| Author: | | Inactive Account Registered: February, 2007 Location: Italy Posts: 2 | | Review Date: February 17, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $90.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | sharp. low vignetting and distortion. light weight | | Cons: | none | |
I had for a long time a Pentax A 28mm 2,8.
This lens perfoms BETTER than the Pentax A for vignetting, distortion, and resolution and contrast whide open and COSTS LESS.
This lens still results a good performer when compared with the Rokkor 28 2,8 and the Rollei 25mm Distagon 2,8 (I have the Distagon and used the Rokkor for a while on my brother's camera).
| | | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 423 | | Review Date: March 12, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $110.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharp, good contrast and color, very smooth manual focus | | Cons: | wish it was a little faster | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 7
| |
This compact lens is sharp wide-open and very sharp by f5.6. I also used to own an A28/2.8 too but I have sold that because I found that the color coming out of the A28 is a little washed out and low in contrast, when compared to the M28/3.5. Not too sure if I had a lemon though.
I have acquired a FA28/2.8 about half year ago but I am still yet to be conviced to sell the M28/3.5. I am not saying the FA28/2.8 is bad or anything, it is just that the M28/3.5 is such a good performer.
| | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2007 Location: Halifax, Canada Posts: 22 | | Review Date: June 21, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Small, pretty light, very sharp, contrasty. | | Cons: | Can't find any. | |
I'll start off by saying that M-series glass is my favorite lens line. I think only old zeiss lenses could top it, and i don't feel like spending hundreds.
I've had this lens for a little while and have done a few shoots with it on my k1000. My results were nothing short of amazing. Tack sharp at every aperture i used. Pleasant but not distracting distortion.
Highly recommended.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 1,774 | | Review Date: July 29, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Good colour and sharp, buttery smooth focus ring. | | Cons: | M lenses are hard to find nowadays. | |
I have the XR Rikenon 28mm 3.5. It turns out to be almost exactly the same as the SMC-M 28/3.5. The only thing different is that Ricoh managed to replace the M style focus ring with that of a Ricoh style version. (It still retains the Pentax font).
The moment I fired the test shot at the camera store, I was hooked. The lens was sharp and the colours were great! The build quality is great and I just couldn't get over the focus ring. Very smooth and all it takes is a 90 degree turn to go from macro to infinity.
Despite the 3.5 max aperture, this lens is quickly becoming my main walk around because of the reasons stated above as well as the field of view coming in at an equivalent of 42mm. (More natural than the 50mm standards which look more like 75mm short teles.)
If you see one at the camera store, pick it up before its gone!
| | | | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: November, 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Posts: 12,385 | | Review Date: November 9, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Surprisingly good distortion and even exposure | | Cons: | ??? | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
It is surprisingly sharp, and has very low distortion for an inexpensive lens. It really, really, makes a great macro on the reverse adapter K - 2:1.
[Edit] 12 Aug 2011. Added detail ratings. I no longer have the lens and have never used it on digital, so keep that in mind when reading this review.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: January, 2008 Location: Ottawa, ON Posts: 38 | | Review Date: March 7, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Size, weight, good image quality, common 49mm filter size, x factor | | Cons: | Image sharpness not outstanding | |
It's more like a 7.5. Honestly, probably way too much positive praise for this lens. It's a good performer, but not a great performer. Focusing is very smooth, though most shots end up being around infinity anyways. Solid construction as well (as with all M series lenses).
I was disappointed when I gave this lens a head to head qualitative comparison with my all purpose walkaround Sigma 18-200 (which I'm beginning to learn is actually a very decent lens). From a tripod sharpness was far better on the Sigma at all apertures, with no noticeable benefit in contrast, colour rendition, or otherwise, from the Pentax.
The funny thing is, I still really enjoy this lens. It is a nice small wide angle prime that is small and lightweight enough to be quite comfortable to carry around for hours. I can't say the same for my Sigma. With a nice circular polarizing filter, I've also taken some fine shots with super colour (in fact, most of my favorite wide shots have come with this lens- ?).
In the end, worth the money.
AMENDMENT
I actually am going to have to go back on what I've said to some degree :S
While I'll maintain that sharpness is a little lacking, colour rendition and contrast are quite nice (isn't that what wide angle shots need?). So you won't get razor-sharp close up work done, but landscapes and architecture will really pop!
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: January, 2009 Location: Champagne Ardennes, France Posts: 20 | | Review Date: January 24, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $42.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Compact, sharp, good color rendition, cheap | | Cons: | difficult to find | |
I had the chance to find one on Ebay for $42 and took it whithout knowing its performances. I was suprised by the sharpness and nice colors of the pictures. This lens is well constructed and focus ring very smooth.
Bookeh is ok (see 2nd picture)
Buy it if you can find one !
 | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: April, 2009 Location: South Central Nebraska - USA Posts: 1,771 | | Review Date: April 19, 2009 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Very sharp, good color, solid lens | | Cons: | none | |
Great lens for landscapes.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: July, 2009 Location: Berlin, Germany Posts: 344 | | Review Date: September 11, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $58.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | resolution across the frame, high contrast, build quality | | Cons: | not f/1.4, doesn't focus very close, bokeh sometimes unpleasing | |
I bought this lens because I couldn't get the "K" version which is said to be absolutely stellar. Fortunately the much more common M version isn't bad, either.
I paid 40€/$58, case included. This lens is totally worth it.
At f/3.5 it is useable without any limitations - the corner light falloff it is said to have isn't apparent in any of my pictures.
Up to f/11 it gets veeery sharp with lots of resolution.
Colours are very saturated, contrast is high.
Distortion isn't visible, flares are neither.
The bokeh is of a mixed bag: at distant distances it has a nice character to it, at closer focus it can get rather distracting.
Still, I recommend this lens.
(Non working links removed)
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2009 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 478 | | Review Date: October 3, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp wide open, very sharp stopped down, easy to focus | | Cons: | A little slow, but that's about it! | |
This is a fantastic lens. Great as a walk around lens and for landscape. I prefer using manual focus lens for landscape and this is very easy to focus. Great value under $100.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: September, 2009 Location: Paris Posts: 31
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 19, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | takes wonderful pictures and is well built | | Cons: | not too fast | |
Well, giving a ten is something i would not do without thinking about it. But this lens is marvelous, and even though 3.5 is a pretty slow maximum aperture, it's my main lens for street shots. Of course, it won't give you a hell of a lot of control over your depth of field, but there's other lenses for that. What this one does is give you very nice colours (no postprocessing needed), and what people here call a 3D quality: it is hard to believe that the pictures from this lens are photographs, it feels like you're looking at the real thing. And i don't know a lot of lenses that can do that.
On top of that, this lens is sharper than anything should be allowed to be, i recently shot some cityscapes and they blew me away: when viewed in 100% of the size, every line of every building is tack sharp. I was 120 meters up (on the eiffel tower), and buildings more than a kilometer away were rendered perfectly. But seriously perfectly. I tend to find cityscapes like this fairly boring, but this lens just makes them extremely intense.
For more ground-level street work, it has a very nice perspective on a crop sensor, and it's very discreet. Like all M lenses i've encountered, it is very well built and it handles nicely. I found the old rectangular hood for it, and it adds an almost illegal amount of mojo to my k20D.
So: very highly recommended, quoi.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: August, 2007 Location: Cambridge, United States Posts: 57 | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: July, 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Posts: 3,948 | | Review Date: May 9, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Nice weight and balance, very sharp, great colours | | Cons: | Average bokeh | |
This is a gem of a manual focus lens with good build and solid feel. On the newer Pentax smaller DSLR's it is very well balanced. Great focal range for the 1.5 crop APS-C sensor as well. While not a 2.8, realistically, the 3.5 is good enough and this lens is sharp throughout. Terrific walkaround lens. Just a great design.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: January, 2010 Location: The Black Hills Posts: 1,108 | | Review Date: July 22, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp with nice contrast edge to edge | | Cons: | None, if you don't mind MF and manual exposure | |
I consider this lens to be a very good performer at a very low price. I shoot mostly lanscape type work, and it is fast enough for me. I have found that the next steps up in this focal range gets very expensive. I am thinking of renting a 31mm LTD and do some side by side testing.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: January, 2010 Posts: 59 | | Review Date: September 1, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Colors, contrast, sharp, low distortion, flare resistant | | Cons: | Manual focus and aperture, slow | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
| |
I have bought a few SMC M primes over the past months and like this one most (M 135/3.5, M 50/4 macro and M 28/3.5). I use it on a digital body (K-7) mainly with a tripod. Most of the time I stop it down to f5.6 - f8.
The 28/3.5 produces very sharp images even wide open. The colors are excellent and contrast is very good. The colors produced by the 28/3.5 are much more vivid than those produced by the other M lenses I have. It is similar to the DA 15/4 limited in this regard. Contrast and flare resistance are also better. Distortion is very low. The lens is compact and well built except for the lens cap which does its job but is quite cheap. From the lenses I have in my bag this one stays most of the time on my camera (DA 15/4, M28/3.5, M 50/4 macro, M 135/3.5).
Manual focus on this lens is not a problem. Relying on the electronic focus indicator of the K-7 gives good results. With the M 135/3.5 I feel that I have to use live view with magnification often.
Manual aperture has some negative side effect: I don't like the lack of aperture display. When I use the modern DA 15/4 I press the green button instead of the AF button just because I am used to it in M mode with the manual lenses.
I would give it a rating more of 9.5 than 9.
| | |
;)
;)
