50mm Macro f/2.8 vs 50mm f/1.4 - Page 2

*Blue* · 07-17-2008, 10:23 PM

Originally Posted by Peter Zack

Exactly.

The macro will produce smoother highlights and bokeh. The macro will be a little sharper at all focal lengths and it's also slightly warmer looking. Little or no diffraction effects as you get in the really small apertures. It's the nature of the macro design.

I have 2 weddings this weekend and will have no time to do more test shooting. Maybe next week but I don't know what the point would be in f2.8 comparisons. The point of the thread is how the 50/1.4 looked wide open.

I don't think you actually got the point I was making. When testing, use equivalent bench marks. Plus, both of these lenses are "specialty" lenses designed for different purposes with some overlap.

**Peter Zack** · 07-20-2008, 07:56 AM

Ok here you go 2 images. One from the FA50mm f1.4 and a 100 %crop and the other from the FA50mm f2.8 and a 100% crop. Both shots are at f2.8

As above, K10D shot in RAW, 2 sec MLU, Tripod ISO 100 Converted in Pentax Browser directly to Jpegs no sharpening. There is one error in the captions. The FA500/1.4 was at 1/1250th and the Macro was at 1/1000 but that doesn't matter for this test. Not sure why but the sky had thin cloud cover and might have darkened slightly between lens changes. The shutter speeds will make no difference in sharpness/bokeh etc tests anyway.

Click on the image to view it in a larger size

You can see that the Macro is a little sharper and the bokeh is a little smoother but that really only shows up in the crops. In real world shooting where you don't crop or do very little (as you should) these 2 lenses are extremely close. But the difference becomes more noticeable as you stop down further. The 1.4 gets sharper but the macro gets even sharper. The OOF areas are nicer in the macro as well but that's to be expected. These lenses are designed for different purposes.

Anyone that chooses not to own the 1.4 based on this is nuts. Forget the "for the money" qualifier. This is a great lens. I have shot with many lenses like the A*85/1.4, 77mm Ltd, 31mm Ltd, 42mm Ltd, 40 & 70mm Ltd, Kiron 105 macro and a number of others. The 50mm macro is as good or better than these lenses, especially for it's intended purpose. The 50/1.4 is so damn close in quality to the macro is just more reason that this lens should be in every serious bag. The fact that it's cheap is just a bonus.

Buy it and don't pixel peep it to death even though it can hold up to that.

Btw, The RAW's are damn fine and these reduced sized Jpegs don't even come close to the quality of the originals.

*Blue* · 07-20-2008, 10:16 AM

Good test.

*k100d* · 07-20-2008, 10:49 AM

the FA50 Macro is reputed to be one of the best Pentax lenses ever.
great tests Peter

Lowell Goudge · 07-20-2008, 11:01 AM

Peter

one thing I didn't see is a comparison of the two lenses used in "copy mode" i.e. at right angles to text.

the macro shoudl be a flat field lens, and be better at this, than the F1.4.

That might help the OP as well, although I personally would take a 50mm F1.4 over the macro, because I believe a 50mm macro is too short to get good working distance

**Peter Zack** · 07-20-2008, 12:06 PM

No question about it Lowell. The macro is better across the frame on a flat subject. The typical brick wall shot etc. will show better corner to corner sharpness where the sweet-spot of the 1.4 is more to the middle. But again, I've seen lenses that are 2,3,4 + X the price that are no sharper than the 1.4 across the frame. Posted Jpegs here would yield nothing much to see between the 2.

Maybe I'll give it a try and add some pics later on.

nathancombs · 07-20-2008, 06:56 PM

i have the 50 M 1.4 i also have the M 1.7 i sujest getting the catz eye split screen with the MF 50s ( i do not have one GRRRRR ) with the short DOF it would be ezer to work with i find that some times i tend to be a hair off becuse the stock focsing on the K10D just is not good enf for the short DOF. i do say at night it is nice having that 1.4

i would LOVE to have a 1.2 (would also like to have the F or FA vertions of these lenes )

some photos with the 1.4

*FHPhotographer* · 07-20-2008, 11:48 PM

[QUOTE=Peter Zack;296567]Ok here you go 2 images. One from the FA50mm f1.4 and a 100 %crop and the other from the FA50mm f2.8 and a 100% crop. Both shots are at f2.8

Thanks, Peter, this is just what I was hoping to see in an earlier post asking for some real world comparison between the FA and DA lenses. This is great, and can I assume this same comparison applies to the 35 FA and DA as well, or is that too big a leap?
FHPhotog

*nulla* · 07-21-2008, 01:30 AM

Thanks Peter

Great results and comments.

**Peter Zack** · 07-21-2008, 04:58 AM

Originally Posted by FHPhotographer

Thanks, Peter, this is just what I was hoping to see in an earlier post asking for some real world comparison between the FA and DA lenses. This is great, and can I assume this same comparison applies to the 35 FA and DA as well, or is that too big a leap?
FHPhotog

Remember this is a comparision between 2 FA series lenses. I don't have the D-FA Macro. So these are the same generation. My understanding is though that the FA 50mm Macro and the D-FA 50mm Macro are optically the same lens. But the DA35mm is a new lens in the line and there is no older model. But the FA35mm f2 is an excellent lens. I had one for awhile and it's very good (slightly better in IQ than the FA50mm 1.4) but never used the lens much (having a number of primes around the same FL) and sold it.

I really can't say this is a direct comparison but good quality macro lenses will all share some similarities. Sharper across the frame and better bokeh. Everyone that has either lens, says they are very good and owners of the 35mm macro like it a lot. So if you can afford the 35mm macro, want the flexibility of 2 very difference applications (normal shooting and macros) and don't need the 1 stop difference, then I'd get the 35mm macro.

**Peter Zack** · 07-21-2008, 05:03 AM

No problem Nulla. I hope this helps some with the choices. I wonder what happened to the OP (ksignorini)?

*nulla* · 07-21-2008, 05:26 AM

Peter

this thread and the demo and comments given by yourself and other kind members has helped a newbie like myself to DSLR strengthen my decision to have ordered the FA 50mm 1.4 for it is going to I am sure after reading this thread serve the purpose that I want from the lens.

On the other hand this thread has enlightened me on the 50mm macro and its strengths and capabilities. I am yet to get a macro lens however this focal length as a prime would not suit me seeing I will soon have the 50mm 1.4 but it sure points me in the right direction as to what I should be looking for

Class A · 10-28-2008, 08:45 PM

Thanks Peter, great comparison. This is very helpful. I'm very much anticipating having my own FA 50mm f/1.4 real soon now. I was surprised to learn that its production has stopped a while ago.

creampuff · 10-28-2008, 09:48 PM

Originally Posted by Class A

Thanks Peter, great comparison. This is very helpful. I'm very much anticipating having my own FA 50mm f/1.4 real soon now. I was surprised to learn that its production has stopped a while ago.

Hmmm, where did you get the info that production had stopped?

Steinback · 10-29-2008, 01:26 AM

I guess I must have missed this post the first time around back in July, I hadn't realized that there was a portrait of me in it... one of the side effects of going to forum meetups.