# The second hand lenses advice thread



## fractionMan (Apr 19, 2012)

I've been looking at ebay for old pentax K mount manual lenses and I came across a few things like this:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Vivitar-2...ters_Lenses&hash=item2a1c542482#ht_500wt_1066

It's a 2x tele-converter.

Now, I have no experience whatsoever with tele-converters, but am I right in thinking that I could use this with an existing auto lens and have the auto focus still work?

Anyway, it's peanuts <£10 and I'm only after a few toys rather than anything 'serious', so is it worth a punt to see how it behaves?

Any other cool/odd/quality old lenses that you can find for little outlay?  Any recommendations?


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 19, 2012)

This also looks like fun: it's a 500mm mirror lens:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CENTON-F8...ers_Lenses&hash=item3a73378ae0#ht_1274wt_1051

Oooh, and here's the kinds of things you can do with it: http://www.flickr.com/groups/mirror_reflex/pool/with/4583095073/


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 19, 2012)

The two together would let me take shots of the moon!


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 20, 2012)

Nobody got ant bargain tips?  I've currently got a kit 18-55 on my pentax Kx.


----------



## weltweit (Apr 20, 2012)

My tip when buying a lens second hand, as I used to do from Jessops, is to buy the condition good as new, rather than the worse conditions. That way you pay a little more but are less likely to end up with a dud.


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 20, 2012)

Amy general lens tips?  There are loads of pentax mount manual rooms on eBay atm for not much money.  The more light (lower f) the better right?  Any tips on good value brands?


----------



## weltweit (Apr 20, 2012)

THe cheapest used lens I bought was my Nikon 50mm f1.8 which I got for £40.00, but it was a camera shop and I was able to shoot test images on my camera before I bought the lens.


----------



## weltweit (Apr 20, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> Amy general lens tips? There are loads of pentax mount manual rooms on eBay atm for not much money. The more light (lower f) the better right? Any tips on good value brands?


I don't know much about the Pentax system, but it is possible that used lenses are becoming available because they DONT work properly on the latest Pentax dslrs. I would look into the history of the mount to be sure what the lenses will do on your body. It is possible for example that they may Auto Exposure, but not Auto Focus, or vice versa.


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 20, 2012)

That's a good point, being able to test em.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 20, 2012)

Couple of points:
1) The stuff you're looking at is standard Pentax K mount stuff, not K-A mount, so your K-x won't be able to "talk" to the lens to set the aperture. You'll have to do it manually. Basically, K-A compatible lenses have an "A" setting on the aperture dial (see pic below). You set the lens to that, and it can communicate with your camera.







2) Catadioptric/mirror telephotos are great, but are a bit delicate compared to ordinary lenses (if one internal element shifts slightly, the whole shebang is fucked).

3) Bear in mind that because of the 1.5x magnification factor inherent to using film lenses on Pentax dslrs (the factor varies between manufacturers, but they all have them), a 500mm film slr lens is effectively a 750mm lens on your K-x.

BTW, as someone who's taken a few pics with a 400mm K-mount lens (using stop down metering as there's no electronic link between camera and lens), remember to use a camera and/or lens support!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 20, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> Amy general lens tips? There are loads of pentax mount manual rooms on eBay atm for not much money. The more light (lower f) the better right? Any tips on good value brands?


 
Vivitar *if* the lens is a series one (it'll be marked on the body of the lens). Pentax's own lenses are pretty uniformly excellent. Kiron made some good 80-200mm zooms, and Tamron (if you can find a Tamron Adaptall 2 PK-A adaptor to mount the lens to the camera with) also made many good'uns, including an excellent 28mm/f2.5 prime, their 28-70 zoom and their 80-210. I reckon a real decent one given the multiplication factor, though, would be the Tamron 70-150mm/f3.5, if only because it's a lovely sharp lens, and the 70mm end (105mm on your K-x) falls into the focal lengths (80-140mm, roughly) that are good for portraiture.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 20, 2012)

weltweit said:


> I don't know much about the Pentax system, but it is possible that used lenses are becoming available because they DONT work properly on the latest Pentax dslrs. I would look into the history of the mount to be sure what the lenses will do on your body. It is possible for example that they may Auto Exposure, but not Auto Focus, or vice versa.


 
If fractionman reads the manual for his K-x, there's a long list in the back of which lenses will give full aperture function. It's pretty easy to then extrapolate from there that any PK-A, and most other lenses subsequent to the K-A mount will give full functionality, and that you can use those that came before in stop-down mode.

And of course manual lenses won't autofocus, there's no motor linkage!


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 20, 2012)

Cheers for the info!


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 24, 2012)

Just found a fantastic resource for any pentax users out there: http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/

Tons of user reviews of the older pentax lenses, *including the autofocus ones* from the film era which can be picked up for not that much. I'm loving the fact that I can get a reasonable lens with autofocus for under 50 quid - payday tomorrow!

I think I'm going to get myself a http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-FA-35-80mm-F4-5.6-Zoom-Lens.html - I've seen them for 25 quid. A 50-120mm digital equiv sounds like a great wandering about range and will complement my 18-55 kit lens well.

---

In other news, Oooh. Just won a
*Tokina 80 - 200 Zoom Telephoto F4*​reviews: http://www.lensporn.net/2009/12/tokina-rmc-80-200mm-f4-699-from-ebay.html
http://ferling.net/Sears80-200f4.htm
http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/tokina-80-200mm-f-4.html
for £12.50 inc postage 

No auto aperture or focus, but I don't think it's going to be a massive hassle. Pick a fstop and let the body work out the shutter speed, job done. Anyway, expecting some fun with this one and then might sell it on.


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 24, 2012)

Now trying to find a reasonably fast autofocus prime for low light shots.  No luck yet.


----------



## stowpirate (Apr 24, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> It's a 2x tele-converter.


 
Total waste of time as you can never really hold the camera steady enough to get that shot. All my attempts using a tripod have been soft. Prime lens is really the only option.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 24, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> Now trying to find a reasonably fast autofocus prime for low light shots. No luck yet.


 
Not at anything approaching a reasonable price, I'll bet.


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 24, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Not at anything approaching a reasonable price, I'll bet.


 
Dammit you're right 

Cheapest I've found that's any good is 130 quid.


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 24, 2012)

What's a good starting point for decent lowlight shots? f2? f1.7 f2.4?

I can do _ok_ at f3.5 with the kit lens, it's sharp enough but nowhere near fast enough.


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 24, 2012)

lol. I sent an ebayer a couple of questions on his auction. The title reads: "
camera lens", the picture is of a generic lens.

He replied: "hi please look at the description all the details are there", the description reads: "lens plus case"

Funilly enough, bidding ended with no bidders 

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI....1&ssPageName=ADME:X:RTQ:GB:1123#ht_500wt_1158


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 25, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> What's a good starting point for decent lowlight shots? f2? f1.7 f2.4?
> 
> I can do _ok_ at f3.5 with the kit lens, it's sharp enough but nowhere near fast enough.


 
Given the utterly excellent high ISO resolution of the K-x (extremely low noise even at ISO 3200 and above), I'd try an f2. If you were a bit more confident in your manual focusing, I'd recommend a manual focus 50mm/f1.7 SMC Takumar. That'd effectively give you a 75mm lens, so your field of view would be narrower than with a standard 50mm equivalnet that was actually designed for the K-x, but would still give you excellent glass for some photo-project uses.


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 25, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Given the utterly excellent high ISO resolution of the K-x (extremely low noise even at ISO 3200 and above), I'd try an f2. If you were a bit more confident in your manual focusing, I'd recommend a manual focus 50mm/f1.7 SMC Takumar. That'd effectively give you a 75mm lens, so your field of view would be narrower than with a standard 50mm equivalnet that was actually designed for the K-x, but would still give you excellent glass for some photo-project uses.


 
Cheers VP. I'm currently bidding on an old manual f1.7 50mm pentax-m which seems to be both a popular and cheap lens. I'll keep an eye out for the takumar but I think that needs an m42 adaptor. (eta: I think we're talking about the same lens)

What I'd really like is the FA 50mm 1.7 or 1.4 - but they're 200-300 quid or so. The 50mm version allows me to do things I currently can't - low light and 75mm shallow depth of field portraiture. I'll keep my eye out for anything auto at f2 as well, should be cheaper than the 1.7 or 1.4 variants.

I thought about the 35mm DA 2.4 which comes pretty well recommended on the pentaxforums as that's only (only, ha!) 130 quid new - it's sort of the modern version of the 50mm film lens with a similar field of view. I'm not sure it's 'different' enough to what I can get out of the kit lens to justify the outlay even if it is way better image quality and speedwise.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 25, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> Cheers VP. I'm currently bidding on an old manual f1.7 50mm pentax-m which seems to be both a popular and cheap lens. I'll keep an eye out for the takumar but I think that needs an m42 adaptor. (eta: I think we're talking about the same lens)


 
Pentax M is a variant of the K-mount. Chronologically, it goes:

M42 screw.
Pentax K bayonet (first released alongside the K-series of Pentax film SLRs such as the K1000, the K-M etc).
Pentax K-M bayonet (released alongside the the M series cameras such as the ME Super, the MX, MG, MV etc)
Pentax K-A bayonet (released with the A series of cameras such as the A3000).

It's the A series that will serve you best out of the manual lenses, because if the aperture is higher (i.e. the aperture number is *lower* than f5.6), focus confirmation on your K-x should work when the lens is set to the A (Automatic) position.



> What I'd really like is the FA 50mm 1.7 or 1.4 - but they're 200-300 quid or so. The 50mm version allows me to do things I currently can't - low light and 75mm shallow depth of field portraiture. I'll keep my eye out for anything auto at f2 as well, should be cheaper than the 1.7 or 1.4 variants.


 
Like I said, given the excellent low-light resolving capacities of the K-x, an f2 should be worthwhile, although an f1.7 is more boastworthy. 



> I thought about the 35mm DA 2.4 which comes pretty well recommended on the pentaxforums as that's only (only, ha!) 130 quid new - it's sort of the modern version of the 50mm film lens with a similar field of view. I'm not sure it's 'different' enough to what I can get out of the kit lens to justify the outlay even if it is way better image quality and speedwise.


 
Worth looking to see if any of the secondary manufacturers (Tokina, Tamron, Sigma etc) are making anything similar at a better price point.


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 25, 2012)

update: won the 50mm pentax-m 1.7 for £10 

Sounds like an A would have been better, but for ten quid I'm not complaining!


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 25, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's the A series that will serve you best out of the manual lenses, because if the aperture is higher (i.e. the aperture number is *lower* than f5.6), focus confirmation on your K-x should work when the lens is set to the A (Automatic) position.


 
I've not heard of focus confirmation.  Sounds useful, I need to look that up.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 25, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> I've not heard of focus confirmation. Sounds useful, I need to look that up.


 
Look in the appendix of your manual (if you've lost it, you can download it in pdf from Pentax's website). There should be a section called "functions available with various lens combinations" that tells you how much functionality you'll get from the different ranges of lenses. Under A-series lenses (and newer) it should say "manual focus (with focus indicator). The focus indicator will light up in the viewfinder when you manually put the lens into focus (don't ask me how the camera does this - personally I suspect voodoo!).


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 25, 2012)

Can't wait for it to turn up now.  Cheapest FA 50mm I can find is 210 quid.  There's no way I can justify spending 200 extra quid on autofocus.

I say that now...


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 26, 2012)

Now looking at constant aperture f2.8 zooms. Sounds like they'll do the most that I want in a single lens for a reasonable price.

Specifically looking at the sigma and tokina versions as they're better value. Not sure if I want a 17-50 (digital) or a 28-70 (film - so more like 45-105). They're both a full 2 stops faster at 50mm than the kit lens, which would make low light soo much easier (It could run 4x the shutter speed for the same exposure, right?)

I suppose it comes down to whether I want to replace the kit lens with something better in terms of IQ and speed (the 17-50) or give myself more options with focal length. I guess in terms of growing my kit the 28-70 would be a better bet, but having a better 'standard' lens would be great. At festivals I often found myself wanting more reach but I don't really want to lose the wide angle on my walkaround lens. Argh.

The samples from the 28-70 look great: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/...42-tamron-28-75mm-f-2-8-xr-di-ld-samples.html

17-50 samples: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28183637@N08/tags/tamron1750mmf28/

I guess what I really want is the Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5, it's f2.8 up to 35mm and would be a great all round lens for me. Shame it's out of my price range for now (200-250 second hand). http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/sigma-17-70mm-f2-8-4-5-dc-macro-af-lens.html


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 27, 2012)

Oooh.  Currently bidding on 3 lenses I really want.   I've allocated myself 100 quid max for the lot (including the 10 I spent above).


----------



## fractionMan (Apr 30, 2012)

Ok, so failed to buy any of them and can conclude:

Decent second hand film (non kit) pentax zoom lenses with autofocus go for about 50 quid.  Old kit (anywhere from 28/35-70/105) lenses go for 20 quid.  f2.8 ones go for at least 100-200.  Fast autofocus primes start at about 150-200 second hand.  Manual lenses nearly all go for peanuts.

The 50mm manual I got is awesome for a tenner, but wish I'd know about focus confirmation and got an A version.


----------



## fractionMan (May 4, 2012)

wayhey. Just found myself a pentax-f 35-70 f3.5-4.5 for 44 quid 

Sharper, lighter, smaller and faster than the kit lens and starting at 50mm (film equivalent) it sounds like a great little lens for the money:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-F-35-70mm-F3.5-4.5-Macro-Zoom-Lens.html


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> wayhey. Just found myself a pentax-f 35-70 f3.5-4.5 for 44 quid
> 
> Sharper, lighter, smaller and faster than the kit lens and starting at 50mm (film equivalent) it sounds like a great little lens for the money:
> http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-F-35-70mm-F3.5-4.5-Macro-Zoom-Lens.html


 
Nice one! I'm pleased for you!


----------



## fractionMan (May 16, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Look in the appendix of your manual (if you've lost it, you can download it in pdf from Pentax's website). There should be a section called "functions available with various lens combinations" that tells you how much functionality you'll get from the different ranges of lenses. Under A-series lenses (and newer) it should say "manual focus (with focus indicator). The focus indicator will light up in the viewfinder when you manually put the lens into focus (don't ask me how the camera does this - personally I suspect voodoo!).


 

This works on M series pentax lenses too btw, not just A.  When it's perfectly sharp, the little light comes on.  It's fab.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 16, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> This works on M series pentax lenses too btw, not just A. When it's perfectly sharp, the little light comes on. It's fab.


 
Cool.


----------



## fractionMan (Jun 25, 2012)

Just got myself a helios 44m for £12.95 

Can't wait to try it out. 58mm f2 with an 8 bladed aperture. Supposed to be a lovely lens.

You can get super weird bokeh out of it: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/76194-cityscape-old-graveyard-helios-44m.html


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 25, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> Just got myself a helios 44m for £12.95
> 
> Can't wait to try it out. 58mm f2 with an 8 bladed aperture. Supposed to be a lovely lens.
> 
> You can get super weird bokeh out of it: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/76194-cityscape-old-graveyard-helios-44m.html


 
M42 screw mount, or one of the rare Pentax K mounts? Lot of people avoid the screw-mounts because of the added faff of using them, but as far as I'm concerned there's so many great screw-mount lenses out there that you're shooting yourself in the foot not giving them a try.

Caresses old M42 Travenar 300mm/f4.5 (that's 450mm/f4.5 on a Pentax DSLR!) lovingly.


----------



## fractionMan (Jun 25, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> M42 screw mount, or one of the rare Pentax K mounts? Lot of people avoid the screw-mounts because of the added faff of using them, but as far as I'm concerned there's so many great screw-mount lenses out there that you're shooting yourself in the foot not giving them a try.
> 
> Caresses old M42 Travenar 300mm/f4.5 (that's 450mm/f4.5 on a Pentax DSLR!) lovingly.


 
I'm not sure what mount it is, I was assuming m42. I'm just hoping it's not the m39 version.

What I really want is a 28mm f2 lens, but they're rare and seem to go for a lot of money. I've got my eyes peeled for a kiron.

Unfortunately I got home drunk the other night and bid on not one, but _three_ 28mm f2.8 lenses


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 25, 2012)

The Helios 44M 2/58 was the standard lens that came with all the Zenit Es and EMs and TTLs that are still everywhere on eBay, so it'll probably be an M42, though some later Zenits used the K mount. VP would know the exact probabilities I'm sure. I have one - it's a nice lens, even though mine is pretty fungussy so I don't use it. (I've tried to take it apart to clean it but it's been very stubborn.) I like the slightly longer length over standard 50mm primes and it's quite fast and sharp too, even with fungus. Not seen bokeh like that though.

I've heard people say the Helios lenses are easily the best part of Zenits.


----------



## fractionMan (Jun 26, 2012)

I've seen a tamron 17-50 f2.8 for 210 quid and as I've just been paid I'm really, really tempted  

Also seen a sigma 10-20 for £235 and again I'm really, really tempted 

This stuff is like crack.


----------



## fractionMan (Jun 26, 2012)

I just bid on a load of old "special effect" filters on ebay for a few quid each  

But I did managed to score an asahi pentax SMC skylight for 2 quid, which should help reduce the flare on the 44m.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 26, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The Helios 44M 2/58 was the standard lens that came with all the Zenit Es and EMs and TTLs that are still everywhere on eBay, so it'll probably be an M42, though some later Zenits used the K mount. VP would know the exact probabilities I'm sure. I have one - it's a nice lens, even though mine is pretty fungussy so I don't use it. (I've tried to take it apart to clean it but it's been very stubborn.) I like the slightly longer length over standard 50mm primes and it's quite fast and sharp too, even with fungus. Not seen bokeh like that though.
> 
> I've heard people say the Helios lenses are easily the best part of Zenits.


 
Over 10 million (yep, *10 million!!!*) of the M42 version sold, as against about 350,000 of the K-mount version, and yeah, FSU lenses were/are a leap and a bound better than their cameras, probably because until '89 the manufacturers had access to some of the best materials and some of the best optical engineers in the world.


----------



## fractionMan (Jun 28, 2012)

Check out this bad boy: helios 44m and 3x teleconverter


All I need now is for the adaptor to arrive 

Eats light and probably soft as hell but it's  261mm equiv


----------



## mattie (Jun 28, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> Now looking at constant aperture f2.8 zooms. Sounds like they'll do the most that I want in a single lens for a reasonable price.
> 
> Specifically looking at the sigma and tokina versions as they're better value. Not sure if I want a 17-50 (digital) or a 28-70 (film - so more like 45-105). They're both a full 2 stops faster at 50mm than the kit lens, which would make low light soo much easier (It could run 4x the shutter speed for the same exposure, right?)
> 
> ...


 
I've got the Sigma 28-70 f/2.8, bear in mind it's a collosal beast so I would defintely not call it a 'walkabout' lens. I've also got the 50mm F/1.4 FA, you're welcome to give them a quick whirl to see if any suit.

I know pentax released a 50mm f/1.8 in the DA-style mount (i.e. there's no aperture ring on the lens barrel) which I think came in at less than £250 brand-new, worth seeing if any used ones about?  The F and FA 50mms are silly money, more thna £250 used in some cases.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 28, 2012)

mattie said:


> I've got the Sigma 28-70 f/2.8, bear in mind it's a collosal beast so I would defintely not call it a 'walkabout' lens. I've also got the 50mm F/1.4 FA, you're welcome to give them a quick whirl to see if any suit.


I have that Sigma 28-70 in Nikon fit and the DF model. I find it pretty good all round.


----------



## cybertect (Jun 28, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> Just found a fantastic resource for any pentax users out there: http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/



Two useful resources for manual focus Canon FD lenses, of which I seem to have acquired a comprehensive selection of primes from 17mm through to 300mm 

http://www.fdreview.com/

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/index.htm


----------



## fractionMan (Jul 2, 2012)

2nd hand hoya circular polariser, great condition, original box.  £3.50.  Get in


----------



## fractionMan (Jul 2, 2012)

weltweit said:


> I have that Sigma 28-70 in Nikon fit and the DF model. I find it pretty good all round.


 
there's a Sigma 24-60mm f2.8 EX DG on ebay at the mo. Usually loads cheaper than the 28-70 f2.8. Tempted but now skint.

edit: went for £171 including postage

edit: just seen a FA 50mm f1.4 go for £172 inc postage.


----------



## fractionMan (Jul 5, 2012)

Bah, can't get infinity focus with the helios 44m, probably the adaptor.

I've only played with it a bit but it's not a patch on the pentax M 50mm f1.7 for image quality. Not sure if it's a bad copy or just nowhere near as good.  Might have to chuck it back on ebay.


----------



## fractionMan (Jul 16, 2012)

I've found myself wanting a longer reach for a while now and hust scored myself a super small and lightweight (<300g) 80-210mm tamron AF lens for £21 

Sharp, small, light & cheap, sounds good. IQ is apparently decent but suffers from CA, but for 21 quid I can hardly complain.

http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/tamron-80-210mm-1-4-5-5-6.html


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 16, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> I've found myself wanting a longer reach for a while now and hust scored myself a super small and lightweight (<300g) 80-210mm tamron AF lens for £21
> 
> Sharp, small, light & cheap, sounds good. IQ is apparently decent but suffers from CA, but for 21 quid I can hardly complain.
> 
> http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/tamron-80-210mm-1-4-5-5-6.html


 
You can also compensate somewhat for chromatic abberation with post-processing of digi-shots, so it's not a massive problem unless you're using film.
I'm a Tamron fan. Their 135mm/f2.5 was my favourite 35mm portrait lens for years.


----------



## cybertect (Jul 16, 2012)

There's some gems in Tamron's history. I've got an Adaptall 35-70 f/3.5-4.5 Macro that I bought for peanuts which is very nice indeed and pretty compact (though it certainly isn't that light).

Only reason I don't use it so much is that my Canon FD 35-105, which is about as sharp, has a wider range and is a constant aperture f/3.5.

E2A: The Tamron Adaptall 90mm f/2.5 is supposed to be very sharp too, though it suffers a bit from flare.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 16, 2012)

My best deal on a used lens was a nikkor 50mm f1.8 AF which I spied nestled amongst loads of used gear in a camera shop. It was not in perfect condition but I tried it on my camera and it worked fine. They wanted £40.00 for it so I happily handed over the readies. I have been very pleased with it.


----------



## fractionMan (Jul 16, 2012)

man if I saw a pentax f1.8 50mm for 50 quid I'd do a merry dance!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 17, 2012)

cybertect said:


> There's some gems in Tamron's history. I've got an Adaptall 35-70 f/3.5-4.5 Macro that I bought for peanuts which is very nice indeed and pretty compact (though it certainly isn't that light).
> 
> Only reason I don't use it so much is that my Canon FD 35-105, which is about as sharp, has a wider range and is a constant aperture f/3.5.


 
I've got the 28-70mm f.3.5-4.5 Macro, which is about an ounce heavier than the 35-70. They did actually do a constant aperture version of the 35-70, model no. 17A, it was a bit shorter than the variable aperture 28-70 and 35-70.

And of course they weren't light, m'lad. Glass and steel, not polycarb! 




> E2A: The Tamron Adaptall 90mm f/2.5 is supposed to be very sharp too, though it suffers a bit from flare.


 
I had a 90mm SP, but sold it when they started going for silly money.


----------



## fractionMan (Jul 18, 2012)

Lens has arrived and it looks like it's in pretty good condition. It's barely bigger than my 18-55 kit lens and weighs about the same!


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 21, 2012)

Are there any 28mm lenses in Pentax K that are particularly worth looking out for? Or, for that matter, in other mounts?

The three mounts I use now are Pentax K (with a Ricoh XR-X - so lenses with the Ricoh pin on them for aperture control are fine if not preferable), M42 and Praktica B. I have reasonable zooms and 50mm-ish fast primes for all of them, but only one 28mm in M42 which isn't that great anyway.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 21, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Are there any 28mm lenses in Pentax K that are particularly worth looking out for? Or, for that matter, in other mounts?
> 
> The three mounts I use now are Pentax K (with a Ricoh XR-X - so lenses with the Ricoh pin on them for aperture control are fine if not preferable), M42 and Praktica B. I have reasonable zooms and 50mm-ish fast primes for all of them, but only one 28mm in M42 which isn't that great anyway.


 
Pentax's own 28mm/f2.8 KM (same series as the 50mm/f1.7) is very good, but my personal favourite, which you can use on *all* your cameras if you buy the necessary adapters (make sure to get the Ricoh-specific one rather than the Pentax K one, though) is the Tamron Adaptall 2 28mm/f2.5. It's a cracker: it's small and sharp as hell. Tamron also do a 24mm/f2.5 which is so good secondhand ones still average £50.


----------



## fractionMan (Jul 23, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Are there any 28mm lenses in Pentax K that are particularly worth looking out for? Or, for that matter, in other mounts?
> 
> The three mounts I use now are Pentax K (with a Ricoh XR-X - so lenses with the Ricoh pin on them for aperture control are fine if not preferable), M42 and Praktica B. I have reasonable zooms and 50mm-ish fast primes for all of them, but only one 28mm in M42 which isn't that great anyway.


 
I was sorely tempted by the 28mm f1.8 sigma autofocus recently (K fit). Rare, but decent _and_ autofocus.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 23, 2012)

The used lens I want next is a 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF NIKKOR - it is quite an old lens but sharp as a pin and with great bokeh, perfect for people candids. The only thing is that it is designed for FX and is the right length for FX, I only have DX so it will be a bit long for me.


----------



## fractionMan (Jul 24, 2012)

Well the tamron I ordered is OK, but the aperture pin is snapped so the camera can't change the aperture  It also means that whatever you set the aperture to manually is what you get through the viewfinder, so anything over f11 is impossible to frame cos it's too dark.

It does take decent shots in the daytime though.

I think my hit rate for working not fucked up lenses on ebay is less than 50% good ones now


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 24, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> Well the tamron I ordered is OK, but the aperture pin is snapped so the camera can't change the aperture  It also means that whatever you set the aperture to manually is what you get through the viewfinder, so anything over f11 is impossible to frame cos it's too dark.


 
Sirrah! Learne ye the Antient Arte of ye stoppinge-downe of ye lens, forsooth!

In other words, compose with the aperture wide open, then stop it down to the required aperture to take the pic.
It's always worked fine for me when using old pre-auto lenses and/or cameras.


----------



## fractionMan (Jul 24, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Sirrah! Learne ye the Antient Arte of ye stoppinge-downe of ye lens, forsooth!
> 
> In other words, compose with the aperture wide open, then stop it down to the required aperture to take the pic.
> It's always worked fine for me when using old pre-auto lenses and/or cameras.


 
why didn't I think of that   I've just been shooting at f4-f8


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 24, 2012)

fractionMan said:


> why didn't I think of that  I've just been shooting at f4-f8


 
Well, if you're not taught it, it's not immediately obvious, is it?


----------



## weltweit (Jul 24, 2012)

It isn't a lens that I most lust after, I already have 5 lenses, what I lust after is a Full Frame digital sensor. Because all my lenses were designed for full frame so I am not seeing them as they were intended.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 25, 2012)

weltweit said:


> It isn't a lens that I most lust after, I already have 5 lenses, what I lust after is a Full Frame digital sensor. Because all my lenses were designed for full frame so I am not seeing them as they were intended.


 
True, but (and of course this is only my perspective, *and* I'm a bit of an anti-gearhead type) surely taking good pictures is as much to do with making the best of what we have to hand, as it is about having the "proper" lens for a particular format, or (in your case) having the "proper" format for a particular lens?


----------



## weltweit (Jul 25, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> True, but (and of course this is only my perspective, *and* I'm a bit of an anti-gearhead type) surely taking good pictures is as much to do with making the best of what we have to hand, as it is about having the "proper" lens for a particular format, or (in your case) having the "proper" format for a particular lens?


Taking good pictures is indeed what it is all about, and I have pretty much all the equipment I could need for that.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 25, 2012)

But that does not stop me thinking my 50mm is a bit too long for a walk about lens, and my 85mm is a tad too long for portraits.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 25, 2012)

weltweit said:


> But that does not stop me thinking my 50mm is a bit too long for a walk about lens, and my 85mm is a tad too long for portraits.


 
That's the curse of the photographer - to always keep reaching for the perfect gear as well as the perfect photo, unless you're some kind of Zen Bert Hardy character.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 28, 2012)

I find that going much below 50mm (35mm equiv) makes me uncomfortable. I want a proper 28mm for completeness but I don't plan on using it routinely... I have a 14mm (=28mm) pancake for my GF2, which I've tried to use recently but feels really odd and wide.

Which is fine, of course, as there are loads of great 50mm-ish primes out there. I got a 2/58 Super Takumar in M42 which is terrific, and makes a good portrait lens in m4/3 as well.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 28, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I find that going much below 50mm (35mm equiv) makes me uncomfortable. I want a proper 28mm for completeness but I don't plan on using it routinely... I have a 14mm (=28mm) pancake for my GF2, which I've tried to use recently but feels really odd and wide.
> 
> Which is fine, of course, as there are loads of great 50mm-ish primes out there. I got a 2/58 Super Takumar in M42 which is terrific, and makes a good portrait lens in m4/3 as well.


 
45-55mm (35mm) pretty much approximates the normal human field of vision, so feeling uncomfortable with w/a lenses is natural. You're taking in a much wider visual field, approx 75 degrees as opposed to 45-50 degrees with a 50-ishmm lens, than usual.


----------



## fractionMan (Jul 29, 2012)

really enjoying this 21 quid zoom lens!


----------



## editor (Jan 26, 2020)

I think I might get one of those Helios 44-M 58mm f/2 lenses soon seeing as they're only about £30 on eBay...


----------



## weltweit (Feb 12, 2020)

I am considering buying my first new lens for years, a Nikon 50mm F1.4 G .. 

Bit disappointed to discover it isn't weather sealed though.


----------

