| Author: | | New Member Registered: November, 2016 Posts: 7 | | Review Date: April 18, 2021 | Recommended | Price: $77.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Build quality, image quality | | Cons: | price | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
Honestly, In my opinion, there is no real good reason to get the F2.5 of the 135mm lens when this F3.5 lens does everything great in the digital era. Background separation is just as good with this lens as with the F2.5, but significantly more affordable and physically smaller. It is also sharper wide open when compared to the F2.5 at F2.5. No need to worry about viewfinder brightness anymore like in the film days. I do have to say that this lens is still slightly expensive, probably because of its slight rarity when compared to the Pentax-M version.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2019 Posts: 11 | | Review Date: November 20, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Nice build quality, Bokeh, very sharp | | Cons: | No A setting on aperture ring (doesn't bother me) | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
I got this lens for portraits as I plan to do more studio work. However I used for street photography and street portraits on a number of occasions now.
Pairs nicely with both K-5 and K-70. One of the cheapest lens I've bought and one of the best.
| | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2013 Location: Jakarta Posts: 2
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 11, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $110.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | very sharp, built quality | | Cons: | prone to flare and CA in wide open, no hood | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: K5, MV, ME Super, a6000, a7
| |
very sharp, little bit heavy and bigger when it's compare to M version, be careful if shot in sun bright, it's prone to flare and CA, the lens character is similar to the big brother: SMC Pentax 135mm f2.5, additional hood should be installed when shot wide open in sun bright
any samples shots here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/roe_groho/sets/72157657390213349 | | | | | Junior Member Registered: March, 2014 Posts: 27 | | Review Date: April 3, 2014 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | sharp, affordable, build quality | | Cons: | harder to find & bigger than M version | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: KX, KM
| |
This lens I got with a KM together with a 55mm 1.8 K lens & 28mm 2.8 M lens for less than 40 dollar. I'm kind of lucky with finding vintage Pentax stuff I guess. Of course it has much more value than what I spent on it. The focussing is less smooth than with the other K lenses that I use but this lens looks so new that it might just have to loosen up. The build quality is as you can expect from a K lens; outstanding.
The pictures it took so far were very fine, didn't see any CA's, sharp across the entire frame at all apertures. It came with the original sunhood that clicks onto the lens in two ways, for taking pictures and for storing (backwards). It is about 2 cm longer then the M version. I didn't try the M version but wouldn't be surprised if the K version would be of better optical quality.
Don't mind the grain, this film has expired 6 years ago...
| | | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: February, 2012 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: March 20, 2014 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Very sharp and light enough to always cary | | Cons: | not as short as the m series | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: pentax k-5
| |
Very very nice lens. I already got the pentax-m 135 f3.5 which I did not like a lot.
But than I found this version at the second hand shop, and they asked only €3,50 ($4,80) for it!
When I first used the lens I was chocked, this lens is so sharp stopped down, such a big difference with the m series.
Pity that it's a bit slow, but in daylight this lens is truly a gem.
Some samples:
 | | | | | Senior Member Registered: October, 2013 Location: Kent Posts: 154
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 20, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $35.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, easy to use | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: Canon 50D (APS-C)
| |
I'm surprised that this lens isn't more popular, perhaps because it wasn't produced in great numbers or it may be that it is just overshadowed by it's big brother the K 2.5.
I have made a side by side comparison between the SMC K 135mm 3.5 and the SMC M 135 3.5 and the K is the clear leader. OK so the M version has a built in hood and is slightly shorter but in perfomance it lags behind the K.
I'm surprised that one reviewer comments about a lack of contrast and can only assume that he wasn't using a hood, which I consider a necessity when using any lens especially one with the front element so exposed. I have always used a hood with this lens and never had low contrast shots.
If you need a 135mm and don't want to pay the high premium for the SMC K 135mm 2.5 then this lens the SMC K 135mm 3.5 is certainly the one to go for.
| | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2012 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: December 25, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $79.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Price, sharp | | Cons: | contrast, colorful, | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 7
Camera Used: K-5
| |
I like this lens, but there are some low contrast with this. Sometimes photos look likes as in "fog cloud" but lens is pure. Maybe it peace by peace.
Resume:
This is better lens then present low cost lenes. There is no TOP quality lens but it is usable.
Some photos for example:
Kitty
Bush
Fungus
Kitty n.2 | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,223
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 18, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $180.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Well built, compact, easy to use, and great IQ | | Cons: | None so far. It is so easy to focus that AF is not missed | |
I really like this lens, I enjoy the sharpness and IQ that I cannot get in the zooms I have. This is a lens that last for ever, so, here are some samples:
yellow-red tomato by Palenquero, on Flickr
uvas by Palenquero, on Flickr
tool bucket by Palenquero, on Flickr
tomatoes by Palenquero, on Flickr
moth by Palenquero, on Flickr
onions by Palenquero, on Flickr
moth again by Palenquero, on Flickr
green tomatoes by Palenquero, on Flickr
Great Orange by Palenquero, on Flickr
THis one is at full resolution:
Grapes by Palenquero, on Flickr
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: November, 2009 Location: Strand Posts: 1,366
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 9, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Image quality, build, light compared to other 135 | | Cons: | MF | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
If I have to select between DA*50-135, M135f2.5 or M135f3.5, this is my to-go lens for walking tour in daylight. Perfect focal length for children candid shoots.
This lens has very good flare control using the hood. Very good color rending compares to other MF zooms or even the DA50-200. At f5.6-f8 it is very sharp. Beautiful bokeh in f5.6 and f8. It is also cheap for this focal length compared to image quality.
Canon shooters with large zoom and grip looked down due it's size on my K20 and just stop laughing after have seen the image result. Tiny size and light weight but excellent result.
Highly recommended.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: October, 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 7,761
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 11, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $179.50
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Cost & quality. | | Cons: | F3.5 maximum aperture. | | Camera Used: K Series film bodies (K1000, KM, KX, K2, K2DMD)
| |
I have owned my K135/3.5 since I purchased it new in late 1975. The K135/3.5 was my only telephoto lens for decades and 135mm is a good entry level telephoto focal length if you are using a film camera.
The K135/3.5 is light weight for a lens of this focal length, so it’s perfect for traveling. As with all K series lenses, the build and quality are second to none. The maximum aperture is f3.5 and this is fine for most shooting situations. You way want something faster for night and indoor use, like the more expensive K135/2.5.
The K135/3.5 has a 52mm filter thread like most K series mid focal length (24mm to 150mm) lenses, so it’s easy to put together a 52mm filter kit. It has a dedicated lens hood, which also fits the K120/2.8 & K150/4. The hood is fairly easy to find on eBay.
The K135/3.5 has four lens elements compared to the larger K135/2.5, which has six. The K135/2.5 also has a bigger 58mm filter thread.
The K135/3.5 is a good entry level telephoto/portrait lens, that you can pickup for a reasonable price. I have both the K135/3.5 & the K135/2.5, but I would recommend the K135/2.5 overall, even though it will cost you twice as much.
Note: The price I indicated for the K135/3.5 is the 1975 list price for a new lens.
Sample shots taken with the K135/3.5. Photos are medium/high resolution scans from original slides.
Camera: KX Film: Kodak Ektachrome E100VS ISO: 100
Camera: KX Film: Kodachrome 64 ISO: 64
 | | | | | Junior Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: new haven Posts: 38 | | Review Date: March 10, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharp, good image quality, great built quality | | Cons: | a bit slow | |
I got a K 135/3.5 from KEH. It is my first manual focus lens. The built quality is so great! like all the K lens. I just take a few shots, and I feel very comfortable with the image quality. It is Sharp. The color and contast is very good.
It is much cheaper than K 135/2.5. For a starter like me, it is also a good choice.  | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: July, 2008 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: September 17, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $70.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharp and good color and contrast | | Cons: | no so far | |
The principal performance of the lens is very decent. I have experience with two PK-Mount 135MM lens. One is Takumar 135/F2.5 (no SMC). By comparison, this lens shows better color and contrast.
 | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2008 Location: Waterloo, Ontario Posts: 4,461 | | Review Date: February 18, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp. contrasty, world class build | | Cons: | Fully manual | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
I picked up a mint copy of the Pentax K 135 f 3.5 on EBAY a month ago for just under $100. From the looks of it I don’t think it had ever been used. Like all K-series glass it is beautifully crafted, sharp and contrasty. As with almost all K series lenses SMC Pentax, serial number, focal length, etc. is neatly engraved on the retaining ring surrounding the front element. It is good at 3.5 and very good up to f16. As with most lenses diffraction takes a toll from there on. Colours seem very bright on this particular example. Here is a recent example from this lens:
It is fairly light and came with an original Pentax hood. Klaus Schrioff of Photozone in a detailed review of the K 135 f 2.5 noted CA issues:
"Low CAs were surely no design objective in the late 70s so it isn't really surprising that this is a weakness of this old lens (K 135 f 2,5) . CAs (color shadows at harsh contrast transitions) can be fairly visible at times with an average pixel width around 1.3px at the image borders."
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Pentax%20Lens%20Tests/48-pentax/143-pentax-s...ab-test-report
As this lens is of the same focal length and vintage it may be an issue here as well but so far I have not noted a problem. Then again I don't set up extreme high contrast situations to look for them. I prefer spending my time making images. In any case on digital it is a nice light 200mm lens that balances well on my K10 and looks great. The K10 shake reduction makes it easy to get good hand held results. Boz Dimitrov's Pentax site provides further technical details:
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/tele/K135f3.5.html
It is manual focus of course with all the digital limitations that implies. Metering is stop down in digital and you will get no f stop information in the viewfinder. I doubt the K 135 f 2.5, although faster, is any sharper and it usually goes for more than twice this price. For a $100 bucks the f 3.5 seems like a good buy. Check it out if you have a need for this focal length.
| | |
;)
;)
