SMC Pentax K 28mm f/3.5 on NEX 3, Quick Review
How does this cult classic wide-standard lens perform on modern APS-C Cameras?
This lens has a reputation from various forums as being an excellent performer. Here is a quick review of the lens.
The build quality of this lens is excellent as with all the original K mount lenses, it is also relatively large and heavy because of this. The later M lenses made an effort to miniaturize the existing primes, but they lost the substantial feel of the older Takumars when they did that.
The lens has 8 elements in 7 groups, with a 5 slightly curved bladed diaphragm. The minimum focus distance is good at 0.3 m (1 ft), which is fairly typical for this class of lens, and it is hefty at 261 g (9.2 oz). It uses standard older K filters of 52 mm.
Optical Performance
Please click on the tab you want to view. Only 1 tab may be active at a time. MTF, Distortion, and Lat CA data acquired using
Imatest
Comments on the Results
Center sharpnessI use this to refer to the MTF50I use this to refer to the MTF50 graph. This is how contrasty the lens is, and correlates with perceived sharpness. A lens with high MTF50 will have a short transition period between a white and black edge. graph. This is how contrasty the lens is, and correlates with perceived sharpness. A lens with high MTF50I use this to refer to the MTF50 graph. This is how contrasty the lens is, and correlates with perceived sharpness. A lens with high MTF50 will have a short transition period between a white and black edge. will have a short transition period between a white and black edge. is very good wide open, but does drop off towards the corners. The resolutionI use the term resolution to refer to the MTF20I use the term resolution to refer to the MTF20 graph. This is how well the lens can resolve fine detail, but the contrast is low at this point. graph. This is how well the lens can resolve fine detail, but the contrast is low at this point. is relatively good across the frame at all apertures.
Distortion is fairly good for the focal length at -0.87% barrel (numeric average for all apertures).
Lateral CADifferent wavelengths (colors) of light have different magnifications and produce colored halos around high contrast objects near the frame edges. is very good, better than average for the class of lens.
Pros and Cons
- Center performance at all apertures
- Entire frame from f/5.6
- Build Quality
- Large and Heavy
- Small Max Aperture
Bottom Line
This lens is a nice solid performer. Relatively low CA and distortion, optically it is well corrected. The corners could be better on digital, but aren’t bad either. I don’t see this lens as special by todays standards, but you can’t really go wrong with it either.
Gallery
The gallery images are © 2012 Eric Tastad, and may only be used for personal evaluation of the lenses. Click the play button and click “visit gallery” in the upper right to download full size images.
Related Posts
The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is an interesting character. It is the only...
On film the 50mm was the standard lens. Nearly every camera came...
Another old standard focal length macro (short telephoto on APS-C); pretty much...
Thanks for the review. I have this lens and a later compact version (Pentax SMC M 28 f3.5) mounted on a NEX-5N. I do not know much about MFT tests, but both lenses are much better than the 18-55 kit lens in sharpness and detail. They surprised me in terms of quality and sharpness!
The M version is much mire compact and it renders excellent color reproduction and contrast. I think both Pentax lenses are above average even at edges especially at F8. Therefore I do not fully agree with your review and I will recommend this land both for street photography and even portraits.
It will certainly be better than the kit lens for Sony, at least my copy of the kit lens that I tested (never posted results with it as I suspect faulty lens), but the Sigma 30 mm f/2.8 or Samsung 30 mm f/2 are significantly sharper in the corners though. For landscapes these Pentax lenses are certainly better than Sony’s own 30 mm f/3.5 macro, being much sharper in the corners.
I made the box green for the Pentax as I definitely recommend the lens if you can get it for a good price, I don’t have any major reservations for it, but obviously this older K version is quite large with an adapter and adds a lot of weight. The M version is obviously much lighter.
I don’t know that they are any better than other similar lenses from other manufacturers though, and some of those aren’t priced with the Pentax used lens premium (i.e. old Pentax lenses are in pretty high demand because of K mount DSLR users).