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.
