| Author: | | New Member Registered: July, 2022 Posts: 4 | | Review Date: July 1, 2022 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Fujifilm X-E2
| |
This lens is always in my Fujifilm X-E2. I like it more than XF35f2 because it makes me feel I am a real photographer. | | | | | | | Unoriginal Poster Registered: November, 2016 Location: Espoo Posts: 3,182 | | Review Date: September 1, 2020 | Recommended
| Rating: N/A |
| Pros: | | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
| |
This lens has great pop and good colors. Not quite as sharp as faster 35 but has better corners in FF. Thought I preferred f2 on APSC, these features make f2.8 my preferred 35mm on FF. This was a special case and I shot it in Single In Challenge two months a row. First in APSC and then in FF. This lens really came to life on FF. At the time I thought It was just the camera, as I had not shot much with it before, but now I know it’s that this lens really shines on original format.
This is clearly cheaper than faster version, which makes this good value. If you’re FF shooter I recommend this M35 version.
APSC SIC album: https://www.flickr.com/photos/154414256@N06/albums/72157707250019794
FF SIC album: https://www.flickr.com/photos/154414256@N06/albums/72157690692907863 | | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2018 Posts: 2 | | Review Date: March 7, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $105.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Small, contrasty, and sharp all over by f/8. | | Cons: | Spherical Aberrations at f/2.8, coma correction | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: MX, X-T3
| |
Prices of 35mm lenses have blown up over the last few years, so I was super enthused when I found this one in good condition for just over $100.
Wide open shows the worst of this lenses performance, there's coma at the edges/corners and spherical aberrations that rob the image of contrast and resolution. However once you close the aperture to f/4 the image improves dramatically - spherical aberrations disappear, coma is noticeably reduced, and there's TONS of contrast and good resolution. At f/8 the image is really sharp across the entire frame.
Compared to the older f/3.5 35mm lenses, this M version has better edge/corner sharpness, better flare resistance, slightly lower chromatic aberrations, and an extra 2/3 EV of brightness at max aperture. The only area where the older 35mm outperforms this one is wide-open performance at f/3.5 - no spherical aberrations and super sharp/contrasty in the center, however if you stop the M lens down to f/4 it outperforms the older versions in the mid-frame and edges. This f/2.8 version has warmer tones similar to the f/3.5 35mm SMC Takumar lens. I personally prefer this f/2.8 version over the f/3.5 versions.
My copy has a very tiny amount of haze under the front element, but it's only visible when shining light through the back - something that will never happen in real-world use.
| | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2014 Location: Jakarta Posts: 1 | | Review Date: September 4, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Cheap, Reliable | | Cons: | Take a bit time to focusing | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 5
Handling: 8
Value: 6
Camera Used: Pentax ME Super, Pentax MZ-50
| |
This is the first lens I have.
What can I say? Hard, strong, reliable, sharp... Its SMC class. You can use this to train your "feel" with manual focusing.
Here is a picture that I take with this lens, using ME Super and BW-film Lucky SHD100.
 | | | | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2013 Location: Jakarta Posts: 2 | | Review Date: May 11, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $65.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharp, color saturation, compact | | Cons: | bokeh | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: K5, ME Super
| |
i have one with scratch and cleaning mark on back element, it didn't affect image quality, color saturation still excellent
here the sample image, the primate were have been in glass cage, close focused shot, taken at zoo in Jakarta, Indonesia, really like this lens
ISO 200, 1/160 sec, no retouch, resize only, autolevel only:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/roe_groho/11905766436/in/photostream/
here are for more samples pics:
http://https://www.flickr.com/photos/roe_groho/sets/72157645671773578/ | | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2012 Posts: 15 | | Review Date: June 20, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $36.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, Size & weight & appearance, contrast, simple construction & robust | | Cons: | Have to more sharp at frame area | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: K10D
| |
All about this lens is very good.
f2.8-f5.6 have to more sharp at frame area, over f8 is perfect!
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: April, 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Posts: 1,760 | | Review Date: May 28, 2013 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, compact, great handling | | Cons: | Not a lot | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: LX, ME, K5
| |
I think the 5 rating really is not right, and drags the average down.
This is a hidden gem in the M-line. Sharp in the centre from wide-open, razor sharp at f/4 in the centre. Great across the frame by f/5.6 on a crop-sensor. Also a great lens on film, but takes f/8 to sharpen up across the frame.
Fantastic value, as mentioned before similar sharpness to the fast-fifties.
See https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/lens-sample-photo-archive/226252-super-mu...ml#post2401178 for a full test including 100% samples.
| | | | | New Member Registered: April, 2013 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: April 21, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Small size , optics and helicoid very good | | Cons: | No | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: KM , ME
| |
I have the M-2.8/28 mm and the M-2.8/35 mm . At short distance untill 5 metre's there is not much difference between the two lenses , but if you do a landscape the M-2.8/35 mm is a real winner . At 1:5.6 even the far corners of the 35 mm negative are very sharp , so this 35 mm is very usefull lens for handheld photography with a 100 iso black and white film and a orange filter . It is a great lens .
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: April, 2012 Location: Melbs Posts: 1,240 | | Review Date: September 14, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | that magical fov in crop land | | Cons: | zilch | |
LOVE IT!!!
I kind of collected this just because I had the 28 M, and a 50 M at either end, turns out the (on a crop) the 50 feels to portraity, and the 28 a little fickle to focus. (Slowly developing a lens collecting persuasion here..)
Can't explain it, why the 28mm feels fickle that is, but in regards for general use, the 35mm just feels good.
I suppose it's having started with a 50mm on film, the 35mm covers the same amount of area so here I am in familiar territory
Can't fault it wide open, out of focus areas are clean, its a ripper  | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: September, 2011 Posts: 6 | | Review Date: June 27, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | sharpness, contrasty, great on film | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-r
| |
Optically identically to the acclaimed A35/2.8. The difference in review score here may just be a matter of sample variations.
I must have a pretty darn good copy of the lens. It's contrasty wide open with excellent sharpness across the frame. Comparable to M50 1.7 in terms of sharpness. It's close to a normal lens, a little bit on the long side, when used on APS-C. Mounted on a film camera, it becomes a wide angle lens. I prefer the FoV it delivers on film more than APS-C. Something to consider if you are also a film shooter.
I've not seen this lens on sale often. The M28s are a lot more common in the used market.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: July, 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Posts: 3,948 | | Review Date: July 23, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Small sharp and the right focal length | | Cons: | None really | |
This is another one of Pentax's excellent 35mm offerings. On digital it has an appealing focal length, and withthe coatings and general design excels at sharp images wide open and 1 stop down we are into ultra-sharp. Contrast is very good and the size is terrific....very small.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: February, 2010 Location: Eerbeek Posts: 1,857 | | Review Date: January 22, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | light, small, versatile, attractive FoV | | Cons: | not too sharp, some distortion | |
I used this lens for over 20 years as my main optics. I also used the 2/85mm, but for specific purposes, and while I had the 4/200mm, I rarely used that focal length (all on film).
The field of view is attractive (on film or FF), and the lens is very versatile. I did not have the money for the 1.4 or even 2.0/35mm at the time, although I later acquired the latter as well. Nonetheless, it served its purpose, but in retrospect I can see that it did not shine as some Pentax lenses do. It certainly doesn’t have the wow factor. Not in sharpness, colour rendition, or boqeh.
Mechanically, it has been flawless. Very sturdy and unlikely to give up any time soon, such is the built quality. Yet I would search for another 35mm were I in the market for one today. I'm not, as I now have the Pentax 645-A 3.5/35mm, which is lightyears ahead.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2011 Location: Minahasa, North Celebes (Sulawesi) Posts: 586 | | Review Date: January 22, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp wide open. Colors are great. Easy to focus | | Cons: | Not so easy to find | |
This is a fun lens to use because it is easy to focus compared to my SMC-M 50mm f/1.4, but still gives quite the same quality. Colors are rich and deep. I can get close enough to capture detail with this lens, a sharp performer too, even wide open. Stepped down it gets sharper. Bokeh is pleasing.
Here's a taste:
 | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: August, 2009 Posts: 417 | | Review Date: November 9, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | sharp, short minimum focus distance | | Cons: | large in comparison to the M40, mechanism vulnerable to sticking | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 8
Value: 8
| |
Excellent sharpness, comparable to the 1.7/50mm, slightly less sharp.
On film, the FOV is perfect, and more normal to me than the 50, with a real feel of depth to photos, as if you are there in the scene again. Great for portraits, provided you like faces which are made rounder...photos of my baby are funky with this lens. Starts to be possible to rely upon depth of field and hyper focal focusing.
Practically though, I find that I am more likely to reach for a 28 than the 35 if I want something wider than the 50. Given the 50's are capable of such outstanding bokeh, the 35/2.8 doesn't see that much use. Story might be different on digital I guess...I am using film.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: October, 2010 Location: Baltimore Posts: 2,542 | | Review Date: November 4, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $52.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | color, sharpness, easy focus | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
I own a Pentax SMC-M 50 1.7 and a 28 2.8 and this 35 2.8 is just as sharp as either wide open. I am really surprised this lens is only rated 7ish.
It seems to focus easier than either of the others using manual focus on a DSLR. This, IMHO is the i perfect walking around lens...
| | |
;)
;)
