| Author: | | Site Supporter Registered: January, 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 17,892 | | Review Date: March 18, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $250.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | fast wide angle | | Cons: | | |
Note that the price of $250 is the price paid in the early to mid 1980's for this lens with K mount (not KA) adaptor.
Lens comes with a circular lens hood, which is thread on.
Focusing is a little imprecise, due to the 100 degree rotation from minimum focus to infinity, however, given the depth of field of a 24mm lens this is not an issue. The front group does not rotate during focusing, which makes use of a polarizing filter relitively easy.
Over time, some detectable play has developed with the focusing mechanism and focusing ring.
It should be noted that the lens with K mount can go to F32, but with KA mount is limited to F22, the F32 position is used for the AE setting
Was an acceptable wide angle on film cameras but not wide enough on a DSLR
The lens can also be used with wide angle adaptors (i.e. 0.5x front end adaptors) but suffers from vignetting on full frame (film) cameras. No vignetting present with 0.45x adaptor on a DSLR
Metering with DSLRs not yet tested.
| | | | | | | Senior Member Registered: August, 2007 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 233 | | Review Date: April 3, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $65.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Can be very sharp. Cheap on ebay. | | Cons: | Saturation is a little lacking. | |
I also had the Pentax K 24mm lens. I would give that lens an 8+ and this one an 8- (if you get a good sample).
Actually, I've had two of these. The early 01B and the later 01BB version. The early version is really well constructed, all metal, feels great. The later one has some plastic and the little window for the distance scale. Supposedly they have the same optical formula. Perhaps it was just lens variation, but my early version (which was absolutely mint) was significantly inferior than my late version in terms of optical quality. The coatings did look different on the two lenses however. For the purpose of this review, I will just restrict everything to the late version, which I currently still use.
It is a fairly large lens (55mm diameter), much larger and heavier than the Pentax K 24mm. It has very good center and border sharpness on a DSLR. (I don't know how it performs on film). Personally, I found the focusing to be really easy due to the fact that everything farther than about 5 feet being infinity. (This is true for almost all wide angle lenses). Color is a bit on the cool side (the eary version was very warm actually), I like cooler colors, but some people like warmer colors (easily corrected with a skylight filter, cheaper than uv filters these days). Contrast is average, it may improve with a hood. The focus ring on the later version is a little on the narrow side (the Pentax K and M lenses are much better in this regard).
The focal length is great and very usable. It has a good feel about it, takes above average pictures and offers 25% more light than a f2.8 lens. (Of course, at f2.5, this lens is soft, but usable, at f4 and beyond it is good).
Re-reading this review, I've made this lens sound a little "blah", but honestly, I have owned, used, tested and sold probably 50+ lenses by now, the fact that I sold most of them and kept this one says something about it. This lens can easily be had on ebay for around $50-$70, for that price, I think this lens is a great deal.  | | | | | Moderator
Site Supporter Registered: June, 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Posts: 17,377 | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2009 Location: Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Posts: 429 | | Review Date: February 20, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $70.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Constant aperture, clear glass. | | Cons: | N/A | |
I have the 01B version.
Focusing is a wee tedious as the 100 degree rotation from minimum focusing to infinite. This is a non-issue for the depth of field of this 24mm lens.
Like one reviewer mentioned earlier, it should be noted that the lens with K mount can go to f32, but with KA mount, it is limited to f22, as the f32 position is used for the AE setting.
Used mostly on my mechanical/manual film camera and my finding is that it is an acceptable wide angle on film cameras. I have not tried on my K100D as yet but preliminary guess is that it may not be wide enough on the K100D.
| | | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: December, 2008 Location: Ames, Iowa, USA Posts: 2,965
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 19, 2009 | Not Recommended | Price: $75.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | well built, feels good | | Cons: | very soft edges with chromatic aberration at 2.8 | |
While usable when stopped down I found my version of this lens model 01BB to be soft & exhibit a lot of flare at 2.5 & 2.8 on my 1.5 crop DSLR.
I would restrict its use to snapshots, especially at small apertures.
Here's a corner sharpness comparison test on a 1.5 crop DSLR:
The brightness decrease is a lighting effect, not vignetting.
Dave
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: March, 2009 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Posts: 509 | | Review Date: February 24, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | decent resolution; compact, well made | | Cons: | color can be a little bit dull; metering can be off a bit | |
In comparison with my Pentax K 24mm f2.8, this lens is inferior in almost all measures except for two areas. 1. slightly higher resolution at f2.8 (as far as I can see) 2. allows AE with PKA adaptall mount. Pentax color is more vivid and dynamic IMHO. Clearly, Pentax makes better prime lenses.
I would say resolution is at the most only half of the story. I prefer vivid and dynamic color which is the characteristic of most Pentax OEM lenses.
BTW: may change mind in the future after more testing.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: October, 2006 Location: NJ USA Posts: 13,072
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 13, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $5.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | good resolution, kills flare dead | | Cons: | | |
Mine is a very beat up 01BB that came as a package with a bunch of other stuff, including a K-A Adaptall-2 mount. This is still preliminary, as some time I will compare vs. a Nikkor-N 24/2.8.
Right off the bat, this lens produced very large JPEGs with the K100D, indicating a good resolution design. I've since used this quite a bit with a Program Plus, both color and b&w. I find the focal length translates usefully to a moderate wide on the K100D.
Flare: I've shot against the sun, I've shot against very bright reflections, and the lens damps down flare amazingly well - better than the 43 limited. This can be a down-side, as at least once I was hoping for some spread of light 
Focusing is easy - though as usual, the DOF scale on the lens is over-optimistic on APS-c.
On film, there's some darkening at the corners at wide apertures, but by ~5.6 this is gone. I haven't noted any vignetting on the DSLR. The edge softness noted by many wide open is mainly a film thing as well.
I find color is very well handled - the saturation depends on the scene and on the light, which to me means this lens does not impose its own signature overly much.
On the K100D, with a good K-A adapter, the 01bb tends to over expose, and requires a bit of - ev.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: June, 2010 Location: North Zealand, Denmark Posts: 1,516
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 29, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $63.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Well built; Fast; AE-functionality with PKA-mount; close focusing distance | | Cons: | Becoming a bit pricy; perhaps not the sharpest prime ever | |
The price I paid (2010) included original case and caps; adaptall-2 mount for Minolta (no use for me) and a Miranda 55 mm skylight filter - a good bargin, I think. But prices seem to be increasing and some of the buy-now prices seen on e-bay now are (at least to me) ridiculous.
Mine is a near-mint 01B version (s/n 901911). One cannot judge the optical and mechanical quality from the exterior only, but this copy seems to be excellent in all aspects.
I cannot add much to the virtues already mentioned by others above but would point to the minimum focusing distance of just 25 cm as a very convenient feature adding to the versatility of this lens.
And regarding sharpness and colour? Take a look of these 65% crops of two pictures of some small orchids:
I think the wide-open aperture performance is good. Of course the DOF improves at f/8.0 but I cannot say that I am unhappy with performance at f/2.5.
Best Regards / Stone G.
| | | | |
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 13, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Close to 35mm equiv, fast, solid, nice balance on K-7 | | Cons: | Adaptall mount, prone to flare | |
Having got an Adaptall 28mm F2.5, I decided I wanted something wider, so sourced a 24mm with P/KA mount.
This worked fine at first, but then seemed to 'stick' at F4 whilst in TAV mode. I can still manually select F2.5, but no longer through the camera. I am assuming this is a mount fault rather than a lens issue. Anyone else had this issue?
Anyway, the lens is solidly built and has a nice weight to it, which balances my K-7 nicely.
The field of view is 36mm equiv, which is ideal for street photography and as a general walk around lens.
The aperture range is pretty broad from F2.5 to F32, but I would suggest that F4 to F16 give the best performance.
My adaptall 28mm is in better condition (near mint), but I just love the field of view on this one. This is a keeper for me.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2011 Location: Minahasa, North Celebes (Sulawesi) Posts: 586 | | Review Date: July 27, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $140.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Wide enough, fast enough | | Cons: | Need sharp landscaping lens? Look somewhere else. | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 9
| |
I'm on the same path with the previous reviewer, got this out of "wider curiosity syndrome" from the Adaptall II 28/2.5 ..I even bought the older Adaptall (CW-24) version before this 
In terms of build quality, Adaptall series offers something that would not disappoint you. When the Vivitar 28mm lineup often found with defected aperture mechanism, this lens, or ANY Adaptall lens, I rarely, if non-existent at all, never heard of having aperture problems. I love the f/2.5, really, it gives me the possibility to photograph just about anything low-light. The 24mm, be it on the cropped DSLR sensors, is very helpful indoors, enough for group shots with everybody on the frame.
I can't point out the difference between this lens with the older CW-24, they performs just about the same to me. Some mention lack of sharpness with these two, which I confirm. Not a big deal, probably because I don't shoot landscape much with these lenses. I prefer DA 18-55 for landscaping, at f/8 no other kit lens can beat that lens 
 | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: May, 2011 Location: Vigan City Posts: 2
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 10, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Very nice lens, sharp image | | Cons: | There's nothing i can say . . . | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 6
| |
I use this lens on my Pentax K-5, so it's in the photographer & composition
My product number is: 01BB . . . i think, it's more older than yours? hehehehe!
HERE ARE MY SAMPLE PICS:
    | | | | | Junior Member Registered: January, 2013 Location: Texas Posts: 32 | | Review Date: January 5, 2013 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Smooth manual focus, build quality, excellent at F5.6 | | Cons: | Bad at full aperture | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax ZXn, Super A, Leica R7
| |
Bad in the corners at the large aperture of 2.5, and also too much vignetting; improves quickly at smaller aperture, excellent at F5.6. A lot of internal reflections when the sun is in the field. The next version (01BB) is lot better at full aperture (sharpness, vignetting) and has reduced flare at all apertures.
The adaptall-II ring system is ingenious (I used this lense on Pentax and Leica cameras), but fragile.
The build quality of this lense is remarkable, truly excellent, all metal, and its focusing ring a delight to use.
Excellent value, cheaper than Pentax lenses, but avoid F2.5.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: March, 2014 Posts: 38
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 4, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | very sharp, well built, small and light | | Cons: | none from my perspective | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: various
| |
My copy is extremely sharp. I use this lens on all of my 35mm cameras - it equals any camera maker's 24 prime I've ever owned, and those adaptall mounts let me use it on my entire collection.
Small, fast light . . . . great lens. Here's a sample of what it can do on a DSLR, in this case my Kx, where it operates as a nice, normal-wide 35mm. 1/250th sec between f5.6 and f8, ISO 200.
Because the CMOS sensor uses the central portion of the lens, sharpness is excellent. My copy is also sharp in the corners full frame, right down to f4. It's a touch soft at f2.5, but who cares? Wides are seldom used wide open, anyway. There's lots of them out there, they're cheap - about the best bang for the buck I've seen.
The picture, by the way, is of a Black Spruce Swamp in winter, in the Prince George, BC area.
 | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2012 Location: North Wales Posts: 2,870
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 12, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $70.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | quality | | Cons: | mount faffs, not so good wide open or away from image centre | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 8
Camera Used: K-r
| |
I took this lens and my Superwide II PKA out and about and came back with a suite of pics to look at side by side.
Conclusion: simply that my K-r was not able to resolve (literally and figuratively) between the lenses! Example pic (f10, identical amounts of light contrast boost and sharpening in Faststone):
For what its worth the first pic and crop were taken on the Sigma. I can remark:
- the Sigma seemed to have the edge wide open
- The Sigma has the edge for close up work, focussing down to 1:4, ~15cm CWD.
- I preferred the handling of the Sigma, and of course you don't have to faff with a mount. The flat "beercan" design of the tamrons doesn't really help feeling for the rings by touch.
- I felt that I was more often noticing some CA with the Sigma. On other occasions I have had some pronounced blue fringing in backlit situations.
Both lenses are very good IMO - read 8.5/10. Between the two, I can remark that Sigma Superwides are common and relatively cheap per se, but Superwides in P-KA mount are not so. Prices head up to ~£100+ though you can get lucky if you bide your time. The 01B sells consistently for around £40-70 and crops up regularly. If you already have an interest in adaptall and a PKA mount then thats the cheaper and more practical option. Otherwise the Sigma overall is perhaps to be preferred over 01B+PKA.
UPDATE I did a landscape comparison with the 01B, 24-48mm 13A and the superwide II and posted the results in the adaptall club thread here.
Scrutiny of the crops clearly shows the superwides superiority wide open. IQ's converged stopping down however the test tends to corroborate SunValley's comments above re 01B's edge IQ. However I have left the scores the same.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: June, 2013 Location: Montreal, Canada Posts: 574
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 7, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | relatively sharp, built like a tank, fast | | Cons: | corner sharpness | | Camera Used: K30
| |
I have mixed feelings about this lens because I thought I could use it for astronomy but it's not sharp enough on the edges and corners. Stopping it down to f/4 only marginally helps. Better at f/5.6 but that's too dark for the night sky. Great lens for candid street or event photography. Here's a shot showing huge coma aberration on the edges but very sharp star images in the center. On the bright side CA and vignetting on APS-C are not so bad.
 | | |
