| Author: | | Senior Member Registered: October, 2022 Location: Glyfada, a southern suburb of Athens Posts: 199 | | Review Date: April 10, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $90.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | "poor man's FA* 28-70/2.8", sweet greyish color tonality, cheap!, beautiful | | Cons: | needs TLC (lens callibration, +13%vibrance) in PP for great images! | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 5
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: KP
| |
First of all it pairs beautifully with a silver KP and as a "raw" pentaxian you know in advance that all Pentax lenses have a great value; greater than what is appreciated by the masses!; ...including the pentaxians!!!  
It also shoots very nice as the "poor* man's SMC Pentax-FA* 28-70mm F2.8 AL"
It produces images with a calm "greyish" color tonality but with some PP I dare to say that it gets IQ close to the 33x more expensive HD 20-40 Limited  (that I own) but the below photos prove my words. Hence I call it " little Jay Star " 🙂
 
It does need a light post-process TLC in order to bring out its calm character but it's a little undervalued, unrecognized gem. Could not ask for more as a pentaxian.
I would even dare to call it the frontrunner in Pentax's DA design.
 It's a trully nice lens!
* [ebayed @ 83 euro ~ 90$ with a hood in almost mint condition; including shipping and customs and VAT.]
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2016 Posts: 2 | | Review Date: October 29, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $35.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Size, SUPER light weight! IQ on APSC | | Cons: | Rotating front element | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: K3II K01
| |
I do not understand why it has such low ratings, it is at least the same as 18-55 but with less size, weight and vignetting.
With the k01 it makes a super light combo and gives very good results with a semi-wide - tele range
It is not 2.8 but in good light situations the results are good (not great) even with the 24mpx sensor of the k3II
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Posts: 3,348
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 12, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $8.61
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Lightweight, underrated, handling | | Cons: | Not sturdy, rotating front element, limited zoom range | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K-30
| |
Updated on Dec 23, 2014
I've been playing around with this lens and comparing it to other zooms in my collections. My gold standard is the DA 18-135mm. I have to say that the FA-J doesn't lag too far behind. At 28mm and f/8 the corners and edges are a little soft but only if you pixel peep. Start zooming in and the exceptionally sharp center expands and pushes the softness outward beyond the sensor's reach. I'm actually very, very impressed with this little lens. The FA-J will not replace my DA since the DA lens is WR, sharper, and capable of a wider zoom range. However, the FA-J is FF capable and works great on film (DA vignettes pretty bad). I do wonder how it will perform on a FF digital system!
In my original review I said that the upper f-stop should be 11. After playing with the lens more I want to lower it down to 8, +/- 1 depending on the scene. Diffraction is definitely noticeable at f/11. Contrast slumps a bit and details get washed out when pixel peeping.
I bumped my sharpness up to an 8 since the DA is sharper and a good prime is sharper than both.
Originally Posted on Dec 12, 2013
I bought this lens on eBay as part of a camera+lens+bag package for $25.83. If I divide that amount by 3 then I can roughly say that the lens cost me roughly $8.61. The camera, a ZX-60, and the bag were in immaculate condition and well worth the total price alone. I can almost think that I got the lens for free. 
I sought out this lens knowing that it was poorly rated here on the forums. It has a score of 5.38 as I write this. I have to say that while this lens isn't a perfect 10 it deserves a higher score than it has now. Let me break it down in my typical Pro, Neutral, and Con sections.
Pro:
This lens is light. Unlike lots of people who like sturdy metal lens bodies I actually like lightweight lenses. My K-30 is heavy enough as it is. However, this can also be a con. See below.
My K-30 gets good and accurate exposure readings. I rarely have to use exposure compensation except in extreme cases.
The colors come out very lively - vivid! - without being saturated. My resulting white balance is very good.
I'm going to buck the trend here and say that the lens is relatively sharp. It's not a perfect 10 but for 4"x6" prints I would say it's excellent. Pixel peepers will want to shoot in RAW/DNG and use some post processing to sharpen textures of faraway bricks, wood grain on trees in the background, etc. I found the sharpness to be consistent across the zoom range and I would not hesitate to exercise the full range. Some lenses require you to back off from the absolute extremes by a few millimeters. Not here. Set the aperture somewhere between f/6.3 and f/11.
Autofocus was quick and accurate. It didn't hunt too much except in some wide angle cases, which I consider normal. That's almost more of a camera phenomena (AF spot size).
Going on with the focusing, this lens has a good close focus minimum even at full zoom. It's rated at 1.31ft or 0.4m. It's not a true macro but still good for close ups.
I liked the bokeh effect that can be achieved, especially at close focus. It's smooth.
Neutral:
The front element rotates during focusing. If you use gradient filters, polarizers, tulip / petal style hoods, etc then this could be a problem.
I like having a focus scale on/near the focus ring. This lens doesn't have it.
This one is neutral at best, almost a con. The mounting surface is plastic and I believe this plastic in this lens is made to mount with cameras that also have plastic mounting surfaces.
Con:
Lightweight! Yes, it's plastic and I have nothing against plastic but this is not sturdy plastic. It's not flimsy but it's not toughened either. This is definitely a fair weather lens like other F and FA lenses.
There is no aperture ring. This becomes a problem if you try to use this FF lens on older film bodies or try adapting to other mounting systems.
I mentioned that this lens is relatively sharp for what is but any lens could be sharper until you bump into the limits of your sensor. Still, for $8.61, what can you expect?
Conclusion:
I bought this lens knowing it could have been a bad lens. After shooting with it for a couple of days I have to say that this lens is actually pretty good. If nothing else, you will approach this lens with the idea to stress it out. You will seek out subjects with fine detail just to see how this lens resolves it and you will seek out colorful landscapes just to see how much range it transports to the image sensor. Lenses like this will have you shoot subjects you probably wouldn't otherwise and it will exercise you to work harder for the same shot. Then, when you come back to a pricey modern lens you will be better for it. The fun factor of this lens was very high! I would say that this lens proves that there is no such thing as a bad lens. This lens has unique strengths and they need to be learned, This lens has weaknesses and they need to be understood.
Again, just to emphasize, stop down the aperture to f/6.3 - f/11 and double check your focus. If you have front/back focus issue try using the LiveView feature of your camera (contrast AF) if you have it. I used my OVF with this lens.
I think you can also see how this FA-J lens become the DA L kit lens. The lack of aperture ring, the decorative silver ring near the lens mount, and the general look and feel are very similar to the DA L lenses.
Nothing speaks louder than samples shots. There was very little post processing done here. The pictures were sharpened a bit and I added some contrast. I also adjusted the black point level and cropped in some cases to adjust my composition. These images are scaled down in size but you can find the full sized images on my Flickr account.
Pentax FA-J 28-80mm Set
Pseudo macro shot. The corner piece is somewhat saturated from my desk lamp which was a tad too close. ISO 1600.
A foggy day in the valley. Gradient was smoothly captured. Sharpening reveals some details of the trees. Not bad at all.
Another pseudo macro shot. Close focus. Good detail on the seed. I liked the bokeh near the bottom of the shot of the trees in the far away distance.
The lens struggled here a bit. It's a wide angle shot with lots of texture. Sharpening and adding contrast helped but only up to a point.
Snow is always hard to capture. It either comes out the wrong color/shade or there's no detail. The lens did pretty well here and the shadows came out very nice too. | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: September, 2009 Location: Back in Florida, but worldwide gigs! Posts: 3,690
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 14, 2012 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Free and light | | Cons: | all plastic construction | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 6
Value: 10
| |
I got this lens for free, and after cleaning it up I realised what a neat little lens this is. Most folks hate this lens or throw it away, but there is something to be said for a lens you don't care much about. It can go on an old body that you are giving your child/neice without worry about "Good Glass" getting destroyed. In APS-C this lens turns into a 42 - 120 which is not a bad walk around lens! I'm not snobbish enough to not like this lens, and when it can be had for less than $20? C'mon, that's amazing!!
| | | | | | | Junior Member Registered: December, 2011 Location: HArtford CT Posts: 46
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 29, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $26.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | price, lightweight sharp at full aperture | | Cons: | No aperture ring | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
Bought this lens at a good price on eBay. Checked the reviews and thought I ended up with a dog. Not so. This lens performs.....and for the price...it was a steal. The lens stays. | | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2009 Location: Tennessee Posts: 3
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 29, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $17.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Lightweight, autofocus reasonable; good value, used. | | Cons: | I would have preferred a manual aperture ring also | |
Yes, I give it an "8." I know that sounds crazy; but, I purchased one used recently, and this lens performed far better than I anticipated.
Normally, out of principle, I would have immediately rejected the idea of an all-plastic lens. Also, I dislike any kind of automatic functions.
That said, this lens does well. I purchased mine used for a whopping $17 unit price; I got over. While probably not worth hundreds; this lens does what it is designed to do; and, I think it does it reasonably well.
The plastic is a trade off; while I assume it is less durable than a metal-chassis, I don't know that for a fact; yet, it's also very lightweight. It's so lightweight that when it was shipped to me, the box felt as though it was empty.
Overall, I'm satisfied; it works well on my K200D, and I will probably continue to use it. A good general purpose lens; probably would be ideal for a beginner; or, as a walk-around lens on a backup camera body.
| | | | |
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 11, 2009 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Iight weight, bright, good colors and contrast | | Cons: | Images a bit soft, plastic, no manual aperture | |
This is a very good, INEXPENSIVE, lens for still structures and landscapes. I prefer to use this lens from f6.7 up. Could benefit from a lens hood. Not the best for portrait/studio work. At the prices these go for they are a good walk around lens. Hey, if you drop it, fall with it or otherwise ding it you are not out a lot of money.
Here is a sample photo taken by a photographer with hand tremors from neurological damage and diabetes. Body is s K110D (no antishake) with a monopod and finger on the shutter button:
 | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: Bodø Posts: 5 | | Review Date: March 5, 2009 | Not Recommended | Price: $16.00
| Rating: 2 |
| Pros: | Nothing | | Cons: | Everything | |
Very soft
Crappy bad contrast
Feels like a plastic tube whit window...
Dont ever buy this lens
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2008 Location: Yurp Posts: 4,666 | | Review Date: July 20, 2008 | Not Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | Cheap, lightweight | | Cons: | Quality not up to par; plastic lens mount | |
A good carry-on companion for MZ/ZX series cameras like the ZX-30. Good for holiday snapshots but not much more.
The lens itself flares quite a lot. It does not come with a lens hood in the box. Image quality is average, bokeh is choppy.
Not recommended for serious photographers.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2007 Location: Phoenix Posts: 1,056 | | Review Date: October 8, 2007 | Not Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 3 |
| Pros: | Very compact, light | | Cons: | Image quality, build quality | |
Soft, dull images and poor construction. For a cheap AF zoom, you're much better off with an FA 28-90: same cheap plastic, but much better image quality.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: August, 2007 Location: Bournemouth, England Posts: 36 | | Review Date: August 29, 2007 | Not Recommended
| Rating: 2 |
| Pros: | None | | Cons: | Everything | |
Either mine was a very bad example due to poor quality control, or it is just a bad lens. Very soft images, no bite and even lacking good contrast levels. Auto focus was slow and it occassionally hunted even in good light. Very flimsy construction. The only Pentax lens I have ever thrown away.
| | |
;)
;)
