I think the M is more highly regarded because there are simply more M's
available. I doubt that an M will out preform a K that hasn't been
abused. That said, the 135mm focal length was exceedingly popular and
most designs were refined over the years until by the mid 70's it was
just about impossible to find a really bad lens of that focal length,
(even the much maligned Takumar Bayonet wasn't a really bad lens except
by comparison), nuch as it was impossible to find a really bad "normal".
45-58mm lens. Some were outstanding but few were truly awful. The
extra element/group was probably added to correct for aberrations when
making the light path shorter in the M 135, there was no "fast" 135mm in
the M line of lenses, Pentax seems to have taken a different tack there
and produced the M f2.8 120mm to keep it compact, and maintain the 49mm
filter size.
On 8/17/2014 9:44 AM, Zos Xavius wrote:
The filter diameter on the M is 49mm. I think that kind of seals the
deal. I can see why the M is generally more highly regarded. I did not
know that they added a group. I've actually wanted the 3.5 for some
time now. Maybe I should snag one from KEH.
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 9:31 AM, P.J. Alling <[email protected]> wrote:
The K 135 f3.5 and the M 135 f3.5 have very different designs, the former
being a 4 element 4 group the later being 5 element 5 group, the M is also
quite a bit shorter and lighter than the K roughly a 1/2 inch, (12mm to be
exact), and about a quarter pound lighter, despite the M having a built in
lens hood. You can look at the specification for the M here
<http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/tele/M135f3.5.html> and the K
here <http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/tele/K135f3.5.html> there
are links to images of the optical designs and everything.
On 8/17/2014 9:22 AM, Zos Xavius wrote:
PF users rate the K 135/3.5 as superior to the M counterpart, but I've
also heard the opposite being true. I may be wrong, but I believe both
have the same optical fomula. Pentax clearly did some tweaking to
formulas though between the two series because the K series
counterparts generally perform slightly better according to reviews.
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Stanley Halpin
<[email protected]> wrote:
15± years ago confusion about the 135mm lens lineup was the reason I went
looking for information. And found what later became the PDML. And found a
range of opinions and advice. I gathered and synopsized all of the opinions
about all of the 135mm offerings and that was the beginning of my (now
dormant) online repository of opinion on Pentax lenses.
WRT 135mm, the consensus was that the best was the A 135/1.8, next was
the K 135/2.5, but a close competitor to both of these was the M 135/3.5.
stan
On Aug 16, 2014, at 8:59 PM, Zos Xavius <[email protected]> wrote:
This explains all the mixed reports I've heard about the K 135 2.5. A
big part of me wants to fill my bag with nothing but K series glass.
My back might not like that though...
On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Bob Sullivan <[email protected]>
wrote:
Yes, the weak Takumar 135/2.5 in K mount has a multicolored dof scale
on the barrel - always easy to spot on ebay. I also believe it is not
multicoated glass. The older SMC K 135/2.5 is an excellent lens,
second only to the A135/1.8. Most people don't know about it.
Regards, Bob S.
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:31 PM, Darren Addy <[email protected]>
wrote:
Bob,
Sorry, I should have explained that part a bit better for those who
are unaware of the confusing state of Pentax's 135mm f2.5 offerings.
Here are the versions of the 135mm f2.5 made by Pentax:
Screwmount:
1) Super Takumar and S-M-C Takumar Version 1
2) S-M-C Takumar Version 2 (6 element design)
K-mount
3) SMC K 135mm f2.5 (6 element design)
4) Non-SMC & confusingly named "Takumar Bayonet" version which you can
find almost anywhere for $50/60.
So I was making the point that the one I am offering (3) is the same
optical design as (2) but not to be confused with the vastly inferior
(4).
Hope that clears things up.
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Bob Sullivan <[email protected]>
wrote:
A bit confusing offer.
There is a SMC K 135/2.5 lens in a K bayonet mount, but you say NOT
BAYONET.
So are you offering a screwmount version? Why not say so directly?
Regards, Bob S.
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 6:40 PM, Darren Addy <[email protected]>
wrote:
As you probably know, this is the K-mount version of the acclaimed
Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135mm f2.5 (version 2), the 6-element
design. This is the finest optical design Pentax made in the 135mm
focal length. On a DSLR it gives you the equivalent of a 200mm FOV
and
f2.5.
This one is gorgeous cosmetically, optically, and mechanically and
comes with the original clip on hood, front & rear caps, and
matching
"SMC Pentax" hard case. If you are picky about the used lenses you
purchase, this one is for you.
$199 plus actual shipping cost to your address. Email me off-list
for a quote.
I prefer not to use Paypal, but would be happy to issue you a Square
Invoice if you desire to pay by credit/debit card.
Respectfully,
Darren Addy
Kearney, NE
--
Photographers must learn not to be ashamed to have their photographs
look like photographs.
~ Alfred Stieglitz
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above
and follow the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above
and follow the directions.
--
Photographers must learn not to be ashamed to have their photographs
look like photographs.
~ Alfred Stieglitz
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.
--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.
--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
