| Author: | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 1,308
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 8, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | small, light, very sharp even wide open | | Cons: | none really | |
Great little lens, very small and light and very sharp even wide open.. I have compared this lens to the 31 ltd and it compares very well IMHO.. The only difference is sometimes noticable in the OOF areas. As this lens has 6 blades and the 31 has 9, rings of light in the OOF areas can be smoother with the 31 ltd...
For the money this lens is a fantastic buy (I payed US$299 from BH)
I don't like to give 10/10 too often but this lens deserves it..
| | | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2006 Location: North Idaho Posts: 696 | | Review Date: January 9, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $300.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | small, lightweight, superior optics, SMC, included lens hood, fast maximum aperture | | Cons: | none | |
The SMC Pentax-FA f/1:2.0 35mm AL lens is quickly becoming my "normal" default lens on my dSLR body. For those familiar with the Pentax 50mm lenses (except for the 1.2 version), it is almost the same size. Only about a few millimeters longer to accommodate the included, snap-on hood mount.
Construction quality is every bit as good as any FA prime and the optical quality is superior. It has been said that the optics of the FA35 are every bit as good as the FA31 Limited. Perhaps, but the relative prices of each lens makes the FA35 a bargain.
The field-of-view, when mounted on a digital is very close to "normal" and is the lens that would be provided as the kit lens if we still lived in the days when they gave you a prime as a kit lens instead of a zoom.
When you purchase a new FA35/2, you get a plastic sun hood in the box. It is the snap-on type common to lenses these days. It is a slightly petal shaped hood and snaps in such a way that rarely, if ever, will it accidentally come lose while in the field. You need not worry about losing a hood when you are out and about. The hood will mount in the reverse orientation for storage, and in fact need be before you can remove or replace the lens cap. The hood has the 'normal' Pentax snap-out cover that allows the use of a circular polarizer when the hood is mounted on the lens.
The lens itself accommodates the traditional 49mm filter thread and has the FA snap-on lens cap. You can remove the lens hood with the lens cap in position.
My only "negative" about this lens is not really a bad characteristic of this particular lens, but of FA lenses in general. That being the ability to manually focus the lens while the camera body is in autofocus mode. The DA lenses have this capability, and is most welcome for us old manual focus type of guys. To manual focus this lens, (or any FA series lens), when the camera is in autofocus mode, you will first have to switch the body from AF to MF.
Very, very highly recommended! In fact, if you have any inclination to purchase one of these lenses, do so as soon as economically feasible. Who knows for how much longer FA primes will be available in the marketplace. As of today (early January of 2007) the FA35/2.0 is still available from multiple vendors. Six months from now, they may be as rare as the FA50/1.4 lens.
Only rated an 8 because I reserve my 9 and 10 ratings for Limiteds, "*", and other exceptional or outstanding lenses. This one comes close...very close.
| | | | | Administrator
Site Webmaster Registered: September, 2006 Location: Arizona Posts: 51,609 | | Review Date: January 15, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $300.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Great color reproduction, Sharp, Fast to focus | | Cons: | None | |
This frequently unnoticed lens deserves a lot of recognition.
Its color reproduction matches up to that of the FA* 24mm. It is sharp at all apertures, and, best of all, it's light and compact. This lens will easily make its way onto every trip!
This 35mm is especially useful on DSLRs since it corresponds to a 50mm standard lens. It's also very quick to focus, and the fast aperture comes in handy for night landscapes.
It also comes with a plastic bayonet hood. A must-have for every serious hobbyist!
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: November, 2006 Location: Taipei, Taiwan Posts: 130
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 31, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Size, handling, build | | Cons: | bokeh | |
My review will go counter to most who use this lens it seems. I had this for a couple of years and while it is a very nice focal length for a DSLR and it is well enough built and comes with a decent hood, it was never a great lens as far as I am concerned.
Optically, the lens is sharp at pretty much all apertures and if sharpness were the only criteria, it would rate as an excellent lens. However, I am of the opinion that sharpness is a much overrated measure (like horsepower in cars, or power output in stereo equipment) and for my style of shooting anyways it is certainly not the most important element of creating a good photo. Where the 35/2 falls short of me is in the area of bokeh/out of focus rendering for one and in how it transitions from in focus to out. The bokeh is quite honestly poor; I don't exactly know how to describe it, but there are often highlights that almost look like flare in the background of shallow DOF shots from the 35 and the hwol character of the out of focus area just seems hard or rough as opposed to smooth and creamy, which is what I am after. Also, the six aperture blades do tend to create strong geometric shapes that aren't that pleasing as well.
As I mentioned the 35/2 is nice and sharp; this is pretty much true at all apertures and across the frame. If you never shoot shallow DOF/available light stuff, it will likely suit you much better than it suited me. Although the 35/2 was sharper than my Sigma EX 28/1.8 at pretty much all apertures, the Sigma consistently took more pleasing photos for me. The bokeh and smoothness of the Sigma was just at another level. Even better is my new FA31/1.8, which easily outpaces the Sigma and crushes the 35/2 in most every area. Again, this is an example of sharpness not being the biggest measure of quality in a lens, as the 35/2 is at least as sharp as the 31Ltd IMO. To compare a lens with a fairly different FOV, my FA50/1.4 is propably not as sharp as the 35/2, but it is optically much superior IMO. The same reasons apply as for the Sigma; much better bokeh, smoother transitions, less nasty highlights, ec. The 50/1.4 does get my rating as a great lens, as does the 31/1.8, so it is not that I don't believe Pentax makes great lenses.
A plus to the 35/2 is that it seems to be pretty straight; I don't think I have ever noticed barrel or pincushion distortion in my shooting (even with film); not that I have a style that would call attention to such distortions, but it is something that I notice with my Sigma 28 (barrel distortion, even on APS). If you do a lot of architecture, the Pentax would likely be the better choice IMO. I don't, so it is not something that I look for.
Many praise the 35/2 as being a great value lens, and while I won't debate that at all, when I compare it to my FA50/1.4 I would say it seems a little overpriced. The bodies of the two are very similar; I would guess there are a number of shared parts. However, if you look at the amount of glass, the 50 seems to have a lot more. Both the front and rear element of the 50 are much larger than those on the 35/2. Now, I am not a lens designer, nor do I know a lot about the economics of lens production, but with such similar bodies, but with so much less glass, the 35/2 would seem to be cheaper to manufacture than the 50 to me. Now, with the 35/2, we do get a nice little case and the lens hood. The case is still in the box for me though, so there is no value for me and I really don't see how the lens hood should add about 33% to the cost of the 50/1.4. None of this is really meant as a complaint against the 35/2 so much as it is to underscore how good a value the 50/1.4 is.
I know this sounds very negative about the 35/2 and I really don't think it is a bad lens at all. I believe that the build quality is excellent, the handling and focus are very good and that under most conditions it produces really nice shots. However, for my uses it just doesn't quite deliver everything I am looking for.
| | | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: February, 2007 Location: Gloucester UK Posts: 441
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 2, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $200.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Fast, very sharp, beautiful rendering, small and very well made | | Cons: | Nothing | |
Everyone else has said what I feel is great about this lens.
Almost eclipsed by the ravings over the 31 Limited, this lens deserves much better recognition. It is one of Pentax's best designs, thank goodness it is still being made and will stay until the DA 35. Thank you Pentax.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: April, 2007 Location: Toronto/Victoria Posts: 460
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 21, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $250.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Compact, fast focusing, fast, sharp | | Cons: | Strange bokeh sometimes | |
This lens works for me in certain scenarios, while in others it doesn't fare too well.
For any type of portrait of anything where the subject is not the entire frame, it is quite a good lens rendering the subject sharp. The out of focus areas are rough in some cases, especially foliage which is handled better by some of my other lenses.
Don't use UV filters. One of them was ruining one corner of my images, then i switched filters and the problem disappears.
It is nice and small, focuses quickly, and manually focuses very well for an AF lens.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: June, 2007 Location: Malmö, Sweden Posts: 93
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 18, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | IQ and size | | Cons: | nothing at all | |
This is the only lens I have that I can give a 10 to without doubting myself. Back during the days of film it was my walkaround lens which had everything from IQ to small size/low weight. Now with digital it has an approx. fov of a normal which is less than perfect for me but I kept on using it and now Ive gotten used to the fov.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: March, 2007 Posts: 2,476 | | Review Date: September 12, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Fast, Sharp (very good wide open too), Affordable | | Cons: | nada | |
A superb lens, very sharp even wide open and its sharpness compares to much more expensive primes. Includes a decent hood with a little opening for adjusting CPL filters, and a not too impressive lens bag, but thats two things more than what u get with the FA50. This is just a great buy, considering the cost of the lens and the 35mm focal length with 1.5x crop lands around a very usable 50mm. Overall I recommend you get this one before you get the FA50 since this is much more of an all around lens. Highly recommended.
| | | | | | | | Review Date: September 13, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $299.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp, perfect focal length for DSLR, sharp, fast focus, sharp, great in low light, sharp, nice bokeh, and did I say sharp? | | Cons: | The plastic construction feels a little less satisfying than the nice old metal lenses. | |
This will undoubtedly be my standard lens, the right focal length and sharp. CA is not a problem and it can be used wide open with no real loss of sharpness.
Fantastic.
Ira
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2006 Location: Canberra, Australia Posts: 338 | | Review Date: February 25, 2008 | Not Recommended | Price: $300.00
| Rating: 2 |
| Pros: | sharp as a tack | | Cons: | Poor rendition of colour and contrast. Poor bokeh. A "hard" "soulless" look. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 3
Bokeh: 2
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 5
Value: 4
| |
I expected this lens to be a wider FA50/1.4 in terms of image quality but I was disappointed. Although very sharp, the photographs almost looked to me as if they were taken by a point and shoot camera; no subtlety with a "hard" two dimensional flatness about them. The bokeh is marked by harsh transitions - not the creamy softness of the FA50/1.4. Although faster (and AF of course), it comperes most unfavorably with my old super-takumar 28/3.5 in image quality.
If sharpness and speed are your only criteria in this focal length then perhaps this lens would suit. I found it quite unsatisfactory for the reasons outlined above.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: May, 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 42 | | Review Date: March 5, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $299.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp and smooth, great image quality. Solid build. | | Cons: | Considering my particular use, none. | |
I have recently purchased this lens and have to say that it exceeded my expectations regarding image quality. I happen to like a "normal" lens (35mm on a K10D, 50mm on a 35mm camera, 80 on a 645 and etc.) for my purposes. I generally strive for a deep DOF even if it means using a tripod. Consequently, bokeh isn't usually a major consideration in lens choice. Of course, your needs may differ.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: March, 2008 Location: Trinidad W.I. Posts: 612 | | Review Date: April 3, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $219.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Fast AF, very sharp, light, | | Cons: | hard edged bokeh, front focuses on K20D | |
I got this lens to get the 50mm FOV on the K20D as I am retiring the old 50mm F1.7 in favor of my 70mm F2.4, on first using the lens it is clearly very sharp but something was just missing? The bokeh on backgrounds that had no highlights looked great but as soon as any bright objects were there it looked just wrong with hard edges or very obvious little hexagon shapes.
Add to that I seemed to constantly be off by 3-6 in in focus on every thing when wide open after 5 feet ( even tho using the lens test chart at 45 degrees it was dead on ). This was correctable with the AF adjustment for lenses in the K20D but the hard bokeh isn't.
Now considering the lens is rather cheap I know I can't compare it to something like the 31mm ltd ( 3-4x the cost ) for butter smooth bokeh and it's far better than most zooms I have used it the same focal range so it stays and it gets alot of use as well but If I had to do it again I might have gotten another lens instead. That is IF there was something else other than the 31mm that can perform as well.
So it's a good sharp lens with nothing actually bad about it ( other than it's bokeh ), it's very sharp but the images are just, well sharp. I guess I have been spoilt by the DA 70mm LTD and it's super bokeh and 3d look. It will cost alot more to get a better lens in the focal range. I can recommend it as a good lens but it's not a great lens.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: November, 2007 Location: Bay area, CA Posts: 194 | | Review Date: July 14, 2008 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharp wide open. light. Inexpensive. | | Cons: | not a limited.. (but then, so what?) | |
The little gem is quickly replacing my fast 50's as being my fav. It seems to be more versatile on APS-C camera than the 50mm, allowing great head & shoulder shots at close range and great children shots (the little rug rats moved too fast to get a clean sharp shot in natural indoor light, and in-door light is 90% of my candid photo encounters). in addition, the wide-open sharpness at f2.0 is better than that of the 50mm f1.4 at f2.0... so i'm not at all shy about ripping this lens wide open for a nice shot.
The physics of shorter focal lens dictates that your 'bokeh' transition will inevitably be shorter than what can be achieved with a longer focal lens. If i want better (more gradual, 3D like) sharp-to-bokeh transition, i'd just grab my 70mm and stand back a little more.
Good: sharp wide open. Decent bokeh for the focal length.
Bad: 6 aperture blade can may an otherwise sweet stary shots to be a slight distraction.
pricing: as a cent-to-cent comparison, i think this lens should cost about the same as one of the fast fifties. and Pentax could easily 'kit' this lens as alternative to the 18-55 zoom and show the world what this little gem is capable of.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: March, 2008 Location: CT / NY Posts: 822
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 29, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $300.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | LIGHT, small, SHARP, GREAT! | | Cons: | Nothing really, maybe the plastics | |
It is my first 10 rating...
This lens is PERFECT for my use because of the following:
- It is COMPACT! Not a pancake, but nicely small and compact
- Relatively FAST!
- SHARP SHARP SHARP!
- Nice FOV! I have the 50mm 1.4 and unfortunately I dont use it that much... it is narrow...
If I had to complain about anything on this lens, it'd be the cheap LOOKS... but honestly that is what makes it sooo SPECIAL! It is a winner disguised in a cheap lens body! I stupidly avoided buying this babe because of its look but after trying it at B&H i felt in love! I wish it was sexy as the A series primes... but I am glad it is a POWERFUL underdog (believe me, in shootouts people look at the K10D with this small lens and then they see the results and they are like: WOW!!!!)
If you need a wide prime around 35mm... this is it!
PS. My lover before the FA 35mm was (maybe still is) a Vivitar 28mm that rendered GREAT colors... small size and all.. but MF and 2.8... so yeah... I have another wide prime to compare too.. and though both are great lenses.. the FA35mm is a WINNER for it's speed, AF, optics and SIZE!
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: October, 2008 Location: Utah Posts: 51 | | Review Date: November 1, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $245.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp, compact, normal FOV on APS-C, excellent bokeh. | | Cons: | Not as well-built as a Limited. | |
Maybe it's not a ten, but it's better than a 9.5. If it was made of metal, it might be a ten. But if it was made of metal, I couldn't have found it so cheap. A previous review ranked this as a "4." You can basically ignore it. I've not found my photos to contain the "hard" and "soulless" quality decried in the review. Of course, I must say I find those a bit enigmatic as far as adjectives are concerned. I think the lens is fantastic. It is already sharp at f2. The bokeh, which others have also complained about, is beautiful. Of course, pick the right shot, and any lens can give cruddy bokeh. That's because the stuff in the bokeh zone was a cruddy subject. I've gotten cruddy bokeh with an FA 50 1.4 and a DA 70 2.4 L. I've also gotten excellent bokeh with both. The FA 35 renders beautiful bokeh in most images I've produced. Considering the normal FOV on a 1.5x crop factor dSLR, I would throw up if somebody stole this lens. For me, it is indispensable. I highly recommend it, and before they become too rare. They aren't being made by Pentax anymore. They are still being made by Samsung as a Schneider, though, if I'm not mistaken.
| | |
;)
;)
;)
