Author: | | Veteran Member Registered: July, 2014 Location: Nagoya Posts: 577 | Review Date: February 22, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 10 |
Pros: | Compact, sharp, colour | Cons: | Nothing worth mentioning | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-01, MZ-5N
| | I bought this lens for £10, and I don't think I've ever known better value. My copy is quite dirty, dusty inside and a bit beaten up, but it takes the loveliest pictures. There is just something lovely about its rendering - the colours are great and images are sharp straight out of the camera. Meters perfectly using green button on my K-01. Obviously bokeh isn't incredible, but it's perfectly nice for what the lens is.
Absolutely no complaints handling-wise, either. Usual M-series quality and very compact, too.
I love this lens and given the prices it goes for, it's not hard to recommend it.
f8, 1/125, ISO100 on K-01: | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2010 Posts: 1,665 | Review Date: February 20, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | build quality, tactile feel, compact, very affordable | Cons: | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-3
| | 135mm, the focal length time forgot. Once a very popular focal length, as witnessed by the huge volume of 3rd party examples, particularly in m42 mount, the 135mm seems to have fallen from favor. Odd, as 135mm on APS-C is nearly equivalent to 200mm on FF, and 200mm was always a popular focal length in ye olden days.
The SMC M 135mm is a delight to use. Excellent build quality, even a notch better than the M 50/1.7 and M 50/1.4. Optical performance leaves nothing to be disappointed. Good contrast and color rendition. Plenty sharp. Bokeh can be a bit harsh but I just consider that part of its character to be used to creative effect.
The SMC M 135mm excels as a short tele and is great for isolating subjects from the background. It's compact enough to easily fit in your pocket and ready to give you a little extra reach when you need it. I think its a fantastic walk around lens, particularly in urban settings. Its small size can allow you to get close to subjects without generating a lot of attention, as a large zoom might. | | | | Veteran Member Registered: March, 2014 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 890 | Review Date: June 13, 2014 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | Compact, Light, Very Good Contrast and Colors, Built-in Hood | Cons: | Could be a bit faster | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| | Happened to stumble upon this lens in MINT condition and could not resist. Received it 2 days ago and took it out for a spin. It's very durable yet not too heavy. It makes for a nice portable telephoto prime. Colors are rich and very good contrast. Bokeh is very good although not the absolute best, IMHO. If you get the chance to pickup a nice copy of this lens for a good price, do it!! You will not be disappointed. IMGP0687 by Ripper2860, on Flickr IMGP0677 by Ripper2860, on Flickr
| | | | Inactive Account Registered: May, 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 217 | Review Date: May 24, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | size, weight, build, sharpness | Cons: | minimum focusing distance | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 9
| | I have had this lens for a few months and am very pleased with its performance. Here are a few photos that I took with this lens:
| | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2011 Posts: 20 | | | | Senior Member Registered: January, 2014 Posts: 180 | Review Date: April 28, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | Sharp, smooth bokeh, light | Cons: | None so far | Sharpness: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-30
| | I bought this lens a few months ago. It was my first 'manual' lens, and as a fairly newcomer to the DSLR world I was a little hesitant to move away from new, AF lenses. I shouldn't have worried. With the ease of the K-30 handling (green button and menu changing), this has been a dream to use.
I've taken pictures at long range (ducks out of reach on a pond) and close-up (flowers, but no closer than around 1m). The quality is fantastic, with a bokeh on the 'close' pictures that is so smooth.
For a very cheap lens, that is supposedly second-rate to the 'A' lenses, I cannot fault this beauty. It looks and feels good, and really delivers the goods. My second most used lens (after a 20-40 Ltd).
| | | | Veteran Member Registered: July, 2009 Location: Mount Joy, PA Posts: 544 | Review Date: April 16, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $75.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | Great construction and feel, overal sharpness, light | Cons: | Wide-open corner sharpness, but that's being picky | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: *ist 35mm
| | I have always liked the feel and performance of the Pentax M and A series lenses.
In college, the 135mm 3.5 was my go-to lens for portraits. I especially liked the fact that, with my *ist 35mm body, the combination was light. Back then, I could walk around and not feel pressured to take pictures to justify lugging around the weight. The sharpness at 3.5 is good and only gets better as the lens is stopped down. Considering the low weight, comfortable size, and good sharpness, this lens is a great performer for the price.
While some people find the built-in lens hood to be a gimmick or simply not helpful, I like this feature. A built-in hood is one less accessory I have to look for. On a cropped, digital body the hood might be a bit shallow, but the good news is the filter thread is only 49mm. This means picking up a metal tele-photo hood like the Kalt variety (as opposed to the rubber, collapsible type which are too wide) are quite inexpensive.
Like other M lenses, the 135mm 3.5 has a dampened focusing ring with the "just right" amount of resistance.
The focal length and fast-ish maximum aperture can create some interesting images; getting low to the ground with street-photography gives compressed and flat images with a small slice for depth-of-field. I would say the bokeh is better than average, although it's not the most creamy-smooth performer, either. Depending on working distance, out-of-focus items in the background can be a little "nervous", as some might say, but still good. Wide open, the highlights are nice and round.
While I haven't tried it, the Pentax-M 135 3.5 might be a good specimen to try a "bokehrama" - basically panoramic images stitched from several shots at the maximum aperture of the lens. The result is an image with very, very narrow depth of field. The most common lenses for such a project are the 85mm f/1.4 variety. Few people have the budget to experiment with that kind of lens. Furthermore, the 135mm 3.5 is much lighter and therefor easier to handle.
If I had to think of a con for the lens then it would be the softer corners found in images shot at the widest aperture. When used for portraits, though, this isn't typically a problem. As another reviewer pointed out, the contrast can be a bit lower when used wide-open, but it can be fixed in post-production. Also, as one can expect there are some chromatic aberrations in back-lit and high-contrast situations. Again, it's nothing that can't be improved with RAW processing software.
| | | | Junior Member Registered: March, 2014 Posts: 38 | Review Date: March 25, 2014 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | small, light, well built | Cons: | none from my perspective | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax Kx, MX
| | I gave this lens an 8 for sharpness, but on a DSLR give it a 9. Reason? You're using the central area of the lens on the CMOS sensor, not the full frame, so the falloff in the corners is not noticeable. It's gone by f5.6 anyway on a full frame film camera.
I use this as a travel lens, and thus, outdoors, I'd seldom be using anything but f8 or 11, unless I was isolating a subject, and at these apertures, it is as sharp as anything I've used. Wide open, it gives more than acceptable faces, and a nice bokeh. It really is about an average lens of this type, but it is smaller, lighter and handier than other 135mm f3.5s, so you're not going to get my copy.
This type of lens is still sharper and pictorially superior to a 135mm setting on a zoom or varfocal, it is common and therefore pretty cheap. If you are like me and use you camera on manual, and prefer manual focussing, I'd not look farther than this neat little piece of glass.
********* ********* ******** As a PS, I recently some of the accompanying duties at the BC Old Time Fiddler's Competition which was held in Prince George this year. Never one to leave a camera or two behind even if participating in events, I took along three lenses and my Pentax K10 and Kx - the 77mm f1.8 Limited, the 50mm Pentax-M f1.4 and the Pentax-M 135mm f3.5
The following pictures were taken with the 135mm Pentax-M 135mm f3.5, and were all handheld at 1/25th at f4, from about 26 feet away. I'm pleased with the results - the lens was very easy to hold steady, and the images produced very sharp and clear. After this experience, like my Mastercard, I won't leave home without it! | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2014 Posts: 7 | Review Date: February 22, 2014 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | Build quality, handling | Cons: | Could be sharper wide open (center is ok though), 2.8 would be nice of course.. | Sharpness: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Camera Used: ME
| | Borrowed a copy of this for a few rolls, so did not comment on price / value.
Nice lens.
Really well made. Neat, compact. Funny little built-in lens hood.
It's not super-sharp, at least not towards the corners wide open. Maybe not super contrasty wide open either.
I think it makes for a nice portrait lens though - center is pretty sharp, and bokeh is nice.
Here's a scan of an analog photo of a poster - full 35mm frame on the left, 100% crop on the right - | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2013 Location: Naples Posts: 10 | Review Date: November 1, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 7 |
Pros: | cheap, comact and light, well built, good fo potraits | Cons: | soft wide open | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 9
| | The classic cheap but quite good medium tele of M era... good for potraits and tele shots. A good kit tele lens.
| | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 3,757 | Review Date: October 18, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $90.00
| Rating: 10 |
Pros: | Sharp, lightweight, small, solid construction, incorporated hood | Cons: | a bit soft wide open | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-x, K-30
| | I paid more than the usual price for my copy, because it's new/old stock.
A while ago I had another copy of this lens, which I sold and then regretted selling it... For me, it's the perfect travel tele-companion. The best tele-range for me, besides 85mm. I've tried AF tele-zooms, and, in addition to having almost twice the weight of this all-metal jewel, all of them have had some decentering at some focal length. No such problems with my two cheap 135mm primes. I have a good copy of JC Penny 135mm f2.8, but that lens is about 150 grams heavier and longer. The M 135mm f3.5 is significantly smaller than the typical 135mm lens, which is a good thing when taking streets photos--people are less intimidated by small lenses, and they tend to think that small = wide.
The Pentax may be a bit softer at f3.5 than my JC Penney at f2.8, but at f4 sharpness improves quite dramatically, and at f5.6 it is superb. (For travel f3.5 is not that important, so I'm fine with it. And the softness I'm talking about isn't actually bad--the lens can easily be used for portraits wide open.)
Just a tiny bit of CA wide open in contrasty situations.
Typical "M" rendering, which I like. Beautiful, realistic colors, with great micro-contrast.
Good copies can be had for around $50: a no-brainer.
A few pics: | | | | Senior Member Registered: November, 2011 Location: Chicago Posts: 126 | Review Date: September 11, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $45.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | SMC, focus ring feel, good sharpness wide open with smooth bokeh | Cons: | none so far... | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: Pentax K-30
| | I've had this lens for a few months, I bought with a few other manual focus lenses. I've just gotten around to properly using it. It took a few shots to adjust to the focal length since I'd been shooting 24mm for the last month or so, but wow!
This lens feels great: excellent construction, focus ring has just the right amount of resistance, fairly small compared to other lenses in this length and at 3.5, it's nicely sharp. Good bokeh, as well.
View Image Here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6mckxNUr6b0UjkyRWpwYUZTUVE/edit?usp=sharing | | | | New Member Registered: April, 2013 Posts: 3 | Review Date: August 26, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $10.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | Cheap, light, compact, good performer at short telephoto distance | Cons: | Not that good wide open or at infinity | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-r
| | Picked mine up for £5 GBP so cannot complain on any front. Great at distances up to 20m on portrait subjects but does struggle wide open and at infinity but this may be more to do with my K-r or me! Even taking into account current ebay prices $75 or so, this is a no brainer.
| | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2011 Location: Vancouver, WA Posts: 817 | Review Date: June 28, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $21.00
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | Compact, inexpensive, attractive, built-in hood | Cons: | Tough to focus with DSLR, not as sharp as I like | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: ME Super, ZX-M
| | Bought this to use with my ME Super (mostly) but use it with my ZX-M too. I shoot B&W film only with these cameras. For what I paid on the used market it's a nice enough lens. It takes a little getting used the shallow DOF. I tried to use it with my K-x and I found it difficult to get a sharp focus without the focusing ring like the film cameras have.
I haven't used this lens enough to know if I like it or not but I can see it growing on me. I'll update this after I get more time with it. I'll be doing mostly landscape with it and it seems to be happiest with plenty of light.
| | | | New Member Registered: February, 2012 Posts: 17 | Review Date: June 14, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 7 |
Pros: | Tiny, light, handles nicely | Cons: | Lacks contrast and sharpness wide open. | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: Samsung GX-20
| | I confess to being disappointed by this lens.
In its favour, it is tiny, light, and well made.
However, contrast is lacking wide open, so it is difficult for me to focus it by eye; I have to rely on the focus confirmation. It is possible that it seems soft because I have missed the focus slightly, but my pictures with this lens wide open are soft.
At f5.6, sharpness and contrast have improved significantly. Sharpness gets close to the CZJ 135mm f3.5 Sonnar when the CZJ is wide open, contrast is still behind.
Switching to the CZJ, I notice how much more easily the CZJ snaps in to focus.
The Pentax bokeh is inoffensive, as is the colour, and fringing is minimal, but the images lack 'Wow' factor.
The Pentax works well with the Pentax 1.7x AF adapter, but it since the lens still needs to be stopped down to f5.6 to get an acceptably sharp image, it is restricted to bright sunlight only.
| | |