Pentax Prime Coverage on K-1

[Tyler Monson]

Camera (Pentax K-1) on tripod. Focus set to manual/infinity and aperture at f/8. Where possible, lens hoods removed or retracted.

Lenses tested:

• SMC Pentax-DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited
• SMC Pentax-DA 21mm F3.2 Limited
• SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F2.8 Limited Macro
• SMC Pentax-FA 35mm F2 AL
• SMC Pentax-DA 40mmF2.8 Limited
• SMC Pentax-DA 70mm F2.4 Limited

[The Limited lenses are the older—green ring—models, not the current—red ring—ones.]

Exposures made with frame size set to:

• Full-frame
• Square (1:1)
• APS-C

Personal Conclusions:

With the exception of the 35mm f/2, all of these lenses were designed and sold for the APS-C format and performed well for me (on my K10, K20, K-5, and K-3). That the 40 and 70 do well on full-frame is a lovely bonus, as is the option on the K-1 of the square format, which allows me to use the wider lenses. I am a 'happy camper'.

Cheers,

The Profligatographer
Here Now, Gone Before Long

 

[Rob J Mitchell]

The 55 does well too. My 14mm is hilarious though!

 

[Gary Martin]

Thanks for this - I have yet to try square format but it looks intriguing. I didn't test thoroughly at all apertures, but my initial impression is that the 40 and 70 are producing muddy corners on FF; what is your experience?

 

[Frekeman]

Thanks for this - I have yet to try square format but it looks intriguing. I didn't test thoroughly at all apertures, but my initial impression is that the 40 and 70 are producing muddy corners on FF; what is your experience?

 

[Gary Martin]

Thanks for this - I have yet to try square format but it looks intriguing. I didn't test thoroughly at all apertures, but my initial impression is that the 40 and 70 are producing muddy corners on FF; what is your experience?

 

[Tyler Monson]

Gary et al,

Took me a moment—never having encountered that expression before

Not sure I've ever seen a lens that did not display fall-off and distortion near the edges of the image circle. In my analog film days, I used to mount smaller lenses on an 8x10 camera to measure the usable image circle. Anyway…

I don't use the 40mm Pentax much, but I do use the 70mm a lot for sky/sea landscapes. For example: This was done with the 70 on the K-1 full-frame.

FWIW, I was pleased to find that the DA21mm lens performed well in square format on the K-1. See Here .

I don't mind a little distortion at the very edges of my images. I'll even increase the vignetting effect a bit in Photoshop to help concentrate the viewer's attention. (I also tend to center my primary subject in the frame. )

All said, I do wish Ricoh/Pentax would offer some new compact prime lenses for the full-frame format. Make them small and slow—almost all my work is done at f/8 in aperture priority, so f/3.5 or f/4 is plenty fast enough.

Cheers.

 

[Frekeman]

Gary et al,

Took me a moment—never having encountered that expression before

Not sure I've ever seen a lens that did not display fall-off and distortion near the edges of the image circle. In my analog film days, I used to mount smaller lenses on an 8x10 camera to measure the usable image circle. Anyway…

I don't use the 40mm Pentax much, but I do use the 70mm a lot for sky/sea landscapes. For example: This was done with the 70 on the K-1 full-frame.

FWIW, I was pleased to find that the DA21mm lens performed well in square format on the K-1. See Here .

I don't mind a little distortion at the very edges of my images. I'll even increase the vignetting effect a bit in Photoshop to help concentrate the viewer's attention. (I also tend to center my primary subject in the frame. )

All said, I do wish Ricoh/Pentax would offer some new compact prime lenses for the full-frame format. Make them small and slow—almost all my work is done at f/8 in aperture priority, so f/3.5 or f/4 is plenty fast enough.

Cheers.

Sure, but the corners of the 40mm on K-1 don't sharpen up sufficiently when you stop down. The "muddiness" is very marked and starts quite appruptly. I didn't have any problems with vignetting though that I can remember. If the 40mm would have worked better I would probably have used it a lot on my K-1. Fortunately, I have the FA43 mm which also is very compact and definitely works great on fullframe.

Best,

Fred

 

[Tyler Monson]

Ah, the FA43 would be certainly be tempting. Even more so, for me, is the FA31, but at $900, it is beyond my reasonable budget (also too large). I went for the 35mm f/2 ($268 from KEH) and am pleased. Still shooting at f/8 .

T

 

[Gary Martin]

FA35 for me too (also from KEH), and I find it to be excellent optically, but lacking in the build quality and "special-ness" that the DA Limiteds spoiled me on. I'm sure the FA Limiteds have those qualities, I'm just reluctant to pay the price.

 

[SBS]

Great thread! Thank you.

 

[drummercam]

Gary et al,

Took me a moment—never having encountered that expression before

Not sure I've ever seen a lens that did not display fall-off and distortion near the edges of the image circle. In my analog film days, I used to mount smaller lenses on an 8x10 camera to measure the usable image circle. Anyway…

I don't use the 40mm Pentax much, but I do use the 70mm a lot for sky/sea landscapes. For example: This was done with the 70 on the K-1 full-frame.

FWIW, I was pleased to find that the DA21mm lens performed well in square format on the K-1. See Here .

I don't mind a little distortion at the very edges of my images. I'll even increase the vignetting effect a bit in Photoshop to help concentrate the viewer's attention. (I also tend to center my primary subject in the frame. )

All said, I do wish Ricoh/Pentax would offer some new compact prime lenses for the full-frame format. Make them small and slow—almost all my work is done at f/8 in aperture priority, so f/3.5 or f/4 is plenty fast enough.

Cheers.

Sure, but the corners of the 40mm on K-1 don't sharpen up sufficiently when you stop down. The "muddiness" is very marked and starts quite appruptly. I didn't have any problems with vignetting though that I can remember. If the 40mm would have worked better I would probably have used it a lot on my K-1. Fortunately, I have the FA43 mm which also is very compact and definitely works great on fullframe

Doesn't "peripheral illumination correction" brighten the corners up in camera?

 

[Frekeman]

Gary et al,

Took me a moment—never having encountered that expression before

Not sure I've ever seen a lens that did not display fall-off and distortion near the edges of the image circle. In my analog film days, I used to mount smaller lenses on an 8x10 camera to measure the usable image circle. Anyway…

I don't use the 40mm Pentax much, but I do use the 70mm a lot for sky/sea landscapes. For example: This was done with the 70 on the K-1 full-frame.

FWIW, I was pleased to find that the DA21mm lens performed well in square format on the K-1. See Here .

I don't mind a little distortion at the very edges of my images. I'll even increase the vignetting effect a bit in Photoshop to help concentrate the viewer's attention. (I also tend to center my primary subject in the frame. )

All said, I do wish Ricoh/Pentax would offer some new compact prime lenses for the full-frame format. Make them small and slow—almost all my work is done at f/8 in aperture priority, so f/3.5 or f/4 is plenty fast enough.

Cheers.

Sure, but the corners of the 40mm on K-1 don't sharpen up sufficiently when you stop down. The "muddiness" is very marked and starts quite appruptly. I didn't have any problems with vignetting though that I can remember. If the 40mm would have worked better I would probably have used it a lot on my K-1. Fortunately, I have the FA43 mm which also is very compact and definitely works great on fullframe

Doesn't "peripheral illumination correction" brighten the corners up in camera?

That could possibly work (never tried and would probably use LR for that) but as I said, vignetting/fall-off was not the issue. The distinctly muddy corners were. "Close, but no cigar" is how I would describe the 40mm Ltd on K-1. I would have loved for it to have worked. If you shoot square it would of course be fine.

 

[Tyler Monson]

FA35 …lacking in the build quality and "special-ness" that the DA Limiteds spoiled me on. I'm sure the FA Limiteds have those qualities, I'm just reluctant to pay the price.

Gary,

I don't think that those qualities really survived the transition from analog to digital. I can use my old Hasselblad lenses on the Pentax, with a Novoflex adapter, and others with homemade fittings:

80mm Zeiss Planar f/2.8

100mm Goerz Apochromat (Red Dot) Artar f/9

125mm Leitz Hektor f/2.5

But, truth be told, with the old lenses, I miss all the automatic features

Cheers

 

[MiguelATF]

Camera (Pentax K-1) on tripod. Focus set to manual/infinity and aperture at f/8. Where possible, lens hoods removed or retracted.

Lenses tested:

• SMC Pentax-DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited
• SMC Pentax-DA 21mm F3.2 Limited
• SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F2.8 Limited Macro
• SMC Pentax-FA 35mm F2 AL
• SMC Pentax-DA 40mmF2.8 Limited
• SMC Pentax-DA 70mm F2.4 Limited

[The Limited lenses are the older—green ring—models, not the current—red ring—ones.]

Exposures made with frame size set to:

• Full-frame
• Square (1:1)
• APS-C

Personal Conclusions:

With the exception of the 35mm f/2, all of these lenses were designed and sold for the APS-C format and performed well for me (on my K10, K20, K-5, and K-3). That the 40 and 70 do well on full-frame is a lovely bonus, as is the option on the K-1 of the square format, which allows me to use the wider lenses. I am a 'happy camper'.

Cheers,

The Profligatographer
Here Now, Gone Before Long

Hello, Tyler, my question for you is really not directly related to the subject at hand, so I hope you will forgive my temerity in asking it anyway but ... reading your original posting, made me think both of the photographs I used to take with my late (and still lamented) K200D - and some of the first photos of yours I saw, taken in Iceland, I believe, with your K10 --- both of which were among the last Pentax DSLR's to feature a CCD sensor before they went to CMOS. I know many Pentaxians and other photographers have opined, sometimes endlessly, about the virtues of the older CCD sensors, including their particular rendition of colors (although with the advent of more complex and powerful digital darkroom developing tools and apps, colors seem to have become more malleable and changeable with the passing of time). So --- my question for you is ---

Have you ever noticed significant differences (or insignificant ones) between how your older CCD-equipped K10D rendered photos - and your newer Pentax (CMOS-equipped) DSLR's? I'm simply curious what your feelings are about this. My curiosity is partly related to looking at some of my older K200D images, and wondering if I should acquire another one...for the 'look' they sometimes tended to give.

Muchas gracias for your thoughts - and my apologies for a non-related posting in this thread.

--
"I photograph to find out what something will look like photographed."
~Garry Winogrand~
Ipernity: http://www.ipernity.com/home/1647950
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/migueltejadaflores/
Blog: http://migueltejadaflores.wordpress.com