| Author: | | Senior Member Registered: July, 2008 Location: Makawao, HI Posts: 195
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 19, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $65.00
| Rating: 8 |
|
I bought my copy off of the f/s forum nearly 2 years ago. Only got into it recently (keeping it on my K10d for walkaround). The more I use it, the more I like it. On "M" mode it's a simple matter of metering (green button) at the selected f-stop. There are a bunch of these on the f/s listings at really great prices. It's a lens thats readily available and should be in every bag.
I didn't think much of it before because it doesn't have the sharpness of the m/a 50, but the slightly wide (42mm) lens is so much more versatile than a 50.
 | | | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: August, 2009 Posts: 417 | | Review Date: April 2, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | FOV on film is really wide, on digital is nice normal | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 5
Handling: 8
Value: 7
| |
Its good, but its not as sharp as the M 28/3.5. Preferred to the M 28/3.5 for usage on digital due to the aperture being a bit faster.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: October, 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Posts: 9,830 | | Review Date: January 8, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, compact, well built | | Cons: | No automatic metering for Digital | |
I'm rating this as a film lens, because I have never used it on a digital body. When I bought my LX in the 80s, I replaced this lens with a Kiron f/2 to get the auto aperture, and then it left with my former wife. I took more photos with this lens than any lens other than the 50mm/1.4. It is sharp, small, well buit and easy to use. I don't know what its quirks might be on a digital body, but it was a super performer in the days of manual film.
| | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2009 Location: paris Posts: 13 | | Review Date: September 30, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $10.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | its luminous for a widish angle | | Cons: | none really except manual is a pain | |
I just picked this up 2nd hand for nothing and its worth several times more. What I liked over my wider angle zooms is that I can use it in low light due to the wider aperture. I recently shot some pictures on the metro and they were adequately lit and open.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: Bodø Posts: 5 | | Review Date: July 23, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp and easy to use | | Cons: | None | |
Werry sharp and nice to use. On my K20D its like a 42mm. Just get it, it is much lens for the money
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: December, 2007 Location: In the most populated state... state of denial Posts: 1,852 | | Review Date: June 12, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | quality of build and image | | Cons: | soft in corners wide open | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 8
Camera Used: Film Cameras (KX, MES, ME, Program, MZ) DSLRS K100, KX, K5ii
| |
Worth every penny
This is a great 28/2.8 lens, worth competitor for the Nikkor 28/2.8 AIS while in its day it was not as loved as the Nikkor.
It is not so sharp in the corners in 35mm film, but that is not a problem in APS cameras and produces very nice images.
Chromatic Aberrations are present on the edges, mostly in purple fringing.
PS. In the APS-DSLRS it acts like a 40mm (almost normal) and it is great for street walking
| | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: Toowoomba, Australia Posts: 24
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 31, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | great contrast, 42mm on dslr | | Cons: | CA, softness | |
I bought my copy over the internet from a second hand camera store in Adelaide, which i noticed was one of the very few stores in Australia that keep a record of their second hand inventory on the net.
Anyway, back to the lens. First off i really like the fact that it converts to 42mm on my k20d which on occasion makes it more useful than smc 50mm 1.4 which converts to 75mm on the digital (IMHO a bit long for everyday photos). In saying that this lens has nothing on the depth of field and bokeh of the 50mm prime. From reviewing the photos i have taken with the 28mm i think the contrast and colours are actually better - it exceeded my expectations completely. I did notice however, in a few shots purple fringing on light coloured objects taken in bright sunlight.
Compared with the sigma 18-50 3.5-5.6 kit style lens that came with my k20d the 28mm prime is just leaps and bounds ahead in terms of contrast, sharpness and overall photo quality. If i had a choice of the 28mm or the sigma there is no way i would choose the sigma!!!
For the price i thinks this lens is a bargain and I would definitely recommend it.
| | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: Bodø Posts: 5 | | Review Date: March 5, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp and nice to work whit | | Cons: | Manual | |
Its sharp, its werry nice to use, its tough it gives werry good quality pictures.
Buy it if u can. Now i am using it whit my new K20D, and its excellent in every respect.
Use a hood and u get even better pictures from it.
Maybe a little soft sometimes thats all
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2006 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 10,685
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 4, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $15.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | plenty sharp, nice contrast & color, great solid feel in a small package for a nice price | | Cons: | flare is more common than with some lenses | |
I use this lens as a "wide normal" on APS-C, to complement my "long normal", the DA40. The M28/2.8 (I have the more common version 1) performs very well and is surprisingly (to me) sharp at f/2.8. Indoors, 28mm is a great focal length for capturing people in their environments, and f/2.8 is a big improvement over the kit lens for low light use. Outdoors, 28mm is great for a lot of landscape uses, and while the kit lens is fine at f/8 (which is where I shoot a lot outdoors), the M28/2.8 is enough better and more fun for me (at all apertures) that I'll often choose it even though landscape is the situation where I'm most likely to consider a zoom instead of a prime. I do have to watch out for flare on sunny days, though. I tried a collapsible rubber hood, but the one I have does not appear sized well for this lens. I actually get better results just using my hand to shield the lens from the sun. Luckily for me, it turns out the hood that comes with the DA70 works perfectly with the M28/2.8. Very effective in combating flare, and no vignetting as long as you remember to keep the hood in its collapsed position.
Considering that this lens usually sells for $50 or less, and is a more generally useful focal length on APS-C than 50mm, one could make a case for this as the best inexpensive introduction to the world of prime lenses.
Here's a shot at f/2.8 showing that sharpness is pretty good and DOF can actually be interestingly thin even for 28mm at f/2.8. Click on the picture below for a larger version:
 | | | | | | | | Review Date: February 4, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | compact (while not compact as the da 40mm), really good performance, great built | | Cons: | practically none if its limitations are understood | |
Have recently purchased it and I have found it to be more handy than the A 50mm f1.7 (and better built)
Quite fast, very compact (smaller than the flash socket at the k100d) and a total satisfactory optical performance both at film and at the k100d
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2008 Location: Waterloo, Ontario Posts: 4,461
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 26, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharp, contrasty, light | | Cons: | Fully manual | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
Pentax must have made a million of these lenses and they are easily found on EBAY. I bought mine new in the early 1980s for use with my Pentax MX. It cost a bit over $100 at that time but can be had for much less now. It came in two incarnations - a version 1 and 2. Boz Dimtirov provides insights to the production history of this optic:
Version 1 - original M-series 28mm data
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/wide-angle/M28f2.8-i.html
Version 2 - late run history of M-series 28mm
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/wide-angle/M28f2.8-ii.html
Quote from Dimitrov site:
"This lens is extremely interesting. Its lens mount is of the "original K-mount" type, and its name associates it undoubtedly with the M-series of K-mount lenses. On the other hand, the lens shares its most important characteristics with the later SMC-A lens: the linear aperture mechanism and the updated optical formula. Even the focusing ring is of the A-style.
Guesses can be made that in 1982 Pentax was already hard at work developing the A-series bodies and lenses, and when parts for the "original" M 28/2.8 lens were depleted, it was decided to switch to production of the new lens, but without exposing the externally visible A-series features — electrical contacts on the lens mount and "A" position on the aperture ring. Still, this lens with its low production numbers is a rather unique piece of K-mount history."
I have the "extremely interesting" version 2 Boz Dimitrov describes above. With film it was great for small group shots and landscapes. All in all a very competent performer. The lens is reasonably fast at 2.8 and is very light like most M-series glass. In terms of build quality it resembles the A-series 28mm f 2.8 and has some plastic bits where the M-series has metal. The distinctive M-series chrome banding around the top of the focusing ring is missing. As a result it looks a little "cheaper" and less "substantial" than my other M-series optics. This is not a knock on this particular lens - I feel the same way about most A-series lenses. I just prefer the look of the M-series lenses. On a performance level I doubt there is a noticeable difference between the two series. This prejudice aside, the lens performed quite well on my MX and K2 film cameras. On the K10 it requires the usual adjustments that have to be made to permit a 25-year-old lens to function on a modern camera. There will be no AF, metering will be stop down with no f stop information in the viewfinder. If you are used to twisting dials and setting aperture it will be no problem. The lens will serve you well. Those who were weaned on auto everything point and shoot cameras might not want the added effort. Here is a recent sample from this lens:
 | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: February, 2007 Location: Atlanta, GA USA Posts: 4
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 20, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Nice wide angle, sharp, good color | | Cons: | Extra steps to use on digital, but works great | |
Fun wide angle for film - had it since the early 1980's. Great for landscapes. Have also used some on digital (DS) and it works great.
Sharpness 8
Bokeh 7
Color 8
Handling 9
Build 9
Distortion 8
Aberations 8
Value 9
A nice compact wide angle (film) or near normal (digital). Don't hesitate to pick one up.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: December, 2006 Location: Mississauga, Ontario, Canada Posts: 2,517 | | Review Date: April 7, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 8 |
|
I bought this lens about a month ago along with a K28/3.5. I don't know why I let go of this lens (gave it to a friend) and kept the K instead but I think it was because I liked handling the K. Both lenses are very good in terms of IQ, in fact I can't tell the difference between the two yet.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: January, 2007 Location: UK/Canada/wherever work takes me Posts: 95
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 4, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Small size, good build quality | | Cons: | Better on film, no A setting | |
This was my favourite lens on film (on my Super A) but on my DS I'm not so fond of it. I've had some quite bad CA and images don't have the same feel as my 50mm f1.7 A (admittedly a very good lens) and 21mm limited.
That said, its still a very sharp lens and nice and pocketable. I won't sell mine yet, but it doesn't get as much use as it used (mainly because of the different angle of view on digital). If on a budget its a nice lens and still preferable to a plasticky zoom in my opinion but if I had some money I might be tempted by an A or FA version.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: September, 2006 Location: D/FW area, Tx. Posts: 1,710
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 17, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | sharp, light weight, small design | | Cons: | can't think of any | |
never had a bad pic from this lens. i'ts very sharp and with Excellent contrast. easily fits in a large pocket. that's usually where i stow it. i've had this lens for 29 years..
| | |
;)
;)
;)
