| Author: | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2013 Location: Kansas City, KS Posts: 1,612
9 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 1, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $39.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | size, color rendering, acceptably sharp wide open | | Cons: | could use a hood, not razor sharp | |
(I used this lens for the Single in September 2014 challenge here on Pentax Forums)
I'd been looking for an alternative to my Sigma Mini-Wide II 28/2.8. The Sigma is a nice lens, but I wasn't in love with it. I've been trying to collect as much old Pentax glass as I can, so figured 28 was a prime focal length to add to the collection. *snort* Plus, it was less than $40 and only advertised in "acceptable" condition. It's missing the little pearl, and focusing is a little stiff near infinity, but the wear is average and the glass is good.
This lens is VERY SMALL. Before this lens, the smallest lens I owned was the A50/2, but this lens is short even compared to that (although the A50/2 is still lighter weight). The focusing ring is quite narrow, especially because I was coming off the Kalimar 28-85/3.5, and I was constantly dragging my fingers over the barrel of the lens that would extend and retract during focusing (not an IF lens). This made focusing a chore at first, before I trained myself to not try to fit so many fingers on the focusing ring. The lens had no other functional surprises as a Pentax-M lens.
Performance-wise, the lens is as sharp as I could want it to be. I am not a junkie for razor sharp pictures and I don't mind overall softness. I was surprised at times at how sharp the lens could be, particularly by the end of the month when I really got good at focusing at this focal length. This lens is wider than what I typically use, so focusing on subjects in a middle distance was kind of a challenge. My eyesight is good, but not perfect and sometimes focusing at wide(r) angles can be a problem. However, using the hyperfocal distance scale, focus confirmation, and a general "too-close-too-far" method while rotating the focusing ring very slowly through the range, I came up with perfectly acceptable in-focus images and I got better at "seeing" through the lens and at the focal length.
The color was very good. Better than the colors from my M135/3.5, but not as amazing as the colors from my M35/2.8
There was a very slight amount of barrel distortion, but only noticeable when I was right on top of my subject and it was easily correctable with a minor adjustment in PP software.
I didn't notice any chromatic aberrations at all, but the lens would have benefited greatly from a hood to improve contrast. I didn't ever bother to acquire one, but I did use my hand as a shield in situations where it was necessary for the life of the image (see some of the photos from Elephant Rocks State Park).
The bokeh produced by the lens can be nice if you have sufficient distance between the subject and background, and the right amount and type of light, but this lens is not knocking anyone out of the water and this quality is hit-and-miss at best.
The Sigma focuses a little closer and I did allow myself to use a screw-on 10x macro filter on the M28/2.8 for some close-up fun. The MFD is about 10 inches, which is pretty damn close, really.
Overall, I would choose this M28/2.8 over the Sigma Mini-Wide II, so I'm glad I bought it. Even to sacrifice the A-setting of the Sigma, the colors the Pentax glass produces are more pleasant and usable, plus the Pentax is MUCH sharper at f/2.8, therefore more functional wide-open for subject isolation. Stopped down, the Sigma is sharper overall, but that's not a trait that sells a lens to me.
I definitely recommend it if you're a fan of the focal length, and you all should have one in your collection anyway. ;-) After the day is done, I still probably prefer something a little more towards the tele end, but I will keep this little guy around. The size, IQ and angle of view make it a valuable lens, in my opinion.
See my Flickr album full of images taken by this lens. | | | | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2016 Posts: 4
5 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 19, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $35.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | my copy is very sharp, light, color rendition,handling | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K3,LX,K2DMD, Stereo Super-A
| |
I am just surprised about the qualities I read here ...
maybe my two copy´s are more than average of the line,
but as a professional photographer I can say that my 28M 2,8
is as good as the K28 3,5, better than M28 3,5 and even sharper as my K30 2,8 !
So this is a really bargain lens also often used with my Dubble-Super-A for stereo shots with Fuji Velvia ...
And while it is so small and light, you can even put it in your jeans-pocket on trips 
After more than 30 Years I must say that they have not lost any fascination !
There are so much on the market so You have to test and choose a good one with no disappointment .
 | | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2018 Location: Kent Posts: 4
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 7, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Works well on APSC sensors. Great build quality and small. | | Cons: | Very soft corners on Full Frame even when stopped down. | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 8
Camera Used: Sony a7, Fuji X-T1
| |
I picked up a copy of this lens last week and have run it through some torture tests.
Ironically it performs better on an APSC sensor rather than full frame. This might be why some people on here love it or don't rate it highly?
Colour rendition is good and centre sharpness is fine. Transitional areas between in focus areas and bokeh are nice too, little ghosting or fuss.
The softness wide open on full a frame sensor is so apparent that the peaking on my Sony a7 gets very confused as to what's actually in focus, making it tricky to use, on Full Frame. The Fuji X-T1 handled it fine with it's smaller sensor.
A good quality, cheap small lens for the APSC user.
Test Chart on Full Frame - https://flic.kr/p/Jketsi
Test Chart on APSC - https://flic.kr/p/23gR2Xa
Photo in Low Light - https://flic.kr/p/Jkeu98 | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: April, 2011 Location: Copenhagen Posts: 510
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 25, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | size, build, colors, IQ (?) | | Cons: | IQ (?) | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 7
Camera Used: Pentax K7
| |
Im initially really puzzled by the performance in regards to the sharpness of this lens (I have the first version). To me it seems to be a not very sharp lens, but in this very thorough test (http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/pentax_28-30.html) made by Yoshihiko the lens performs very, very well especially at f:8 - 16. Hmm  I need to do more photos with this lens at higher ISO and aperture to learn more about it.
Read the numbers (FF) as from center to edge, line pairs pr millimeter(see the link for more details and lenses):
smc PENTAX-M 28mm f/2.8 (former model) (M28/2.8(I), #6772***)
f/2.8_62_62/62_55/55_49/49_44/49
f/4.0_69_69/69_55/55_55/55_49/49
f/5.6_78_78/78_78/78_62/69_62/62
f/8.0_87_87/87_87/78_78/78_69/78
f/11_98_98/98_98/98_87/87_78/78
f/16_87_87/87_87/87_78/78_69/78
f/22_78_78/78_69/78_62/62_62/62
smc PENTAX-M 28mm f/2.8 (later model) (M28/2.8(II), #8328***)
f/2.8_62_62/62_62/62_55/49_44/44
f/4.0_78_78/69_62/69_55/55_44/44
f/5.6_87_78/69_78/69_55/62_44/49
f/8.0_98_87/98_87/87_78/78_69/78
f/11_98_87/98_78/87_78/78_69/78
f/16_87_87/87_78/78_69/69_62/62
f/22_78_78/69_69/62_62/55_55/62
Note: Went for a walk today. Here is one taken on K7 (ISO400) at f:11
See the ‘Original‘ here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/32108329@N08/8413613449/sizes/o/in/photostream/
This is a great lens when closed down to f:11: Quite sharp, no aberrations, pleasing bokeh and high value | | | | | | | 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:
 | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: November, 2017 Location: Garden City, NY Posts: 6,349
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 8, 2017 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp and easy to use. | | Cons: | I cannot think of a deal-breaker | | Sharpness: 10
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-50; K-1000
| |
I think I have the 1st version.
On the K-50, this is my favorite lens. Bar none. It is fun to handle, small, sharp... It has got great color. Here are some shots...
I'm an amateur photographer who just loves the art of shooting. I love this lens, not too technical as to why I do, but I do.  | | | | | Senior Member Registered: July, 2008 Location: Milwaukee Posts: 129
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 3, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $35.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, High Contrast, Great Build Quality | | Cons: | CA/PF | |
I'll be reviewing this lens as a MANUAL lens, so lack of autofocus and metering will not factor into it. Manual-ness may be a negative to some people, but if you own this lens, you're probably getting it for the fact that it is a manual M-series lens.
Let's start with the body:
1. The build quality is phenomenal. This is by far its greatest strength. Although the lens is 25+ years old, I believe it will easily a hundred more, if taken care of properly. I can't say the same about any modern lens. There is something to be said about the KISS principle. Simplicity, when executed properly, will last forever. In this case, it was executed properly.
2. The focusing ring is impressively smooth. It's looser than my other M-series glass, but by only a smidgen. Unfortunately, it's also a really short focus throw. I think it would be more effective on a film body, but on an APS-C sensor, it's a bit small. This makes it quite difficult to focus at times, especially medium distances. It's about a quarter inch between 15ft and infinity, which can be tricky to negotiate.
3. The aperture ring is perfect. Smooth, seats positively at each aperture setting. Good grip, good location, easy to read. Perfect.
Optics:
1. Wide open performance is very good. Of all my M-series glass (35/2.8, 50/1.7, 100/2.8) this is the sharpest and has the strongest contrast wide open. It does certainly sharpen up as you stop down a bit, but wide open is definitely usable.
2. Unfortunately, I can see a fair amount of CA/PF in very high contrast situations, even when stopped down to f/5.6. In normal use, however, this is not too important. If I cared enough about a photo to care about CA/PF, it would only take a minute to get rid of it with simple postprocessing. Not a big issue.
3. It doesn't improve too much when stopped down. It certainly gets sharper and more contrasty, but wide open performance is very good, so slight improvement isn't so significant.
I'd love to get my hands on a 28/3.5 and see how that goes. I hear they're even better!
Overall, an amazing lens. 9/10
| | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2014 Posts: 2
2 users found this helpful
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: December, 2012 Location: Seattle, WA USA Posts: 1,753
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 14, 2013 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Small, sharp | | Cons: | Not gonna list any | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K5ii
| |
This lens came to me as part of a trade. To be honest, I didn't really want it, but was curious and we were trying to get to a cash neutral trade and this trued us up a little bit. I thought I'd play with it and sell it or pass it along.
I started getting great photos with it nearly right away. I still considered it a placeholder and have been looking for the right lens around this focal length, but it's kicking the snot out of my DAL35/2.4 right now. I picked up a K lens near this focal length that was supposed to be better and it showed me a couple of things; how tight and well machined this one feels. Focus and aperture are smooth with no wobble. It's held up extremely well. I don't see any evidence in build quality step down from K lenses. The photos were better than that particular K lens as well. It had some issues, so maybe not a fair comparison.
I will say that it's a little bit of an odd focal length for me. I'm not sure why, I know a lot of people love it, but it is. With something in the immediate foreground, it's really nice. For landscape it can be nice. For something across the room or across the street, it just doesn't feel right to me (yet). I may just need more time with it. It did make me want a 24mm. I can see what's cool now about wider field of view.
Mainly I wanted to review my impression that the fact that these are abundant and cheap ($40?) does not remotely represent their value to me. I think it's a prize. I can't say that I'll keep it forever. I may end up with the perfect 24mm and something in the 30-43mm range and pass this one along, but it's far exceeded my expectations and got me seeing things differently. I may stop fighting it and just embrace it as a keeper at some point.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: May, 2011 Location: Malmö, Sweden Posts: 128
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 9, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, colours, contrast, 3-d feel, handling, great FL on APS-C, price! | | Cons: | Weak in backlit conditions | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-x, K-5
| |
This lens is a sleeping beauty. You can get it dirt cheap and it gives great pictures. It took a while before I really understood how good it is, but now it's one of my favourite lenses (and the cheapest!).
28mm is very useful on APS-C I think, makes a nice wide/normal lens. Great for landscapes, perfect for street.
Sharpness is good even wide open. Stopped down a bit it's great. (Though I haven't pixel peeped at edges and corners.)
I haven't noticed any CA or PF. Nor any distortion, though I haven't really looked for it or tested for it.
But where this lens really shines is the saturated colours, great contrast and 3d-feel of the pics. The pictures are just so vivid with this lens!
Or I should, in the name of honesty, say that this goes when using it in the right conditions. Because it has one big weakness; pictures look washed out when light comes from the front or side front. Here it's clearly inferior to modern lenses.
One other caveat: used on my K-x it wouldn't focus to infinity. On the K-5 I can adjust for that and it works fine at -10. This could just be my copy though.
Build quality? It's an M lens. Mine is about 30 years old I guess. It looks and works as new. It feels so solid and great to use. Focus ring is smoooooth and has heavy dampening, which I love. (I sometimes find myself focus masturbating this thing just because it feels so good...  )
| | | | | 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:
 | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: September, 2018 Location: Poland Posts: 1,800
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 22, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $45.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | image quality, price | | Cons: | for the price - nothing | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: K-50
| |
Surprisingly versatile lens when mounted on APS-C. I've been using it quite a lot on my K-50 with good results. Wide-open it is a bit soft (not a tragedy, though) but gets better stopped down. My copy gives slightly desaturated colors, which sometimes is nice and sometimes disturbing (but of course it is easily corrected in pp).*Very well-built; handling is very pleasant.
 | | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2019 Posts: 2
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 27, 2019 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Excellent detail | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-50
| |
Great detail and color reproduction in closeup shots.
- SMC Pentax-M 28mm F2.8
- Pentax K-50 DSLR (16.3mp)
- mounted on tripod
- aperture priority
- ISO 100
- F5.6
- 1/3 second exposures
- white balance set to AWB
- focus peaking enabled on camera
- using manual focus assist
- 2-second timer
Right-click the following images and click "Open Image in New Tab".
 | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: November, 2018 Posts: 590
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 3, 2019 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | small, build quality | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
 | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2019 Posts: 15
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 24, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | A near-perfect wide angle lens | | Cons: | Prices pushed up too high | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 10
Value: 6
Camera Used: Film
| |
I've had three through the years. I still use one on film cameras, so I'm not getting confused between the actual lens performance and a digital processor plus sensor then a heap of on-camera picture quality adjustment software systems, followed by an online editing software suite to get my images.
Why this has such ordinary scoring from so many people was beyond me, until I realised that there are two versions around and one is (the shorter barrel one) not as good as the other. Or maybe a lot of people have internally foggy or dirty versions they bought old and junky? A lot of people assume they can simply "look into" a lens and see haze and dust; you cannot, especially with a wide angle that tends to have small diameter and highly magnifying optics. You need to carefully shine an LED light through it - never looking directly at the light beam - to see the real muck and haze inside. My one was bought knowing it had some fungus and mechanical issues. A day-long opening and cleaning session sorted that out. As with most sub-50mm lenses, it's not the easiest of lenses to clean out. And Pentax seem to have made these with glass that tends to fog and haze with blue colouring and that is insanely difficult to clean up. Get a dirty one and you will have bad images, so seek guarantees from your seller and make sure you can return it if it's full of blue foggy haze or masses of dust. Dust tends to cluster on the lens system around the aperture blades; caused by wear on their movement through the decades. Get a clean one and it will be 9/10 for image quality, but I've never known a clean one until after I've serviced one.
As with all lenses it is sharpest for most of the images across the centre-to-corners at f5.6 to f11/f16. Outside of that range this lens stays sharp with only minor softening; pretty much what any sane mind would find 100% acceptable. Well built and easy to work (yep, you simply turn the rings) this is a superb lens. It's such a pity so many sellers force buyers to fork out a small fortune on auction sites, and it's more of a pity some buyers fork out that much cash. $40-60 is a reasonable price. Over that and you are clearly rolling in cash and may as well save a bit more and buy a Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon.
Pentax made this in at least two versions, a shorter version with the numbers on the front ring (this short version has a narrower aperture turning ring, too) and a very slightly longer and slightly fatter version with the number on the side/rear of the lens barrel. I have found the shorter version slightly less quality than the other, and especially at infinity.
| | |
;)
;)
;)
