Which Pentax (K) 135mm for Film Bodies

[kb244]

The reason for the rather specific question is because I'm in the market for a Pentax 135mm, there's a couple out there such as the SMC Pentax-M 135/3.5, as well as the Pentax-M 135/2.8 and Pentax-A 135/2.8.

However I've seen a couple posts mention the Pentax-A suffers quality issues on film yet seems rather nice for DSLRs. But that's the only one of the 135s I see mentioned with that difference between film and digital so when I'm searching thru sample archives, most of them are off of DSLRs and doesn't really give me a point of reference of clarity with a film body (guessing based on how the light falls).

I've seen the Pentax-M 135/3.5 go for around $30 to $50, and the Pentax-M 135/2.8 around $90 and up. But not sure if the price bump is just because it's ~2/3rd of a stop faster, or if it has better contrast/clarity.

I'm trying to aim at $100 or less for a telephoto (120mm+) prime to use on my MX as I already have a Pentax-M 28/3.5, Pentax-M 50/1.4, Rokinon 85/1.4, and a Tamron SP Adaptall-II 90mm f/2.8 1:1 Lifesize Macro.

 

[Johnkpap]

All of the Pentax M and A series lenses are first class, they all perform well, I think the sleeper lens is actually the Takumar 135mm F2.5
I got mine for next to nothing and the results are outstanding, it even has a built in hood.

If you are only shooting film and not digital you would be happy with any of the M or K series lenses, I like the build quality of the
M and K series lenses best.

Johnkpap

 

[kb244]

All of the Pentax M and A series lenses are first class, they all perform well, I think the sleeper lens is actually the Takumar 135mm F2.5
I got mine for next to nothing and the results are outstanding, it even has a built in hood.

If you are only shooting film and not digital you would be happy with any of the M or K series lenses, I like the build quality of the
M and K series lenses best.

Johnkpap

Though isn't the takumar series M42 screw mount?

Also would one be better than the other in regards to orthochromatic or infrared film?

In regards to digital, I use a Jupiter 11 135/4 that's sharp as a tack wide open with good contrast, it just doesn't want to correctly focus on my Canon 7 body (which is not surprising since the industar 10 that came with it is spot on with the Fed2A but not the Canon either, one of those FSU registration nuances hence why I only use the Jupiter 11 digitally)

 

[removed account4]

i have the 135 3.5 ( i think? ) and it is a fantastic lens.
i've never used the others you mention but the 135 is great.
$30?! i hate to say how much i paid for mine 20+ years ago from KEH.
it was "BGN" ( read almost like new ) but still cost a heck of a lot more than $30.

 

[Paul Howell]

However I've seen a couple posts mention the Pentax-A suffers quality issues on film yet seems rather nice for DSLRs. But that's the only one of the 135s I see mentioned with that difference between film and digital so when I'm searching thru sample archives, most of them are off of DSLRs and doesn't really give me a point of reference of clarity with a film body (guessing based on how the light falls)

I have both the 135 3.5 M and the 135 2.8 KA, and in the past had the K version. I am not sure why anyone would post that the KA version has any issues with film, it was designed for film it is a high quality lens sharp up and down the pike. Like most lens for 35mm best at F8 to 11. If you have an A body camera including auto focus then I would get the A lens, if you shoot on a straight K body then the K lens. At the $30 price range I would think about a 3rd party lens, Vivitar, Sigma, Tamron, the Pentax forum has a data base with listing for 3rd party lens.

 

[Vonder]

All of the Pentax M and A series lenses are first class, they all perform well, I think the sleeper lens is actually the Takumar 135mm F2.5
I got mine for next to nothing and the results are outstanding, it even has a built in hood.

Johnkpap

This. Totally agree. I really should use mine more. Oh, and not all Takumars are M42. This one is K mount.

 

[Tim Stapp]

If you are from Grand Rapids, MI as opposed to Grand Rapids, MN; you might try Marks Photo and Video on South Division and see what they have in used K mount lenses.

 

[Fixcinater]

The Takumar 135mm K-mount either 2.5 or 2.8 has a cheaper coating than the normal Pentax line, same with the 28mm. It was their budget line like Nikon's Series E.

I had the 135/2.5 K-mount Takumar and it made fine images but were lower contrast than the S-M-C Tak 135/3.5 that I had after it. I've also had the 150/4 and that's an excellent lens as well. The 200/4 is not up to the same standard in my experience.

Some of the off-brand 135mm offerings are very good and can be found for dirt cheap but might take a few to find one that works so sticking with Pentax is a time saving idea.

 

[Jeff Bradford]

The Pentax A lenses allow the camera to control aperture. This is good for Program mode cameras like Super Program or Program Plus, as well as for digital cameras. If you're using a K-body with manual or Auto shutter speeds, the "A" functionality of the lens has no advantage. The optical formulas are the same. The only differences are the aperture control and the build materials. A lenses have more plastic.
The Super Takumar is a K-mount lens. All of them are fine glass. I traded the Super Takumar 135/2.5 for an A135/2.8 because the Takumar suffered from severe purple and green fringing in high contrast areas when used wide-open on a digital camera in daylight.

 

[G1DRP]

I have the M 135 f3.5 which is excellent and nice and compact. I also have the 1989s built 135 f2.5 "Takumar" which was a value priced ( relatively cheap) lens when it was new. I must say that it performs really well but I carry my f3.5 because it's physically quite a bit smaller and really well built, especially when compared with my Canon FDn 135 f3.5.

 

[Pioneer]

Like John I like the 135/3.5. It is an excellent lens, very well built, and is quite compact. It is smaller than most manufacturer's 85mm lenses. It also has a built in hood that slides out so you don't need to source a separate lens hood. It uses 49mm filters which are very common for Pentax lenses.

Mine gives very good photographs with a sweet spot from f5.6 to f8, though I find it very usable wide open though you may run into some chromatic aberrations. These are pretty much gone at f4 and above. Depending on the background the bokeh can be quite creamy or a bit busy. I can't tell you if it has real diffraction problems when you close it all the way down since I rarely do this with this lens. I love the sharpness and detail at f5.6 so I stay in that area most of the time.