Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

SMC Pentax-M 135/3.5
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 3:57 am    Post subject: SMC Pentax-M 135/3.5 Reply with quote


Moscow

open aperture


PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 6:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is a lovely little lens - very small and light.
I like mine for landscapes.
Yours is plenty sharp enough. Thanks for sharing these
Tom


PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seems sharp but bokeh on the first one is very distracting.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I haven't used mine a lot yet. At 3.5 it is not a bokeh monster, but in this case the wire fence probably has a lot to do with it. This was taken with the K-5


Bench Bokeh by The lens profile, on Flickr


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 2:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very nice samples! Does anybody know how this version of this 135/3.5 lens compares to other versions?


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

invisible wrote:
Very nice samples! Does anybody know how this version of this 135/3.5 lens compares to other versions?


There are comparisons over on the Pentax Lenses website:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/

This lens' great asset is its size and weight.
Not a bokeh monster as other 135's are but a very capable lens nonetheless.
Also relatively cheap
Tom


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:
invisible wrote:
Very nice samples! Does anybody know how this version of this 135/3.5 lens compares to other versions?


There are comparisons over on the Pentax Lenses website:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/

This lens' great asset is its size and weight.
Not a bokeh monster as other 135's are but a very capable lens nonetheless.
Also relatively cheap
Tom

Thank you for this. I thought there was an A version, but it looks like the f/3.5 was discontinued after the M version. There is a K version which (going by the reviews on that page) is rated similarly to the M version. However, they have a different number of aperture blades and also a different number of groups/elements. The non-M appears to be slightly sharper, but also heavier.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

invisible wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
invisible wrote:
Very nice samples! Does anybody know how this version of this 135/3.5 lens compares to other versions?


There are comparisons over on the Pentax Lenses website:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/

This lens' great asset is its size and weight.
Not a bokeh monster as other 135's are but a very capable lens nonetheless.
Also relatively cheap
Tom

Thank you for this. I thought there was an A version, but it looks like the f/3.5 was discontinued after the M version. There is a K version which (going by the reviews on that page) is rated similarly to the M version. However, they have a different number of aperture blades and also a different number of groups/elements. The non-M appears to be slightly sharper, but also heavier.


Yes, the K version is about one-third heavier again as well as one third longer.
The convenience of the M version is its big advantage. I use it for landscapes because it is so easy to carry about.

#1


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 6:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

These aren't bad lenses by any means, but there are so many decent 135s out there, I have never understood why these are considered so highly.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 10:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

martinsmith99 wrote:
These aren't bad lenses by any means, but there are so many decent 135s out there, I have never understood why these are considered so highly.


Because they are pretty compact, there are a lot of them, so they are great value. Also being from the late seventies/early eighties coatings are relatively modern. The Pentax-m lenses were designed to be very compact.

A lot of the earlier K-mount lenses were the same as takumars with a different mount. I guess compactness became an issue when cameras got to be more mass market articles. From the k series to the M-series only the 50mm 1.4 and the 50 and 100 F4 macro lens designs survived. (There were some new lens designs in the K series though but they are unique to the series, generally very good lenses and pretty sought after.)


PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Olympus OM series cameras and lenses were a huge impetus toward smaller 35mm SLR's. My first camera, an OM-1, was dramatically smaller than my Mom's FTb. Both had the 50mm 1.8 kit lenses. Oly lens was every bit as good.