Pentax Smc -DA 35 mm F2.4 AL Standard Aspherical Lens

I've had this plastic fantastic almost 2 years now, and it's been a little revelation. Here are some plus and minus points that I feel are worth noting. Positives: - Well made. Even though it is an all plastic body and mount, it's very solid. In my experience, the plastic mount is no problem, just as it's never been a problem in my 18-55mm DAL. Obviously, you wouldn't want to drop it - but even if it was all metal, this wouldn't save the glass. - It's a sharp lens, even if it doesn't have the highest resolution according to DxOMark (8 P-Mpix, depending on the body it's mounted on). The rendering is pleasant - not too clinical, although not with the character of old glass, since this is definitely a "modern" lens with better coatings etc. - AF is fast, and quiet (for a screw driven lens, of course), and there's no hunting, even in low light. - The lens handles flare like a champ, seems to be quite free of CA (my copy is, at least), even in difficult situations where most of my other lenses exhibit it to some degree. I do use a cheap rubber hood (to fit the 49mm filter diameter) to prevent stray light from hitting the front element at an angle - helping the lens to achieve optimal contrast. - The ergonomics are very good, the lens feels just right on my K-r. Perhaps it might feel light on a K-7, K-5 or K-3, but I would guess it would be fine, since lightness is hardly likely to be a downside for a lens. Since this is a fast lens, I'll talk about that in the next two points: - Light gathering ability is good enough for night shooting hand-held, and I've had some joy doing night street photography. It's perfectly adequate for indoor shooting too, provided the lights aren't too low. I would guess that the T-stop is about as close to the F-stop as could be expected. As would be expected with any 35mm lens, a shutter speed of just 1/50s is fast enough to avoid shots being spoiled by camera shake. And, since all Pentax bodies have SR, you can get about 3 stops better performance than that - meaning reasonably sharp handheld shots at 1/8s or even 1/6s are quite easy to achieve with proper technique (for still subjects, of course). - Bokeh is, for the most part, pretty pleasant. However, it's really not possible to be objective about the quality of bokeh, since it's very much a matter of personal taste! Obviously, there's a greater DoF than a 50mm f/1.8 would have, since the FOV is wider and the aperture less narrow. Also, it doesn't focus especially closely (min. focusing distance = 30cm or 1ft), so if your subject is close to a "busy" background, then the blurring of the background is likely to seem "busier" too. If you know what you're doing, then you can get quite lovely bokeh, so I'm including this as a positive. Besides, when you consider the price of a 35mm f/1.8 vs. this f/2.4, I think you can appreciate that you're getting good bang for the buck here! Negatives: - For manual focusing, the focus throw is just a bit too short, however, it is smooth at least. When you are working with apertures like f/4 and beyond, DoF isn't so fine and focus isn't so critical. At f/2.4, however, you need to be a little more patient. - There is no aperture ring. This means that if you want to use extension tubes to shoot macro, you'll need ones that support automatic aperture (KA). If you reverse mount the lens, then you might use a toothpick to open the aperture a bit to approximately f/8, as per your best guess. - The lens exhibits a fair amount of vignetting at f/2.4. It's mostly gone at f/3.5, and I can't see it anymore at f/4. It's also a little softer in the corners, but again, once you stop down a bit, that problem is gone. - There is some - While in my copy, I can honestly say that CA is NOT a problem, DxOMark state that it's 9nm, which is quite high (about 1.8px wide). I have never felt the need to correct for CA with this lens, and I don't have in-body CA correction turned on. I experience more CA with most of my other lenses. I may have an exceptional copy, or DxOMark may have been testing a defective copy with poor coatings - who knows? In fairness, these negatives aren't much of a criticism, since this is an AF lens that you're not likely to want to manually focus with, and 35mm, whether using extension tubes or reversing the lens, isn't going to give the best macro results anyway. The vignetting can actually look quite arty, and is really nice in casual portraits (even if the 52mm equiv. focal length is at least 30mm too short for classic portraits), and is gone from f/4. Perhaps the best application for this lens is street photography, where it really excels, although it's my no.1 walkaround lens. I use it for landscapes, details, casual portraits, street photography, interiors (where wide angle isn't essential) and non-macro flower shots (that's basically everything, isn't it?). I suppose the main downside is that it's just so useful, and I use it so much, that I have a tendency to just take it for granted ;) For what it's worth, I've included some sample shots.

As an enthusiastic Pentaxian (several cameras and lenses) I waited for the price of this amazing lens to drop down before I bought it. Like all my Pentax lenses it is well built and has great optical quality. Do not be put off by this models light weight or that it has a plastic rather than a metal mount. It still works the same. I bought mine in December so I have been able to test it out. I really works well in low light conditions (the reason I why I bought it). I already have an older Pentax M series 50mm f.17 lens that performs superbly on modern cameras ( fits straight no to All Pentax DSLR'S and other makes with a suitable adapter) despite being more than 30 years old but as my eyes get older focusing manually all the time (as you must with any M series lens) I don't always nail the focus point each time. With the DA50 focusing is very fast, smooth and always spot on. A real joy to use and no missed shots. Another difference between the DA and M series 50mm is in the number of aperture blades. The DA has 7 whereas the M has 6. The DA therefore is the better lens when it comes to blurring the background for instance when taking portraits or close ups. Many people prefer the also brilliant DA35 f2.4 which costs slightly more but for my money this is the lens to go for.

I use this on my Pentax K70 and find the combination work's really well. It is more of a 70mm on the aps-c format however It is versatile for me in portraiture and landscapes. It is the fastest f1.8 , auto focus lens I own and that really makes a difference for indoor portraits of my grandson. f1.8 allows for less flash use still and still produces sharp images . It does have a plastic construction which maybe others might not like. However for me this makes it a very lightweight kit when paired up with the K-70. Compared to my 40 year old M 50mm f1.7 the colours and contrast are much more vibrant however in certain situations I will use the older lens as it has a different character. The autofocus is fast and accurate and i really can't fault this lens for the money.

NOTE: tested on Pentax K-5 and K-S2 PROs + very affordable + better value and image quality than Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II (2nd generation), but the Canon EF 50mm f1.8 STD ;) might be a close competitor if Canon gets the bokeh right + very appealing bokeh + extremely fast AF speed + very light and compact - great to carry around + surprisingly good build quality for a £80 lens + front element does not rotate, so you can use polarising or ND filters without worrying + appealing lens design (personal opinion, but it does look quite slick) + makes your viewfinder look very bright (but also makes lenses slower than f2.8 look depressingly dark through the pentaprism) CONs - produces a lot of noise when focusing (sounds almost like a mini chainsaw) This is worked around by using MF manual focus which is perfectly possible, but requires some practice. - a UV (preferably hybrid polarized UV) haze filter is necessary to prevent dust from entering the inside of the lens - AF is sometimes inaccurate (might be okay for premium bodies with AF correction such as the K-7, K-5, K-3 etc., but my K-S2 does not have this) - image sharpness at f1.8 is average and only when stopped down to f2.8 and above you will have a decently sharp centre, but then you lose the nice bokeh - plastic mount will wear over time - AF ring rotates (if you touch it while AF is running, you will permenently damage the motor) - turning the AF ring when the drive mode is set to AF on the camera will result in you (or whoever is currently operating the camera and lens) breaking the lens motor VERDICT: Until Pentax releases a silent and weather sealed medium end DA 50mm f1.4 DC and/or revises the DA* 55mm f1.4, I will be keeping this sample. My Sony E 50m f1.8 OSS for my Sony NEX-3N can now retire and be sold off although it still does take images with beautifully blurred backgrounds - it is slower but it's the bokeh is a whole step more appealing than the Pentax 50mm f1.8 and the sharpness is fine straight out of the box at f1.8 - no tweaking and postprocessing needed, but it also costs almost 2.5x more. ALTERNATIVES: Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II (bokeh: poor-mediocre, usably sharp centre at f4 and above, average AF speed) Canon EF 50mm f1.4 USM (bokeh: mediocre, usably sharp centre at f3.5 and above, average AF speed) Nikon 50mm f1.8 G (bokeh: good, usably sharp centre at f2.8 and above, average-fast AF speed) Nikon 50mm f1.4 G (bokeh: good, usably sharp centre at f2 and above, average AF speed) Pentax DA 50mm f1.8 (bokeh: good, usably sharp centre at f2.4 and above, very fast but noisy AF speed) Pentax FA 50mm f1.4 (bokeh: mediocre-good, usably sharp centre at f4.5 and above, noisy and slow AF speed) Pentax DA* 55mm f1.4 (bokeh: good, usably sharp centre at f2.8 and above, slow AF speed, overpriced) Sigma 50mm f1.4 HSM (bokeh: good-very good, usably sharp centre at f2 and above, slow AF speed, very heavy) Sony E 50mm f1.8 OSS (bokeh: excellent, usuable sharp centre already at f1.8, slow AF but ok-ish on NEX 6000 body)

I bought this lens for my K5. I wanted a cheap lens that could provide the images one would expect from a prime lens. Pentax did a really nice job with this lens: making it affordable for the enthusiast yet pleasing to even the professionals. I love this lens. It is fast and easy. Yes it isn't weather sealed, yes it is made of plastic (durable plastic but still - plastic) and yes the lens cap is a little fiddly to get used to, BUT, the images that this lens produces are amazing for its price. I would definately recommend it to Pentax users who don't want to break the bank. Buy this lens and see what amazing IQ you get for your buck. Francois :)

I bought this for my wife's K20D camera when it appeared in an Amazon deal. I'd been discussing prime lenses with a relative (who heads a photographic society) and was interested to see whether all the breathless enthusiasm was justified. The short answer - it is! The K20D is getting to be fairly old-tech these days, but is still a force to be reckoned with as SLRs go, with a decent sensor density and in-camera processing that yields remarkable images, especially when it is teamed up with the right lens - which is where this comes in. I recently bought a 50mm FX prime for my smaller-sensor Nikon D80, expecting to get similar results to this Pentax lens, and realised that sometimes the lens shows up the limitations of the camera. Not in this case, though. The K20D may no longer have market-leading sensor density, but it definitely benefits from this excellent lens, and if your camera is anything near 16 megapixels or above, you will notice similar or even more spectacular results. In use, the lens is very quick to focus because the components are very light - there is no "hunting" either side of the actual correct focus as you get with larger lenses and, unlike my Nikon 50mm prime, it is quiet in operation. It's a small difference, but if you've been using long zooms or telephotos for your photography, the snappy focus of small lenses like this is a revelation. The quality of images is the point, and having fewer lens elements goes a long way to eradicating the small errors that creep in with all but the most precisely engineered lenses - you can get better quality for less simply by leaving things out, which is the attraction of prime lenses. Where this lens really stands out (as better than my Nikon equivalent) is in the depth of field effects and the quality of bokeh (the arty blurring of backgrounds) that I believe stems from the iris petals, which are subtly curved. As is uaul for prime lenses, especially 50mm, you need to pay quite a bit of attention to depth of field and focus, which are more critical for 50mm lenses where the DoF can become very narrow in close-up, and really highlight out-of-focus areas - if you're taking a shot acrosss someone's face and can see both eyes, it comes down to the point where you have to work at getting both eyes in focus by managing the aperture very carefully (and where depth-of-field preview becomes essential). In that senses, lenses like this, used carefully and thoughtfully, make better photographers of us all. It may be a bit of a bind to zoom with this lens, since that involves walking towards and away from your subject (!), but the results are definitely worth looking at.

All the pictures made with this lense came out with some blurry spots, which prompted to return the product

This was an excellent buy. I'd been disappointed by the clarity of the photos produced by the 18mm-135mm lens that came with my K-30, particularly in low light. Had been about to write the camera off as a bad decision and move on, but thought I'd try this lens first. Has made all the difference. Despite the lack of zoom it provides me with virtually all the capability I need on a day to day basis. Everything from landscape shots to snaps at a dinner table. Excellent for portraits. Not a surprise, I guess, that it's better than the 18-135 in low light, given the much larger maximum aperture. It does have a plastic body, but in practice feels well built. Focusing is super-fast. Worth being aware though that depth of field is extremely shallow on maximum aperture, as noted in other reviews. Often this produces a nice effect. Other times it's a bit annoying, with one person in a group out of focus if not exactly the same distance from the camera. All in all, the K-30 is now a keeper.