being a lens designed for film cameras and with my using it on the K10D it ends up being a "prime" length to really long telephoto. For the price I paid it can't be beat! Yes, it tends to be soft at the longer lengths and wider apertures but that usually can be taken care of in editing the "keeper" shots. I really like the size and shape of this lens and even though it feels like a rock it gives me a level of confidence in it's durability and toughness. All in all I wouldn't sell this lens unless I was changing systems!
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: December, 2009 Location: East Yorkshire Posts: 120 | | Review Date: October 10, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Good zoom range for film. Reasonably small when set at 28mm | | Cons: | Not brilliant for digital. Looks very plastic. | |
I really like this lens, I know that I should not but I do. It may not be the sharpest lens available, but then again it is not soft. It has to be the shear convenience of it. Sometimes you do not want to walk around with a bag full of equipment either because its too cumbersome or you are in conditions were you don't want to changing lenses a lot such as on the beach. I use it when I am hill walking or in areas were I'm just being a tourist.
This lens has converted me to the cause of the 'superzoom', something that I was against since owning a Vivitar 35-200 in the mid 80s which was probably the worst lens ever made.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: January, 2008 Location: Brampton, ON, Canada Posts: 2,456 | | Review Date: September 21, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $200.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Very fast AF on Film, useful range and aperture | | Cons: | soft at each end, creep, strong pincushion distortion when zoomed | |
I owned this lens for several years, and used it on an MZ-5n, and a *IST DS.
All review comments are pretty accurate.
Really good as a single lens travel solution - size and aperture at the zoomed end were seldom a problem. Creep was annoying at times, but with a compact crumpler bag, I was able to sling it like a gun and avoid the issue.
It *can* be sharp - in good light and with a better hood (a collapsable rubber one worked quite well) - it is very prone to contrast loss (due to the large front element I guess). Colour also OK with respect to this.
Pin cushioning of horizons is pretty bad at full zoom, best at around 135mm. A bit narrow at wideangle FOV on an APS circle.
*Very* snappy AF on a film slr due to the short focusing ring throw.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: June, 2010 Posts: 54 | | Review Date: June 6, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | wide zoom range, some close focus ability | | Cons: | soft images | |
This lens produces images that look nice as 4x6 prints. The closeup focus is fairly useful as well.
However, look any closer and softness is easily noticeable.
When shooting closeups of objects with small lettering, the lens does not produce sharp edges until f/9. From f/3.8 to f/7, the lettering is significantly softer than the DAL 18-55, almost to the point of illegibility. This lens also performs worse than a Kodak Z740 camera in this situation. There is also significant softness at image edges.
I measured the minimum focus distance and field of view (on a K-x) at the various focal lengths:
28mm: 48cm min, approx 40x25cm (larger than my cm grid)
35mm: 53cm min, approx 40x25cm (larger than my cm grid)
50mm: 52cm min, 27x18cm
70mm: 41cm min, 18x12cm
100mm: 31cm min, 11x8cm
135mm: 29cm min, 10x7cm
200mm: 62cm min, 14x10cm
As the numbers show, magnification peaks at 135mm.
Due to the weight of the lens, there is zoom creep. However, this only occurs when the lens is already extended past 70mm or so; the lens just slides out to the full focal length if pointed down.
Overall, this is an ok lens if it's available for a low price.
Edit: I came to realize that the slight looseness in the front element is not normal. It's reverse threaded (looking at the lens from the front), so I put a suction cup on it and tightened it up. After cleaning the glass, I did another informal resolution test. Still not super sharp, but sharper than before. Rating and recommendation has been revised.
| | |
![SMC Pentax-FA 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 AL [IF] Review RSS Feed](https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/images/rss/rss_feeds14x14.gif)
![SMC Pentax-FA 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 AL [IF]](https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/44/SMC_Pentax-FA_28-200mm_F3_8-5_6.jpg)
![SMC Pentax-FA 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 AL [IF]](javascript:update('https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/44/SMC_Pentax-FA_28-200mm_F3_8-5_6.jpg');)
![SMC Pentax-FA 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 AL [IF]](javascript:update('https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/44/smc_Pentax-FA_28-200_3_8-5_6_optics.jpg');)
![Add Review of SMC Pentax-FA 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 AL [IF]](https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/images/digitalvb/pentax_red/buttons/addreview.gif)
