It's a real neat inexpensive lens and works really well on my K-70. I bought recently from second hand at a local camera shop excellent condition. Buying from eBay is always tricky as the quality can't be guaranteed for marks, fungus and dust.
I've had this lens for several years. What I love about it is its compactness and low weight. It balances nicely on my Fuji X cameras and has decent image quality. And I've never been that fussed about the f3.5 aperture since it's a moderate telephoto (about 200mm equiv. on APS-C), which I never associate with high speed anyway. I'll definitely take a slower aperture if it means more compact and lighter. Gear gets heavy on a long hike! Thanks for the great review Marco!
Kudos on an excellent review. I own this lens and agree with your assessment. Perhaps Olympus made a smaller 135 for their OM system, but I'll bet the Pentax can be found for a fraction of the price of the Zuiko.
Thanks Brian! Yeah, Olympus lenses seem to be a little expensive. I've been wanting to try them for a while but haven't found a cheap one. A friend got a 50mm last year and sooner or later I'm gonna borrow it 😉
Another excellent review. I love your fresh down to earth approach to reviewing and presenting vintage lenses. I must say that when I choose to take my vintage lenses out I tend to prefer smaller, easy to use, tactile lenses. My stash is largely comprised of Olympus OM and SMC Takumar lenses which are wonderfully sharp, small, fun to use and render very nicely. My Olympus 135mm f2.8 and 3.5 versions are really good, but the 3.5 is smallest and lightest with no obvious quality trade off......so it comes with me (for digital) more often. Great work. I look forward to more! (if you can find one, the SMC Takumar 24mm f3.5 or the Olympus 24mm f2.8 are great wide angle lenses you might want to review).
It's really good, yes! I've come to trust the quality of Pentax M lenses, plus I have a soft spot for their warm colors. I can expect your review of the 35 some time in the future, then? 😉
Nice video! I don't have any 135's in my collection so I bought this Pentax M today on Ebay. Also bought Vivitar 135mm f2.8 so I can compare them on my Pentax K-3
@@MarcoAries I really love them! The Vivitar was in new condition including the box, very sharp. I really like the Pentax-M, very sharp wide open & outstanding stepped down.
Never used a speed booster, I don't want to alter the image quality of the lenses by introducing more glass. Many use them, especially on M4/3 cameras and are happy with the results, I just prefer to get the direct result of lens and camera. I would like to get a full frame camera, tho, to properly test the lenses and sharpness fall off at the edges...
@@MarcoAries tnx for the reply. I agree. By ending additional glass you can mess up original old lens. But.. Some how on apc I feel like I don't have all of the original full frame characteristics of vintage lens. Same vintage glass looks completely different on full frame
True, I feel the same, but at the same time aps-c uses the sharper part of the lens, so... it's a little bit of a compromise. We'll both have to save up for a full frame! 😅
@@MarcoAries Thank you! Glad you found that interesting, I'm a passionate bass player actually, nothing pro though.. Synth world is very lovely indeed!
f3.5 could be a no-no, but due to it's physical qualities, I find this to be a nice combo for mi t3i; a light weight prime team: 24mm stm, 50mm 1.8 and this 135mm f3.5 Nice image quality, about near f numbers and 3 quite different focal ranges.
J'aime beaucoup cet objectif, je plus compact que je possède, on l'oublie dans le sac! son traitement MC, son piqué,, je le trouve très mignon et pratique! (pourtant j'ai du CZJ, du Schneider, du 37A) j'ai fait de jolies photos de chevaux avec,, j'aimerais bien faire de la photo de concert, de musiciens avec.
Ah, ok, so you were trying to use an m42 adapter on a PK lens. M42 is a screw mount, while PK is a bayonet. Look up images of them and compare with your lens. It should be a PK, I don't think they came in m42. It gets confusing, I know 😅
Hi Marco. Great images.......... and yes the little Pentax 135 f3.5 is wonderful. I would suggest you also try the Asahi Pentax SMC 135 f3.5 the one from the 60s. it is compact, built better or as good as any other top lens and the images are incredible.
@@RobinParmar Hi Robin,..... Thanks for your reply and input. The original 135mm 3.5 M42 mount is not from 1975. It is early 60s. Take my word for it......What I don't know about Pentax history you could write on the back of a postage stamp. I have 135mm lenses from Asahi / Pentax dating back to 1957. I have a collection going right the way back to when Pentax decided to make 35mm cameras and lenses from the original Asahiflex 1 from 1952. Prior to this Pentax were optical engineers for both the military and clinical services. Asahi fully knew the ropes before they decided to make cameras and lenses for the masses. This is why their cameras and lenses really are something special.
@@racl1954 I was referring to the so-called K lens series under discussion. Didn't know we had switched to discussing the M42 Taks! No disrespect meant to your knowledge. Are you recommending the original preset Tak? I have seen some lovely photos taken with it. Might be very hard to find one in decent repair.
@@RobinParmar Hi Robin. Both Super Takumar and the early SMC Takumar are pretty awesome. I am talking about the early lenses that have the alloy grip and no rubber grip on the focusing ring. These will be M42 mount. That said the little K mount M version 135mm is also a cracker and it is so compact. PS. you should still be able to pick up the early metal barrel versions for very reasonable prices. I have just found 2 early version M42 SMC Takumar 135mm 3.5 for less that £30.00 in first class condition. Really nice to use on mirrorless and the images are wonderful. Very sharp with great colour and contrast. do you live in the UK ?.
Damn! I need to find this lens. (using Sony A7 III + adapter). Fortunately, on the local Internet market I have quite a lot of offers for a wide variety of used lenses at fairly low prices. I especially liked the compactness and this retractable lens hood - very convenient. And yes, the video itself quite beautiful and cinematic (these atmospheric narrow streets of Italy!) I have always been impressed by Pentax, but have never had a single lens. I heard that this brand is also chosen by photographers from the high professional segment who work in the wild nature - National Geographic, for example. They prefer Pentax cameras, though. But mostly I came across lenses with their signature green ring (like Canon with their red ring). It's probably autofocus ones. The only thing that worries me is the size of the lens - it's too compact. No, of course this is an advantage, but usually nothing is free - perhaps the quality has suffered in favor of maintaining compactness. Otherwise all manufacturers would make such lenses compact. Wondering now how it performs in comparison with your other 2 favourites :)
Yes, as you say Pentax had and still has a great reputation, although it is now a quite niche brand. Green ring lenses are the more modern ones, yes, and I've been curious about trying them and the cameras, even if I'm a mirroless guy myself. In regard of the lens in the video, they managed to keep it small by only having a max aperture of 3.5 instead of 2.8/2.5. I am working on some direct comparisons as I've acquired some more lenses I'm curious to test it against, but it will take some time!
You know, I searched on your channel and something quite surprised me. For a person who loves vintage zoom lenses, it's rather strange not to have a single review of Minolta lenses. Particularly if you like telephoto lenses. But what about the famous "beer can" 70-210 f4? Or 28-135 f4, or 35-70 f4 . These are legendary lenses. How could you bypass them? Or, for example, the G series (although the G series is still quite expensive even used).
That's easy to answer: I wasn't able to find them yet. The only Minolta lens I've stumbled upon was the 50mm 1.7, but I wasn't able to snatch it. I don't buy off the internet and I'm actually losing money by making these videos, so you can see how I can't afford to risk buying sight unseen.
I normally watch tanganyika channels, but when TH-cam gave me this video, it was a great pleasure to watch it all ...
Thank you, glad you enjoyed it!
It's a real neat inexpensive lens and works really well on my K-70. I bought recently from second hand at a local camera shop excellent condition. Buying from eBay is always tricky as the quality can't be guaranteed for marks, fungus and dust.
Yes and yes!
I've had this lens for several years. What I love about it is its compactness and low weight. It balances nicely on my Fuji X cameras and has decent image quality. And I've never been that fussed about the f3.5 aperture since it's a moderate telephoto (about 200mm equiv. on APS-C), which I never associate with high speed anyway. I'll definitely take a slower aperture if it means more compact and lighter. Gear gets heavy on a long hike! Thanks for the great review Marco!
Yup, same here! Thanks for the support!
Kudos on an excellent review. I own this lens and agree with your assessment. Perhaps Olympus made a smaller 135 for their OM system, but I'll bet the Pentax can be found for a fraction of the price of the Zuiko.
Thanks Brian! Yeah, Olympus lenses seem to be a little expensive. I've been wanting to try them for a while but haven't found a cheap one. A friend got a 50mm last year and sooner or later I'm gonna borrow it 😉
Great video Marco! Building a set of Pentax myself so I'll keep an eye out for this one!
Thanks! I'm trying to build a set, too! These lenses are really nice and I love the colors.
@@MarcoAries it's the same set I learnt on so there's a bit of nostalgia there too lol
It was one of the lenses on the Pentax KX that my dad used. I still use it with the adapter on my Nikon Z9. Fantastic lens
Yep, it's a keeper!
It's a lens that gives a lot of satisfaction. And also the beauty of vintage
Just bought one based upon your review.
Have fun with it!
snapped this up for €30 in Barcelona and having a great time with it, so crazy light
Nice! Glad you like it!
I have this lens and I love it. Thanks for the review!
Thank you for watching, glad you enjoy your lens!
Another excellent review. I love your fresh down to earth approach to reviewing and presenting vintage lenses. I must say that when I choose to take my vintage lenses out I tend to prefer smaller, easy to use, tactile lenses. My stash is largely comprised of Olympus OM and SMC Takumar lenses which are wonderfully sharp, small, fun to use and render very nicely. My Olympus 135mm f2.8 and 3.5 versions are really good, but the 3.5 is smallest and lightest with no obvious quality trade off......so it comes with me (for digital) more often. Great work. I look forward to more! (if you can find one, the SMC Takumar 24mm f3.5 or the Olympus 24mm f2.8 are great wide angle lenses you might want to review).
Thank you! I still haven't tried any Olympus lenses, but I'm keeping my eyes open 😉
Great video. I've been thinking a out getting the 35mm 3.5. The 135 looks like a stunning lens!
It's really good, yes! I've come to trust the quality of Pentax M lenses, plus I have a soft spot for their warm colors.
I can expect your review of the 35 some time in the future, then? 😉
@@MarcoAries absolutely, you'll be thr first to know when I do!
Nice video! I don't have any 135's in my collection so I bought this Pentax M today on Ebay. Also bought Vivitar 135mm f2.8 so I can compare them on my Pentax K-3
Nice, let me know if you like them!
@@MarcoAries I really love them! The Vivitar was in new condition including the box, very sharp. I really like the Pentax-M, very sharp wide open & outstanding stepped down.
Good to know! It's very rare to find a lens with the box, that's cool!
I love the lens! Does everything I need.
Yep, it is one of my favorites!
Great review. Thanks very much.....
Glad you enjoyed it, thank you for watching!
Great video! What Pentax camera did you use ,Marco?
Camera? This was all shot on a Sony a6500, but I may hunt down a Pentax sooner or later
I found one this weekend.
Keep us updated and let us know if you like it!
Great video as always. I have question off-topic. Did you try maybe speed booster m42 for your camera?
Never used a speed booster, I don't want to alter the image quality of the lenses by introducing more glass. Many use them, especially on M4/3 cameras and are happy with the results, I just prefer to get the direct result of lens and camera. I would like to get a full frame camera, tho, to properly test the lenses and sharpness fall off at the edges...
@@MarcoAries tnx for the reply. I agree. By ending additional glass you can mess up original old lens. But.. Some how on apc I feel like I don't have all of the original full frame characteristics of vintage lens. Same vintage glass looks completely different on full frame
True, I feel the same, but at the same time aps-c uses the sharper part of the lens, so... it's a little bit of a compromise. We'll both have to save up for a full frame! 😅
This can be used with a K1000, right? I’m looking for lenses to use with my film camera
Yes, it has a Pentax K mount, the person I bought it from was using it on their k1000
Very nice colours I’ve got the 2.5 version of that lens.
Nice! Is it sharp wide open or does it get a little soft?
@@MarcoAries it is very sharp wide open.
Good to know!
The video quality looks great
It does!
A dude talking about lenses with bass guitars behind? Subscribed
Thanks, but can we talk about you for a second? Bass, cool synths AND visual arts? That's badass!
@@MarcoAries Thank you! Glad you found that interesting, I'm a passionate bass player actually, nothing pro though.. Synth world is very lovely indeed!
f3.5 could be a no-no, but due to it's physical qualities, I find this to be a nice combo for mi t3i; a light weight prime team: 24mm stm, 50mm 1.8 and this 135mm f3.5
Nice image quality, about near f numbers and 3 quite different focal ranges.
I agree, f3.5 lenses are quite hit or miss, but this one is really nice.
J'aime beaucoup cet objectif, je plus compact que je possède, on l'oublie dans le sac! son traitement MC, son piqué,, je le trouve très mignon et pratique! (pourtant j'ai du CZJ, du Schneider, du 37A) j'ai fait de jolies photos de chevaux avec,, j'aimerais bien faire de la photo de concert, de musiciens avec.
Hey Marco! What mount would you use for this lens with on a fuji xt2? I tried an m42 mount but it doesn't fit
What do you mean it doesn't fit? There's plenty of m42 to Fuji adapters, maybe you got the wrong one?
@@MarcoAries it's possible, like the adapter is just too small for the lens threading. I bought a pk to fx one so we'll see now lol
Ah, ok, so you were trying to use an m42 adapter on a PK lens. M42 is a screw mount, while PK is a bayonet. Look up images of them and compare with your lens. It should be a PK, I don't think they came in m42. It gets confusing, I know 😅
@@MarcoAries ahh see that makes so much sense!! Best explanation I've seen online lol thank you Marco!
No problem!
Is there another smaller lighter option
So far this is the most compact vintage 135mm lens I have tried
@@MarcoAries what's another 135 with more character but also small
Of the ones that I have tried and reviewed, the Tokina 135 2.8 RMC.
Is this compatible with pentax K-1 fullframe camera?
I don't own a K1 so I can't say for sure, but it should work, as both the camera and lens have a K mount
Hi Marco.
Great images.......... and yes the little Pentax 135 f3.5 is wonderful. I would suggest you also try the Asahi Pentax SMC 135 f3.5 the one from the 60s. it is compact, built better or as good as any other top lens and the images are incredible.
Thanks, I'll look into it!
That's from 1975 not the 1960s. The M version here is from 1977, so only two years between them. This one is much more compact.
@@RobinParmar Hi Robin,..... Thanks for your reply and input.
The original 135mm 3.5 M42 mount is not from 1975. It is early 60s. Take my word for it......What I don't know about Pentax history you could write on the back of a postage stamp.
I have 135mm lenses from Asahi / Pentax dating back to 1957.
I have a collection going right the way back to when Pentax decided to make 35mm cameras and lenses from the original Asahiflex 1 from 1952. Prior to this Pentax were optical engineers for both the military and clinical services.
Asahi fully knew the ropes before they decided to make cameras and lenses for the masses. This is why their cameras and lenses really are something special.
@@racl1954 I was referring to the so-called K lens series under discussion. Didn't know we had switched to discussing the M42 Taks! No disrespect meant to your knowledge.
Are you recommending the original preset Tak? I have seen some lovely photos taken with it. Might be very hard to find one in decent repair.
@@RobinParmar Hi Robin. Both Super Takumar and the early SMC Takumar are pretty awesome. I am talking about the early lenses that have the alloy grip and no rubber grip on the focusing ring. These will be M42 mount.
That said the little K mount M version 135mm is also a cracker and it is so compact.
PS. you should still be able to pick up the early metal barrel versions for very reasonable prices. I have just found 2 early version M42 SMC Takumar 135mm 3.5 for less that £30.00 in first class condition. Really nice to use on mirrorless and the images are wonderful. Very sharp with great colour and contrast.
do you live in the UK ?.
I have the 135mm 2.5
Good for you
Suxh an under rated lens. You can still grab these lenses on e bay all day long for 30 bucks!
Indeed! Small size and great image quality!
Is there a lot of image clarity?
What do you mean by clarity?
@@MarcoAries Referring to this lens, is it sharp when taking pictures?
Well, yes, as you can see in the samples. Really sharp, even wide open 👍🏻
It's a smol boi compared to the others! XD
It is!
Damn! I need to find this lens. (using Sony A7 III + adapter). Fortunately, on the local Internet market I have quite a lot of offers for a wide variety of used lenses at fairly low prices. I especially liked the compactness and this retractable lens hood - very convenient. And yes, the video itself quite beautiful and cinematic (these atmospheric narrow streets of Italy!) I have always been impressed by Pentax, but have never had a single lens. I heard that this brand is also chosen by photographers from the high professional segment who work in the wild nature - National Geographic, for example. They prefer Pentax cameras, though. But mostly I came across lenses with their signature green ring (like Canon with their red ring). It's probably autofocus ones. The only thing that worries me is the size of the lens - it's too compact. No, of course this is an advantage, but usually nothing is free - perhaps the quality has suffered in favor of maintaining compactness. Otherwise all manufacturers would make such lenses compact. Wondering now how it performs in comparison with your other 2 favourites :)
Yes, as you say Pentax had and still has a great reputation, although it is now a quite niche brand. Green ring lenses are the more modern ones, yes, and I've been curious about trying them and the cameras, even if I'm a mirroless guy myself.
In regard of the lens in the video, they managed to keep it small by only having a max aperture of 3.5 instead of 2.8/2.5.
I am working on some direct comparisons as I've acquired some more lenses I'm curious to test it against, but it will take some time!
You know, I searched on your channel and something quite surprised me. For a person who loves vintage zoom lenses, it's rather strange not to have a single review of Minolta lenses. Particularly if you like telephoto lenses. But what about the famous "beer can" 70-210 f4? Or 28-135 f4, or 35-70 f4 . These are legendary lenses. How could you bypass them? Or, for example, the G series (although the G series is still quite expensive even used).
That's easy to answer: I wasn't able to find them yet. The only Minolta lens I've stumbled upon was the 50mm 1.7, but I wasn't able to snatch it.
I don't buy off the internet and I'm actually losing money by making these videos, so you can see how I can't afford to risk buying sight unseen.
Is this a radioactive lens?
No, it is not 😉
@@MarcoAries thank you!
👍🏻
Jesus himself impressed with this lens!
If Jesus likes it it must be nice.
😁