| Author: | | Veteran Member Registered: August, 2009 Posts: 417 | | Review Date: November 2, 2021 | Recommended | Price: $75.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, compact, beautiful engineering | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 9
| |
I've compared a lot of zoom lenses using MTF Mapper. The only zoom I have which is sharper than this is the Vivitar S1 28-90, which is also sharper than many primes. Its comparable, but slightly better than the Tamron SP 24-48, but additionally takes filters, which the Tamron doesnt.
Which lens would I keep? All of them!
| | | | | | | Forum Member Registered: September, 2009 Location: Kyoto Posts: 72 | | Review Date: May 10, 2020 | Not Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Compact, well built, and good handling | | Cons: | Mediocre image quality, color cast | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 7
Camera Used: Pentax K-1
| |
I bought this by mistake, I thought I was bidding on the Pentax-A version.
It's not as bad as all that, though. I've seen a sharpness of "3" and this lens is not a sharpness score of "3". On the other hand, it's not that great either. Best performance is at the long end of the focal range, 50 mm. Barrel distortion, vignetting, softness, and lateral CA get progressively worse as you move towards 24 mm. Stopping down improves the vignetting, but doesn't do as much to clean up the image quality as you might have expected. Also, although my copy is very clean, I notice a distinct green color cast.
Most of the IQ issues can be fixed pretty easily in post processing. All that's left is some residual mushiness around the peripheral of the 35 mm frame, which alas is not fixable by stopping down. When you consider that this is a manual focus lens with no electronic coupling to the camera, it all adds up to a lot of bother for fairly mediocre images.
It would be a pretty easy pass, if it wasn't for the fact that cheap, wide-standard options starting below 28 mm on Pentax FF are limited, 24-50 is a pretty fun zoom range to work with, and the lens does handle very nicely. But let's be realistic - you probably want to hold out for the Pentax-A or the FA versions.
| | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2016 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5 | | Review Date: August 22, 2016 | Not Recommended | Price: $130.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | Small and lightweight, good built and handling | | Cons: | Very soft when wide open -almost unusable at f/5.6 and f/4 | | Sharpness: 3
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 6
Camera Used: MX, LX (both film)
| |
I have read the excellent reviews of this lens posted by other users, but my experience is very different. My example of this lens is so soft that it is almost useless when wide open or at f/5.6, independently on the focal distance. I've had it for a while now and never shot more than a dozen rolls of film with it. However, when stopped down at f/8 or f/11, it performs extremely well an all focal lengths... But then, almost any lens does well at f/8 or f/11. In general, I only use it in very bright/sunny days.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: August, 2009 Location: Quebec Posts: 6 | | Review Date: April 11, 2014 | Not Recommended
| Rating: N/A |
| Pros: | | | Cons: | Flare | | Camera Used: Pentax LX
| |
This lens has a pronounced flare problem. I noted a strange color balance with this lens sometimes. So I did a test. On a sunny day in winter, I took a photo of the white snow, excluding everything else around but snow. I did a shot at f8 with a SMC-Takumar 28mm f3.5 and another one with the M24-50. On the first one the snow was white, on the second one it was green. Why? I had green firs all around me. The 24-50 picked up the reflection of the firs. This is one way flare can affect a lens. To give such an effect the lens must have a design flaw (baffles, optical design). It has been corrected in the A version of the lens, a rather good zoom.
I'd llike to know if anyone having the lens could reproduce this kind of experiment, as my slides from the test are not around and I don't have the lens anymore.
| | | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: October, 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,091
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 30, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $90.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Focal range on film, constant aperture. | | Cons: | A bit slow & bulky, two touch zoom design. | | Camera Used: K Series film bodies (K1000, KM, KX, K2, K2DMD)
| |
The M24-50/4 was released in late 1980 and was replaced in 1983 with the optically different A series version. The M version has one more lens element (12 vs 11) than the A and F version.
Optics:
Pretty good optics but I found the M24-50 to have more distortion that the M24-35. Just don’t take straight on shots of brick walls with this lens!
Focal length:
A great zoom range on film, which covers the wide to standard focal lengths. This lens, along with the M24-35, are great street lenses on film.
Build/Mechanics:
The M24-50 is basically a beefed up bigger version of the M24-35, with similar looks and build. The M24-50 has a dedicated set-screw type lens hood with a 58mm filter thread, that I’ve never come across. Instead I use the push-on RH-B 60mm or the screw-on RH-RC 58mm rubber hoods for the A or F series 24-50/4. The zoom is a two touch design which I don’t like as much as the one touch push/pull. The M24-50 also does not have a DOF scale which is missed on a wide angle lens.
Speed:
F4 is on the slow side for the standard FL range and ok for the wide range. This is also a constant aperture zoom, which I like much better than the variable ones.
Summary:
The focal range on film is the best thing about the M24-50. However the lens is too bulky to use when I travel and the optics/speed are not good enough to replace a standard prime in the 40-55mm range. I’d rather take my M24-35 & FA43 lens in place. I’ll use the M24-50 mostly around town, when the size/speed/optics are less of an issue.
Sample shots taken with the M24-50/4. Photos are low resolution scans from original slides or negatives
Camera: K2 Film: Adox Silvermax 100 processed in DR5 Chrome ISO: 160
Camera: MX Film: Ilford SFX ISO: 200
Update July 2018:
I finally found the OEM lens hood for the M24-50/4 Zoom, after years of looking. The hood is metal and slips over the top of the lens until it touches the rubber focusing ring. You then tighten the two set-screws until the hood is tight. There is a felt strip around the bottom of the inside of the hood, where it attaches to the lens, so the metal set-screws do not scratch the lens. This is without doubt the dumbest lens hood design that I have ever encountered! Stick with the easier to find screw-on RH-RC 58mm rubber hood, mentioned above.
 | | | | | Forum Member Registered: March, 2010 Location: Norfolk Posts: 85 | | Review Date: July 4, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Rugged build, nice handling, sharp, good colour | | Cons: | Too large for its zoom range | |
MY 24~35 was fine for film but didn't make much sense on a 1.5 crop dSLR, so when I recently saw a 24~50 I swopped. The extra reach (effectively 36~75) makes it far more useful as a walkabout lens and the constant aperture takes some of the hassle out of the manual stop-down metering.
My copy (on a K-r) provides crisp images at the wide end even wide open but needs to be stopped down to f8 at the long end. IQ not quite up to the 28~50 in my opinion and it's a little too chunky to qualify as a travel lens. Mixed feelings about this one.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: December, 2006 Location: Lincoln, UK Posts: 229 | | Review Date: June 5, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Constant Aperture. Performance Zoom Range | | Cons: | Lack of A setting | |
This used to be one of my favourite lenses on the LX if I needed wide and didn't have the luxury of using primes.
One of the better and early M lenses which featured a constant aperture. I try to use incident light meter readings and so I didn't have to worry abiut losing a stop in speed as I went from one end to the other.
If you need an extra 1/2 stop or size is important the the 24-35 might be an alternative.
If you are looking for such a lens for the DSLRs, the A version would be better as it has the auto setting but little difference otherwise.
Kim
| | |
;)
;)
