Pentax DA* 55mm F1.4 lens review in dpreview.com - Page 2

Alfisti · 07-31-2009, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by Biro

I have to wonder if QC is a greater issue with Pentax's newer lenses more than it is with new lenses from other companies. Either way, it's particularly frustrating in the case of Pentax because we seem to hear about more problems with the high-end DA* line than any other. We can only hope this will be limited to a few early examples.

It very clearly is, 5 miutes on DPR and here will make it pretty clear it's been farcical since the * designation was re-released and it's almost ALWAYS a misalignment or focus issue.

Russell-Evans · 07-31-2009, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Rondec

It's just really odd that they would get so many bad copies. This is one lens that hasn't had much negative said about it since its release (other than the price). I guess the moral of the story is that any time you get a new lens, you need to shoot a lot with it to be certain that it doesn't have any flaws.

I think the moral of the story is, if you have three copies all showing the same issue, check your camera. If you are testing lenses, then your camera should be sent in for service to verify it is at spec or better, even if it is new. You should start with a known good, not just the assumption.

Thank you
Russell

*cousinsane* · 07-31-2009, 11:57 AM

If you read the review, you will find out that they tried 3 different camera bodies, K2000, K20, K-7.

Originally Posted by Russell-Evans

I think the moral of the story is, if you have three copies all showing the same issue, check your camera. If you are testing lenses, then your camera should be sent in for service to verify it is at spec or better, even if it is new. You should start with a known good, not just the assumption.

Thank you
Russell

octavmandru · 07-31-2009, 12:15 PM

I'm disappointed the least.

ll_coffee_lP · 07-31-2009, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by octavmandru

I'm disappointed the least.

Why be disappointed? You have the excellent FA50, and didn't spend the money on a DA* that you aren't going to be happy with.

c[_]

Russell-Evans · 07-31-2009, 03:48 PM

Originally Posted by cousinsane

If you read the review, you will find out that they tried 3 different camera bodies, K2000, K20, K-7.

It isn't clear that the decentering was observed on more than one camera body. It only states AF issues with the three bodies.

Thank you
Russell

*Adrian Owerko* · 07-31-2009, 03:59 PM

I have the DA* 55mm.. I find that the SDM is a must have for portraits of babies and Young Children.. The old screw focus is way to noisy and distracting for a young subject... DPR I can't wait for there K-7 review lol.. I guess DPR don't want Canikon to cut back Advertising dollars in these hard time (:

Zubati Kit · 07-31-2009, 04:21 PM

it's just a review, not a favourable one, but that is fair, as Pentax sent duds to dpr... if I was Hoya Corporate, I'd be furious with local Pentax UK subsidirary... but hey if you are a customer... check you copy and it can well be great... like mine is thankfully

so it is not a problem with the lens, the problem is with QC, and if you really need the best 50/55 prime, this is still it... but the review just points out that you might not be the only one in case your copy is not the best out of the box, and if the product needs replacing, you better do it and hope for the best...

it sucks but also it is not the end of the world... it can all be easliy sorted by buying a house walking distance from someone who stocks Pentax and you are all set

rams · 07-31-2009, 06:20 PM

I have the lens and I am happy with it! If yours is not functioning properly-send it to Pentax to fix the problem.

GaryM · 07-31-2009, 06:55 PM

Originally Posted by Zubati Kit

it's just a review, not a favourable one, but that is fair, as Pentax sent duds to dpr... if I was Hoya Corporate, I'd be furious with local Pentax UK subsidirary... but hey if you are a customer... check you copy and it can well be great... like mine is thankfully

so it is not a problem with the lens, the problem is with QC, and if you really need the best 50/55 prime, this is still it... but the review just points out that you might not be the only one in case your copy is not the best out of the box, and if the product needs replacing, you better do it and hope for the best...

it sucks but also it is not the end of the world... it can all be easliy sorted by buying a house walking distance from someone who stocks Pentax and you are all set

Well said. Also, in regards to lens reviews, DPR wasn't especially keen on the DA15 either, but I went ahead and bought the lens and am very happy with it. Every review needs to be taken in context with other reviews including user testimonials. DPR is one of the very best review sources available, but they are not the final, definitive word.

Rondec · 07-31-2009, 07:00 PM

I have to say that DPR has a few horses they ride to every camera review and I can already forsee that the K7 review won't be favorable. They like highly saturated photos with high noise reduction and sharp JPGs. This isn't what Pentax releases in general and so DPR will always review the cameras badly, however tweakable the JPGs might be in the camera.

I think the biggest seller of lenses for Pentax is not reviews, but threads like JSherman's for the DA 35 and the PPG. Once you see what a lens can do in competent hands, it fuels LBA like no camera review ever dreamed of doing.

kunik · 07-31-2009, 10:01 PM

I've seen bad reviews of the Canon 85/1.2 which costs $2000 and I've seen good reviews of Tamron 18-250mm... but I've never really been into "reading" about lenses.

I've seen some great stuff from the Pentax 55mm and I look forward to trying it myself one day.

Class A · 08-01-2009, 12:10 AM

I think the DPR review of the 55/1.4 is very fair. AFAIC it is correct to describe it as a significant improvement over the FA50/1.4.

The three issues I take with the review is that it suggests that

there is a QC issue on the basis of three copies (haven't heard about 55/1.4 QC issues as much as I heard about 16-50/2.8 QC issues), and
that similar problems do not exist with other lenses, and
that FF/BF is something specific to the 55/1.4.

Regarding 1: Yes, they should not have had such difficulty to get a good copy, but who knows whether their copies all came from the same batch of duds?

Regarding 2: I don't like it at all but I keep reading about lens buyers returning their copies because of decentrering and other issues. This seems to happen with all lens manufacturers.

Regarding 3: I don't get why the reviewer seems to indicate that FF/BF is an uncommon phenomenon. If it were, why would the K20D/K-7 (and other cameras from Can*kon) have an adjustment feature?

Not sure what the chances are for the 55/1.4 price to come down in due course, but in any event I think the DPR recommendation should not have included the "with reservations".

*notion* · 08-01-2009, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by DanLoc78

yup, checked BHphoto and it is. But I had been checking on Adorama where it is $800...what's the deal with that?

Adorama shows the list price on the product page with the message to add to cart for lower price. Their price is 639.95.

ballgofar · 08-01-2009, 12:16 PM

Realistically, though, how many sales could Pentax possibly lose from this review? The people who were planning on spending $700 or whatever on what is essentially a weather-sealed fast 50 are probably still going to do so.