| Author: | | Junior Member Registered: June, 2020 Posts: 38 | | Review Date: July 11, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Small, light, sharp | | Cons: | Some softness in corners and vignetting | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 3
Bokeh: 5
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax LX, MX, Canon RP
| |
I love this little lens! I found it on auction on Ebay and bought it for a steal with a beautifully functional MX body. I didn't know if either would work but I hit the jackpot. Both did and I couldn't be happier. I'd have spent 3x as much for this lens. It makes for an excellent companion to my small Pentax SLRs and works beautifully as an adapted lens to my full frame Canon RP DSLR. Very very happy with the sharpness, build and quality and bonus points for the lovely built in filters. 
 | | | | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2015 Posts: 15 | | Review Date: August 20, 2018 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | size & weight, center sharpness | | Cons: | flare, soft corners | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: K1
| |
Lovely full frame wide angle lens from the film era.
Small (filter size only 58 mm! Very small compared to the DFA 15-30).
Despite SMC a lot of flare (also reflections from the filter revolver?).
CA are present but easily correctable in post-processing.
Center is sharp from f 5,6, but the corners are a different story. At f16 only the extreme corners stay unsharp. Best aperture is f11-16.
Even small 58 mm Polfilters cause a litte bit vignetting. Four built in filters, two are useful (orange&yellow) for B&W
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2013 Location: Sydney Posts: 844
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 9, 2015 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: K2, K-3
| |
First off, if you are thing of getting this lens for APS-C I'd probably recommend getting the DA15 or DA21 instead. They're smaller, sharper, and can be picked on the second hand market for about the same price. If I was rating it solely based on apsc, I'd give it a score of 7.5 to 8 ish.
If however you are a 35mm film shooter, or have your eye on an FF camera, then it's worthy of consideration. The bokeh is actually remarkably good, but that's probably not why you're buying this lens! The inbuilt filters add to it's charm, but they are focussed somewhat towards B&W film. If you're an avid pixel peeper, then you might be a little disappointed (on the k-3 for example it can be a little soft in the corners, but it's still much sharper than the A20 f2.8!). The rendering of images, is however top notch. On 35mm film it's a fantastic lens, and there really aren't many better options that are so wide. You'll find some distortion there, but it's never bothered me too much.
So on FF it's great. On apsc, it's not that wide, it has great rendering and bokeh, but it is a touch soft at wider apertures. Worth picking up if you can find a good deal, but you might be better served with a DA limited. I'll report back when I get my hands on an FF pentax | | | | | Junior Member Registered: February, 2014 Location: Nissedal (Goblin Valley) Posts: 38
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 18, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $590.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp | | Cons: | None | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K10D
| |
Read the other reviews, bought this lens anyway, worth every dollar! You see, even if this lens is a bit unsharp at the extreme edges (but not in the corners), it's not an unpleasent unsharpness. A lens can have high and low resolution in different ways. Leica lenses (whitch I've been using for the last 10 years) are very good examples of this. They have very high centre sharpness and contrast, and the low resolution areas are more like bokeh than like "unsharp" in a smudgy way. The K mount 18mm is like this. There are lenses with higher resolution, but this lens never renders objects ugly, in or out of focus, sharp or unsharp. It reminds me of my Leica R 21mm. I just can't wait to get this lens on a FF camera. Oh, and very low CA and fringing, just as good as the ltd 31mm, but with more ease. This lens is so far my best encounter with Pentax optics. Most lenses can be sharp and unsharp, but not always in a cool way.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2009 Posts: 15
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 31, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $370.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Colors, focal length, handling | | Cons: | No interest on APS-C | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: LX
| |
The point of this lens is to be used on a large sensor (silver or silicon).
I used mine on a pentax LX and it is a good couple, very well balanced.
The feel is solid. It uses built-in filters, which are black and white oriented. (a tungsten to daylight filter would have been welcome).
About the results, colors are fine and pleasing. Distorsions are little but visible when you look at it (first picture). I think it is the counterpart of developping a light and small retrofocus wide angle.
To compare with what I own, I compared it to the 15 heliar which has practically no distorsions but is a so-so performer in color.
I gave a good rating in bokeh because when forcing it (focus at few cm , full opening) it is quite smooth and pleasing. But in the real life it is inexistant.
Aside from all that, wide angle are fun
Pentax LX / Fuji Superia 400
Pentax LX / Ilford XP2
Pentax LX / Fuji Superia 400
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: December, 2010 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 141
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 8, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Super wide angle, built in filters, great upclose.. | | Cons: | Size and weight means it's often left untouched. | |
Lovely wide angle on the full frame 35mm. It's impact is lessend with the smaller DSLR sensors. Built in filters are useful but largely redundant (orange O56(O2)) and yellow(Y48(Y2)) filters for B&W, skylight and cloudy are the other choices. Great for sweeping landscapes, and well lit interiors. Mine focuses down to about 15cm on a ist DL2 Body. Great for distorted sizing effects. Not small or light means it oftens gets squeezed out of bulging camera bags. Still it's less imposing than it's 15mm F3.5 brother, well worth collecting now. (just imagine with a full 35mm sensor!). Definitely one of my 'TOP' 5 SMC Pentax Lenses. 
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2010 Posts: 753
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 26, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $380.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | distortion, full format, centre sharpness, small and compact. | | Cons: | edge sharpness could be better | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 10
Value: 7
| |
First of all - here is some old magazine test which puts this lens against some comparable lenses from other companies. Notice that Pentax is on top here with Olympus and Zeiss.
http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive...tm&sl=it&tl=en
I purchased this lens when I missed oportunity to buy FA20mm. The lens comes with built in filters, but if you purchase step up ring 58to67mm you can mount any filter without vigneting on DSLR. The lens has very good control od distortion, not so significant in landscape photography but if you intend to make photos of architecture you'll surely appreciate this. Resolution in the centre of the frame is great from f5.6 to f16. Edges however are different story, softer below f8. I had the oportunity to compare the lens to Tamron SP17mm and Pentax DA16-45mm. SMC18mm easily outperforms Tamron, DA16-45 is tougher match, however i think older K lens is marginally better.
Cons: Avoid f22! Expensive.
In my opinion it is a very good UWA lens, if the resolution will be bit more even across the frame I'll give it 9.
Edit: Recently I purchased K20/4 and if you are considering UWA and you don't mind losing 2mm of focal lenght, I definitely recommend K20/4 over K18/3.5.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: January, 2010 Location: Calgary AB Posts: 40 | | Review Date: July 16, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $550.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Built in Filters, Great IQ | | Cons: | Larger than the alternatives | |
I was originally looking for a 20mm F4 lens as a compact ultrawide, but was offered one of these lenses at a fair price. The built in filters are great, especially if like me you're shooting B&W film. The lens is very well built and has given me excellent results. Suprisingly resistant to flair.
This lens has been firmly fixed to my MX since I got it and I would highly recommend it.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2010 Location: Santa Barbara Posts: 60
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 4, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $485.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp, good color, fun to handle | | Cons: | not realy | |
It seems this lens may vary in quality throughout its production years.
My copy doesn't suffer any "pink hue", nor softness or other negative issues. This lens came as SMC and later as smc marked variant. My copy is the newer smc, renders very nice color, it's sharp 3.5-11 (my range of usage) from corner to corner and mechanically solid & pleasant to use.
One has to make sure the filter wheel is not accidentally set in off position, which could get in the way of performance. Mostly, I have dialed in the Skylight and 58mm UV Heliopan is protecting the glass. CA's are not any different than of my DA16-45mm (very minimal) and high contrast fringing is practically non-existent (on istD or K-x).
Will see if future digital FF body (hopefully one of these days) will like it as well. Very glad I was able to get this fun classic about three years back!
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2007 Posts: 151 | | Review Date: April 26, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $450.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | low distortion, built in filters | | Cons: | a bit soft, built in filters | |
I must say, I was a little disappointed with this lens (sold it rather quickly). I heard so many glowing reviews about this cult lens and was very excited to use it. Long story short, it was noticeably softer than my M20/4 (although the m20/4 has quite a bit more distortion than the 18mm). Maybe my copy of the 18 was a dog (or maybe my copy of the 20 is better than average). If you are looking for a low distortion ultrawide this is the lens for you. If you are looking for a sharp ultrawide for candids I would pass. In any case, I think that the lens is overrated and does not deserve the price premium that it often fetches on the 2nd hand market.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: October, 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,090
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 18, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $410.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Size, built in filters, dedicated hood and 100 degree angle of view. | | Cons: | If it were slightly faster like f2.8, I would give it a 10. | | Camera Used: Pentax film bodies (K1000, KM, KX, K2, K2DMD, MX, LX, Super A, P50)
| |
The “little brother” to the 15/3.5, however the 18/3.5 is a far more practical lens for every day use. The 15/3.5 is more of a specialty lens like a fish-eye or shift, while the 18/3.5 is a lens that you will take with you on most outings.
This lens lies in the middle of the K series ultra wide angles, between the 15/3.5 and the 20/4. Compared to the 15/3.5 this lens is about half the size & weight and has a proper dedicated plastic clip on hood. The 20/4 does not have any built in filters and is slower at f4.0. I would select this as the best lens out of the three.
The 18/3.5 has a 58mm filter thread, but you will have a hard time finding a filter that does not cause vignetting. This problem is solved with the lenses four built in filters; Cloudy, Skylight, Y48 (Y2), O56 (O2). The 18/3.5 also has the ability to accept gelatin filters at the rear of the lens. The built in filters are selected with a dial on the top of the lens and cover most colour and b&w shooting situations. Unlike the 15/3.5 or fish-eye, you must select a filter at all times, there is not a “none” filter selection.
The 58mm rectangular plastic clip on hood is worth the extra cost if you can find one, it’s even more rare than the lens itself. It does a better job shielding the lens from stray light or damage, than the metal fixed hood on the 15/3.5.
I found f3.5 fast enough even when using slower daylight films. A faster film and a tripod will let you shoot city scenes in the evening. With the 100 degree angle of view you have the ability to capture an amazing amount of landscape in one shot.
The K 18/3.5 is definitely worth seeking out and is a perfect companion to any K series film camera, like a KX or K2. I have only had the 18/3.5 for a few months, but it’s rapidly becoming one of my favorite Pentax lenses. I rate the K18/3.5 as a 9.5. If it were slightly faster like f2.8, I would give it a perfect 10.
Sample shots taken with the K18/3.5. Photos are medium resolution scans from original slides or negatives.
Camera: K2 Film: Fomapan R100 Processed in DR5 Chrome ISO: 160
Camera: LX Film: CineStill Film 50 ISO: 50
Camera: K2 Film: Lomo Earl Grey 100 ISO: 100
 | | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2007 Location: Norway Posts: 1 | | Review Date: March 13, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $400.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Solidly built, great FOV on film, great IQ | | Cons: | Built in filters, CA on digital | |
I bought this lens to use on a Pentax LX. Image quality is excellent, very well corrected and dramatic FOV. The lens is very solidly built.
On digital it looses some appeal as the FOV is covered by all normal zooms, it isn't particularily fast and it suffers from CA. It is still sharp and well corrected though.
| | |
;)
;)
