| Author: | | New Member Registered: December, 2023 Location: Middle of nowhere, country side Posts: 3 | | Review Date: January 20, 2024 | Recommended | Price: $7.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sturdy, well build, A setting, nice focussing | | Cons: | Bit on the heavy side. | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K10D
Focusing: 9
| |
Just got a Takamur 28-80 macro zoom, made a few test shots with Takumar-A 2x Tele-converter to stress it out a bit and I reckon it's just a very fine lens.
Will keep it as the primary lens on my camera as I like it a lot better than the 28-55 kitlens.
First two pictures in the evening through a double-glazed window, 250m distance, fully zoomed in with 4.0 and 8.0 aperture,
second two on macro, 35cm distance, fully zoomed in under a "incandescent" led lamp and aperture again 4.0 and 8.0.
Absolutely no complaints, very happy with it :-)
     | | | | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2017 Posts: 15
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 12, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $6.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | great value - good close focus - light touch focus | | Cons: | [1] Its reputation [2] light touch focus | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: P30; Lumix G
Focusing: 8
| |
Why is it that any "Brand" camera standard range zoom from Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Minolta gets good ratings and commands reasonable prices secondhand on eBay - yet the Pentax Tak A 28-80mm sits unloved and is selling at the price of coffee for 2 at Starbucks?
All film era standard range zooms have issues:
- the front filter thread often rotates
- You get some barrel distortion at wideangle and pincushion at tele
- The best contrast and acuity is in the middle of the range - and falls off at the extremes
- it needs a lens hood to control flare - however much coating is on the lens - but isn't sold with a dedicated one
- It has a "macro" setting - but doesn't reach fully to 1:1
- It has only 8 elements, 8 groups - not multiple compound lenses that show cement separation (like Olympus OM zooms) so
- yes - it vignettes about 1 stop when wide open; the contrast drops at widest aperture; it shows some chromatic aberration when pushed to high contrast at he field edges if you peek at the 100% magnification
- but it keeps the lens lightweight and affordable
Today we complain - because even "cheap" ($200/£150) modern era AF digital lenses have all this sorted - they now have aspheric and high density glass, with CPU built in - so even the JPEG algorithm adjusts for the barrel distortion at wideangle and pincushion at tele.
But - get yourself an inexpensive a 58mm thread 3-position rubber lens hood, use it, and be surprised. The "macro" close up works well. On digital, just optimse the image for contrast in processing. Crucially - keep the small rear element very clean - it is closest to the fim and sensor and has a disproportionate effect on IQ. This had a dramatic effect on my copy.
| | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2019 Posts: 15
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 11, 2020 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Same as Pentax non-SMC A 28-80mm | | Cons: | Feels cheap | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Focusing: 8
| |
I don't get the really poor scores some people give this lens. It's a good zoom range and like all zooms it's best at about f5.6 and f11 and you can forget the lowest 10mm and highest 10mm. Within the remaining "sweet spot" range this is a very fine lens.
Sadly, people rate a lens by what the letters on it say so not having "SMC" make their mind assume a lens has no effective coating. This one does.
As all A series lenses, this has a cheap plastic feel to it. But if you want a lens for good photos then this one is just fine.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: September, 2010 Location: Faridabad Posts: 38
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 19, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Very Useful range, Ideal travel lens , Useful Macro for Closer objects. | | Cons: | Focus ring very smooth so nailing focus is not very easy. Soft wide open | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-50
Focusing: 7
| |
I got this lens as part of three lenses from ebay /or PF marketplace , don't remember now  , other two being the sears 135 f2.8 (a Keeper IMHO) and sears 80-210 mm F4 (Nice fun lens , again ). I never actually used this lens extensively and took it out again only to check its IQ post reading the reviews here. I kind of like this lens across its full range but particularly at 28 mm on my K-50 as the equivalent focal distance of 42mm is just right on APS-C. It is not sharp like a prime or like 18-135mm but it still fine.. I am not very particular any way and do not pixel peep my pictures as am still learning basics  .
Here are some samples I clicked with this lens. I like the colours on the Hibiscus as they have come out after PP (Used Macro Mode) .. also attaching an unprocessed picture that i took casually in low light .. at 28mm .
I must say lens is somewhat soft and not the easiest lens to focus due to very lose focus ring but is this lens as bad as reviewed here?. May be ...but then i need to learn lot more to agree with the bad reviews here. To me its a great fun lens and can be a kit lens on your second or may be third body for sure. Loving it.
 | | | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: September, 2013 Location: Saskatoon Posts: 3,227 | | Review Date: December 16, 2019 | Not Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 4 |
| Pros: | very useful focal length range for a film camera, didn't cost me extra | | Cons: | poor contrast, soft across the frame, play in the barrel | | Sharpness: 3
Aberrations: 5
Bokeh: 3
Handling: 5
Value: 7
Focusing: 5
| |
This was taken at f5.6 using a tripod, carefully focusing with Live View and focus peaking, with the skylight filter removed, as part of a comparison of 5 different lenses I have that cover 70mm. The DA 18-135 and DA 55-300 blew this lens out of the water. The SMC A 70-210 f4 was noticeably better. A hood would have helped with contrast in this test, but this was the first and last time I used this lens on a DSLR. I had a spare film body that I donated to a local high school and this lens went with it.
I bought a used Super Program in 2004 and this was the lens that came with it. The Super Program replaced a P3N that I bought with a Tokina 28-70 f3.5-4.5 and I shot slide film 80% of the time with both cameras. On a film camera 28-80 is a very useful zoom range and for recording memories, it did its job, but the photos taken with this lens have no "pop" to them, unlike some of the photos I took with the A70-210. It is really hard to do a proper comparison with the Tokina 28-70, but my impression is that the Tokina gave me better images, even though I had less photographic experience. Manual focus consumer grade lenses are available these days for peanuts and there must be better lenses in this range out there,so I can't recommend bothering trying to get one of these.
| | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Posts: 14 | | Review Date: June 30, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | very sharp lens | | Cons: | some very few CA's only at corners with APS-C on big magnifications | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: pentax k-5 k-x k200 k-s1 Fuji x-t100 x-e1
Focusing: 10
| |
Marvellous extremely bad judgements for this nice lens by some users !!! Why for ??? Lenshood forgotten ??? Not stopped down a few ???
My TAKUMAR lens 3.5-4.5/28-80 with the production number 5706635 has the same 12//9 (not 8/8) optical design as the PENTAX one, rated in sharpness 2 points more. Really marvellous !!!  (You can proof it by comparing reflexions of lens elements against the light of a single lamp, if you've got both of them like me).
Is there big difference between the kinds of production or issues, i.e. 2 kinds of TAKUMAR ???  Incomprehensible !!! 
+ Indeed 28 is a few weak in the corners - 9 points only, stopped down to f 6.3-11, too - and some very small visible CA's if picture has been magificated to a big poster of 80x120cm = 32" x 48" (most wide angle zoom lenses - even the actual ones - have problems with sharpness and CA's in the corners - as f.e. trhe setr lens Pentax 18-55 at 18mm, too, but much more visible !!!)
+ very good sharpness in the corners with 28mm - 9 points, scarecely CA's (all values APS-C)
++ center sharpness is excellent at 28mm - 10 points - no CA's
+ at 50 mm very good corner sharpness - 9 points
++ excellent center sharpness with 80mm - 10 points
++ excellent corner sharpness at 80 mm - 10 points
++ close-ups excellent sharpness - 10 points
++ 1.7 x AF converter using with full AF function and 70 LP/mm resolution.
Big difference between shooting with k-x and k-s1. - K-s1 results are much more better !!! (Outstanding with Fuji x-T100) 
My cameras are fitted to highest sharpness + 4, highest contrast + 4
Beside a small weekness in the corners at 28 mm an excellent lens. Fit your Pentax DSLC to highest sharpness, contrast and color saturation and youl get nice photos with this lens
9.5 points totally
PS. with aperture f 6.3 you'll get 85 LP/mm = 170 black and white lines - this is a professional value - an often underrated lens, undoubtly.  | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: March, 2011 Location: yesterday Posts: 1,261
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 29, 2018 | Not Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 1 |
| Pros: | low price, "A" aperture, close focusing | | Cons: | flare, field curvature, build quality, 90° focus throw is too short, value | | Sharpness: 5
Aberrations: 1
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 5
Value: 3
Camera Used: Pentax K-5IIs
Focusing: 4
| |
All of the 28-80's good qualities are washed away by an amazing ability to flare.
I've owned several cheap, bottom of the barrel quality lenses, but I've never used one with less flare resistance.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: July, 2007 Location: North West UK Posts: 390
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 3, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $12.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Cheap "Macro" Good stopped down | | Cons: | Lacking contrast wide open, Loose focus ring | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 6
Value: 8
Camera Used: K-3
| |
I found this bundled with a couple of other lenses in a second-hand camera shop dirt cheap.
Is it any good? Well if price was the only thing, then superb! But of course price is only one thing.
Happily though, it is quite good fun to use.
Wide open, it lacks contrast, but then again, the K-mount Taks were not renowned for contrast wide open.
Stopped down it does come alive with nice contrast and bokeh.
Macro mode is quite good really, but don't expect 100mm Macro in this lens.
Downsides?
Well it is cheap feeling, and the focus ring lacks any sort of control, it is too loose really.
Overall, it is a good lens albeit not outstanding, but if you do find one for peanuts like I have, then why not go for a punt, You can always sell it on again for a tenner, and have fun in the meantime.
[IMG] Praying by Iain, on Flickr[/IMG]
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: October, 2013 Posts: 94
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 30, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $5.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, 'macro' mode | | Cons: | Sloppy focus, metering | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 7
Value: 10
Camera Used: K200D
| |
Ok I got mine free because the ebay seller failed to notice scratches (well it cost me £3 postage) and first impressions are it's a) heavy and b) difficult to focus with the viewfinder on my K200D. Exposure has also caused me problems but that's just user error.
Having now got the hang of it I have to say it is as sharp as any lens I've tried, so I'm wondering why it scores so low. I wonder if people haven't bothered to learn how to use it? Getting the right aperture and shutter speed and focus takes time and patience, but get it right and it will produce pin sharp images - no room for improvement. Hence it must get a 10/10 for sharpness.
As mentioned by others, it's main appeal is 'macro' mode for close focusing.
 
This is just a test shot of course, under weak artificial light, but it shows the IQ.
One peculiarity with mine is the focus and zoom rings seem a bit sloppy or made of very bendy material so they can 'grind' when turned, sounding like the lens glass is being ground to dust. Took me a while to work out it was nothing serious.
I'd say to anyone who can be bothered to use a manual lens, especially if you have live view, pick one of these up. If it's in good condition pay a little more for it because it is a very capable lens. All you have to do is learn how to meter with it.
Another in natural light, 'macro' f/8 1/20s ISO 400 croppd and resized, a little u/s mask. No other edits.
A wider shot, very difficult to focus with my K200D but at f/16 I got it more-or-less right. I am liking the colours with this lens, it seems to distinguish subtle shades well.. Cropped, resized and u/s mask. No other edits. 35mm f16 1/20s ISO 400
 | | | | | New Member Registered: July, 2013 Posts: 2 | | Review Date: July 23, 2013 | Not Recommended | Price: $125.00
| Rating: 2 |
| Pros: | Inexpensive | | Cons: | Myriad | | Sharpness: 4
Aberrations: 5
Bokeh: 5
Handling: 2
Value: 3
Camera Used: Pentax 35mm
| |
This is the only Pentax Corp. lens that I was dissatisfied with. Lost my A series 28mm f2.8 on a hiking trip, and replaced it with this thing. Bad choice. I should have coughed up the cash for a 24-50 SMC-A, but they were quite expensive back then.
Poor construction - the focus barrel wobbled noticeably in use, and it rotated forever through the focus range. The zoom ring was way too loose to hold a setting. Taking any kind of action or snap-focus shot was an exercise in frustration. Used it for some scenic work, but it was nowhere near as sharp as my primes or the 70-210mm A series f4 it accompanied.
Actually, I'm surprised that people are still using these. I disposed of mine at least 10 years ago.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: August, 2011 Posts: 99 | | Review Date: September 19, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | easy use, fast to focus, rather light, good macro setting, Durable | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: Pentax ME
| |
I've been using this lens for over 3 years, now and i can say that it is a good valued lens. It came bundled with my Pentax ME, since then i still use this lens on that camera and find that it produces good photos, the handling of the lens is very good as it is has smooth focusing, allowing for fast focusing. I also found that this lens is rather sharp compared to other 28-80s found on the market toda y, it has stood the test of time well, It may not be SMC coated, but it still holds a go od contrast and sharpness.
I took these with my ME using this lens, Boots 200 ASA film
 | | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: April, 2009 Location: Puerto Rico Posts: 2,681 | | Review Date: June 16, 2012 | Not Recommended
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | handling | | Cons: | overall performance | | Sharpness: 3
Aberrations: 4
Bokeh: 3
Handling: 9
Value: 4
Camera Used: K1000
| |
I'll try to be objective in this review because my heart says love it but my brain says it sucks Let me explain:
This was my first and only lens for years as it was kitted with my brand new K1000 back ~ 1989. More than 23 years later, both are still in perfect working order.
This lens taught me a lot about photography in my early days. I used the close focusing macro mode frequently. Back then, a teenager me had no idea was multicoating was, nor DOF, nor the concept of sharpness at different apertures. Being a poor IQ performer, especially wide open, I was always blaming myself and pushing to become better. Since 99.99% of my prints were 4x6 (or the even cheaper Clark's 3x2) it was "adequate" back then. My favorite part of it is handling. It still moves smoothly and zooming in for precise focusing and metering then zooming back for proper composition became second nature.
Bottom line, no, I won't use it now but it did contribute to the history of my photography. And for that I can not simply disregard it as useless.....
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: April, 2011 Location: Lost in translation ... Posts: 18,076 | | Review Date: February 11, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | "A" lens, "proxi-photo"/macro use | | Cons: | See the previous reviews above | | Sharpness: 5
Aberrations: 5
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 5
Value: 6
Camera Used: K-5, K-r
| |
Bonjour,
OK, the "impulse" purchase of this lens was an error on my part, but sometimes I cannot resist and LBA gets the best of my better judgment.
No need to further whip a "dead horse" ... this lens is really poor except for maybe "proxi-photo" close focus situations ... otherwise it's almost a good paperweight to have on one's desk to fiddle with every now and then.
I'll be kind and give this lens a "5" ... solely because of its "close focus" capabilities. Enough said. Allez, J | | | | | Junior Member Registered: December, 2011 Posts: 27 | | Review Date: December 4, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: $5.00
| Rating: 2 |
| Pros: | Inexpensive | | Cons: | Poor image quality | | Sharpness: 2
Handling: 8
Value: 2
| |
After testing and using this lens, I concur with the mediocre review. This lens will take pictures if that is all you need in a pinch, but that is about as good as it gets. Because I have a 18-55m kit lens that came with my Kx, I regret purchasing this lens, but for $5 US I thought it was worth a chance to see how it would perform under the conditions I like to take pictures on my Kx. My kit lens (DAL 18-55mm) far out performs this lens. I was hoping the extra distance in the zoom would help me, but the images weren't nearly as clear as my 18-55.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Posts: 1,678 | | Review Date: September 8, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $15.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Nice Macro Lens, decent Bokeh. A Macro only lens IMO | | Cons: | Poor contrast, not great for "normal" use | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 8
| |
To me, this is lens is ONLY used for macro and I only keep this around because A. it's damaged and has little to no resale value and B. It produced a few of my favorite macro pics I have taken.. in part because of its "damage" The front barrel for focusing can unscrew without a stop/lock in it at all.. letting me get a bit of extra focusing distance in macro mode, sometimes very handy!
Here's a sample.
 | | |
