Pentax SMC M 80-200mm f4.5

yangman · Joined: 01 Nov 2008 Posts: 3 Location: Malaysia

Hi all, recently got this lens which I think is the version 1 which has some positive reviews.

Still learning to accurately use manual focus on a dSLR, hence the image may not be so sharp, but what concerns me is the marked PF. i have read that its common btw old manual lens and digital sensors, but is this bad??

Taken at 200mm, f4.5 iso 400, speed 1/1600 cloudy day.

any advice on improving ?

thanks

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

It has significant CA on a cloud day hmm. Really nice capture I think you get maximum what this lens can do. I suggest to take instead a better one.

Shiladitya · Joined: 31 May 2008 Posts: 306 Location: New Delhi, India

I have had this lens for at least 20 years now and this was my first zoom lens. My experience of extensive usage of this lens is that it is quite sharp between appx 90 and 150 mm and f 5.6 to f 11. Of course Just my personal experience and no scientific tests done. No pictures to demonstrate as i have stopped shooting with this since last five years and none of the slides are scanned.

Oldhand · Posted: Wed May 11, 2016 8:10 am Post subject:

This lens gets bagged so much but I think it does not deserve it.
To me it is a real sleeper.
Here is a shot wide open - f4.5 - Laugh 1

OH

Pancolart · Expire: 2013-11-18

@Oldhand: Awesome!

LifesShort · Joined: 01 Feb 2016 Posts: 71 Location: Forsyth, GA, USA

Shooting at f5.6 or f8 will probably get rid of the CA...or at least minimize it. I've found that what sometimes works best for me when I use lenses with bad CA is to underexpose by about a stop and then to boost the exposure in post.

PhantomLord · Joined: 08 Apr 2013 Posts: 476 Location: Szczecin, Poland

I don't remember which version of this lens I had, but it was the one with quite long MFD. As for CA, this lens had it a lot when wide open, but just one click further and it was gon. It was something like f/5 as it was between f/4.5 and f/5.6.

Sharpness was great on APS-C throughout the whole focal length on f/5 to f/8. But a bit soft wide open. My copy had a lot of fungus on a few elements and after cleaning it up CA problem was smaller and I think sharpness became even more obvious. It was a lot more contrasty then my Vivitar Series I 70-210/3.5 (Kiron) and sharpness was on par on f/5.6-f/8.
I sold it because I thought I need f/3.5 of Vivitar, but regret that ever since. Recently I'm looking for the deal on this lens (as well as for Pentax-M 70-150), but with no luck. About three years ago I bought my copy for £10.

TrueLoveOne · Expire: 2013-12-24

A while ago i found a Takumar bayonet zoom 4.5/80-200, the cheaper brother of the SMC lens, for 8 euros or so in a thrift shop, and i was quite impressed because i read everywhere that it is an awfull lens.
Maybe i was lucky with a good copy or maybe it just looked way better than i expected, but here's a wide open sample from that one. I gave it away with a Pentax camera i sold.

Nola by René Maly, on Flickr

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

In my experience, purely my opinion, pretty much all of these 1970s-80's 80-200 zooms are perfectly fine at f/5.6 for any normal purpose. In nearly all cases whatever flaws they have are irrelevant and secondary to the usual photographic errors. They wont make a bad picture out of a good one.

Great picture TrueLoveOne!

PhantomLord · Joined: 08 Apr 2013 Posts: 476 Location: Szczecin, Poland

Here are a few samples I took to attach to the auction when selling the lens (after the clean).
If I remember correctly all were shot at f/5.6-f/8, probably except the cat, which might have been at f/5

#1

#crop of 1

#2

#3

#4

Oldhand · Posted: Thu May 12, 2016 12:22 am Post subject:

Thanks for the kind words everyone.
Mine is the first version with the longer mfd.
Ebay BIN $14.99 - and no one wanted it.
Here are some more quick images from this morning in the garden.
OH

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

#3 is great!

We have those here in San Francisco as a garden flower.

Roka · Expire: 2017-04-07

Oldhand · Posted: Thu May 12, 2016 8:57 am Post subject:

noddywithoutbigears · Posted: Thu May 12, 2016 12:44 pm Post subject:

I had this lens for a while but never really warmed to it. Now it's smaller brother the 75-150mm f4 I adored.

Oldhand · Posted: Fri May 13, 2016 11:04 am Post subject:

noddywithoutbigears · Posted: Sat May 14, 2016 2:20 pm Post subject:

I totally agree OH, It certainly is not a poor lens, it was the only manual zoom I had for a while and it held its own against the AF zooms I had. I tended to stick with manual primes but I bought it on a whim as I love old Pentax glass. I bought the 75-150mm out of curiosity based on the 80-200mm performance and it became an instant favourite, I just gelled with it and never really used the 80-200mm again. The 80-200mm doesn't deserve to be slatted l just preferred its smaller brother.

lensbeginner · Joined: 16 May 2016 Posts: 6

Hi all,
@OP which version do you have?
I have a version 1 (silver ring), and the PF is very marked, especially on the border of white objects in strong sunlight.
I'd say that your BiF is well inside what I'd expect from it, esp. wide open.
Another "issue" my copy exhibits is a focus shift around f/8, especially when focusing at close/medium range.

Apart from that, it's a swell lens, with a peculiar vintage-y rendering

airfrance by Lens Beginner, su Flickr

Oldhand · Posted: Tue May 17, 2016 3:18 am Post subject:

lensbeginner · Joined: 16 May 2016 Posts: 6

Oldhand · Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 2:43 am Post subject:

Another shot from this very capable lens
Tom

#1

Focusthrow · Joined: 12 Sep 2017 Posts: 209

@ the OP--it is relatively easy to Post Process PF/bloom--not a big deal. I'll bet just a slight tweak in focus would make the image enough sharper to be satisfying. Manual focusing, like some many things in life, takes time to acquire the knack/skills necessary to make the kinds of images of which you are proud. Go out and shoot! jt

Focusthrow · Joined: 12 Sep 2017 Posts: 209

Oldhand · Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:05 pm Post subject:

Thank you JT.
This lens "paints" its images in a very pleasing way.
So good, and soo cheap.
Happy snaps
Tom

jmkmva · Joined: 25 Nov 2010 Posts: 78 Location: MidAtlantic US

Great results from all with a rather ordinary lens. Luis’s comment above is appropriate and so is Attilla’s.

I had this Pentax SMC lens. Rarely used it though. It was outperformed by a Tokina 80-200mm F4.5. There are many other inexpensive options out there.