| Author: | | Showing Reviews 1-15 of 46 | | Pentaxian Registered: September, 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,470
2 users found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: February 9, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $33.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Compact, very good stopped down | | Cons: | Poor wide-open and f/2.8 | |
Because I do a lot of low light work, but had been doing it with only the two kit zooms 18-55 and 50-200 -
please see: Kx in Use
I finally broke down and decided to get a prime with faster max aperture.
I mean a prime is bound to be better than any zoom right?
- especially the two cheapo kit zooms.
Well at f/5.6 to f/8 the Pentax-A 50mm f/2 is pretty stunning.
BUT at f/2 and even stopped down to f/2.8 it is very disappointing -
well one could say it is 70's (30-40 years old) lens design, and it was the cheapest kit A prime available - so what can one expect?
I guess not much -
There was a lot I had to get use to before posting this report -
My manual focusing despite years of manual focus film SLRs had to be improved I got many shots between f/2-f/2.8 that were so atrocious - it was almost unbelievable - I really had to re-examine my focusing.
I spent a long time doing the most critical focusing I could think of - at almost closest focus distance, a well lit dollar bill as target, initially obviously flat on - but I was getting so many that was just poor at the wider apertures that I thought this was just the way the lens was - until I manage to get one shot like this:
So I did a lot more practicing but this time with the dollar bill at about 45degs so I could see whether I was out - and I was often - and one need not be out by much to have the result look terrible - and remember I was being as accurate as I thought I could be - but I still got pretty poor results - after a bit I did manage to get some that were presentable which was at least encouraging - in terms of the lens - but not so much in my own consistency -
even at this greatly reduced size one can see how critical focusing was for this target.
100% crops - unretouched -
I think the differences seem to be exaggerated because of the slightly different brightnesses -
I merely adjusted brightness/contrast - no sharpening:
This would almost seems as if the f/2 was pretty respectable - I mean it's a dollar bill - with lots of fine detail that one can discern....
but at this magnification the details are actually pretty large/coarse.
So this really only shows that I have managed to lessen my focusing errors at wider apertures.
A comparison at different apertures on a bright sunny day and a good distance where focusing may not be quite as critical -
this is actually at f/2 resized, brightness/contrast adjusted and sharpened - but even at this small size and pp one can see it's not really that sharp - it's barely acceptable -
At 100% crop -
one can see how the lens improves at about f/4 it is starting to get sharp and by f/5.6 and f/8 it is very sharp.
So have I got a lemon or is this par for the course -
well, I think it is par for the course - I didn't think I got an exception - the lens was in very good condition clean free of any debris - glass looks in excellent shape.
Certainly at f/5.6 and f/8 it is something well worthwhile -
BUT how does it compare to my two kit zooms?
At f/8 -
hmmm.... I am impressed with the zooms at f/8 to be able to match a prime at its optimum aperture is pretty good.....
ah but what about zooms wide-open won't they be cr@p compared to f/8 on this prime?
still pretty good - the 18-55 at 55mm wide open does lag very slightly - but really nothing to complain about - especially considering it is supposed to be the worst focal length and wide-open for this lens.
The 50-200 @ 50mm and wide-open does surprisingly well - very close call.......
So my usage for this lens is likely to be more for focusing in dark places but still shooting at f/4 or smaller f/3.2 and f/3.5 might be passable - but f/2-f/2.8 are strictly for emergencies - but this is already the kind of restriction I had been facing for well over a year with only the two kit zooms - so I haven't really gained much by having this lens over the two humble zooms.
Perhaps I should have held out for a good copy of the A 50mm f/1.7 - which is supposed to be better - but is it that much better?
| | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2009 Location: Sofia Posts: 2
1 user found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: November 9, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $50.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Compact,cheap,small,lightweight | | Cons: | soft at wide open | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
Soft wide open, gets better at F/4.The bokeh is not ideal, but acceptable.If you are on a budget, this is a really good lens.
 | | | | | Junior Member Registered: November, 2009 Location: West Cornwall Posts: 40
1 user found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: September 2, 2010 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: N/A
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Image quality, small price, small size, light weight. | | Cons: | Low "poser value" compared to f1.7, f1.4. | |
I wonder if some of the people who rate this lens low actually tested it?
Mine came attached to a non working camera I bought really cheaply just for the case and strap, so it was effectively free!
Neat, tiny, lightweight, crystal clear glass and good proportions, it LOOKED good on my ME-F and MX, and still looked good on my K20, but the revelation was, of course the brighter image on the viewfinder screen and the ease with which it "snapped" in and out of focus.
From the moment I started using it, my 18-55mm 'kit' lens was doomed as the image quality of the 50mm f2 was noticeably better!
Some lens tests online show it as performing as well as, or better than the f1.7 and f1.4 50mm variants (by minute degrees, as likely to account for individual lens variations) and use in real terms bears that out.
The big issue, though, is its availability and price. Here in Britain, the last dozen or so sold on Ebay UK have been around or below $40, one as low as $5!
Those are just fantastic low prices for a lens that works 'on automatic' in all ways except focussing on modern Pentax DSLRs yet comes well within spitting distance of the image quality of modern lenses costing at least ten times as much, which are bigger, heavier and (I suspect) more fragile.
Don't worry about the poor scores some have given this lens, find one cheap, buy it and USE it.
It's great for use reversed for close up photograophy too... instant 75mm (equivalent) f2 Macro lens for $40 dollars anyone??
GC.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: May, 2008 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 237
1 user found this helpful
| | Lens Review Date: November 10, 2008 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: N/A
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Cheap, sharp, and easy to use | | Cons: | Plastic | |
First let me say that I love this lens. I have used it for 25 years as it came with my K1000. Now I have a K200D and I couldn't be happier. Set it to A and you can use all of your auto settings and you can still use your flash. This lens is cheap as heck so get it and use it.
One thing that has helped with mine is getting the VF magnifier which magnifies the VF up to 10% more (I think) and it really helps with manual focusing in low light.
If you are on a budget, this is a really good lens.
Sure it's a little soft at f2.0. Who cares; it sharpens up nicely by f2.5. Further you can use Unsharp Mask to sharpen it up a little more if you want.
| | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2011 Location: Malang (East-Java) Posts: 4 | | Lens Review Date: March 4, 2012 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $30.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | cheap,sharp | | Cons: | plastic body | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: Pentax p30T
| |
 alternative for 50 f/1.4 and 50 /1.7...for image quality A 50 f/2 litle same
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: January, 2009 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 29 | | Lens Review Date: December 18, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $20.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Small, light, inexpensive, good colors, lack of CA, lack of PF | | Cons: | Downright soft in the corners even on APS-C, not very sharp wide open | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 9
| |
I had a chance to compare this lens with an SMC Pentax 55/1.8. Handling aside (the A lens has obvious control advantages on digital bodies), the 55/1.8 wins in almost every respect. The 50/2 is not very sharp wide open, with corners remaining very soft until it reaches f/5.6 - and that's on a cropped digital body. That's quite mediocre for a relatively slow fix-focal.
The 55/1.8 is a much sharper lens. The 50/2 has less purple fringing wide open than the 55/1.8 though. Unfortunately, there's no f/2 stop on the 55/1.8, so I can only compare wide-open with wide-open, which is not a very fair comparison; but even then, the old 55mm lens is sharper at f/1.8 than the A version at f/2. I'm surprised as it's usually easier to design slower lenses.
One other thing to mention: the 50/2 always gives perfect white balance on my K-5, while the 55/1.8 throws off camera's WB metering, producing purple-tint images out of the box. As I shoot RAW, it was easy to correct the white balance, but that's one more point to consider for those shooting JPEG.
One more thing to mention: the 50/2 almost totally lacks any purple fringing when shooting high-contrast objects. The 55/1.8 has slightly higher PF in comparison when shooting exactly the same scene.
| | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2011 Posts: 7 | | Lens Review Date: October 23, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $45.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, compact, light | | Cons: | A little soft wide open | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
A bit soft at F2, but usable at F2.8.
I took a quit number of night shots for buildings using this lens at F2.8 and the results are quite nice and sharp IMO.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: September, 2010 Location: Manchester, UK Posts: 243 | | Lens Review Date: October 20, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: No |
Price: $30.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Cheap, compact, auto | | Cons: | Soft wide open, nasty plastic stop ring | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 6
| |
Cheapest of the auto 50mms. Soft wide open, gets better at f5.6+. Built spoiled by the nasty plastic stop ring with its ball bearing guided detents. Easy to focus even with the standard Pentax DSLR focus screen. With a bit of care it is a reasonable performer, but for just a little more you can get the f1.7 which is much better optically.
  
  
| | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2011 Location: KRAKOW Posts: 2 | | Lens Review Date: September 14, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: No |
Price: $50.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 8
| |
Niedoceniany obiektyw , niewielkich rozmiarów i uniwersalnego zastosowania w DSLR.
Mało przymknięty - na pełnej jasności (f/2; 2,8) ostry środek ale miękki, przy f/4 już całkiem ostry rysunek na środku łagodniej po bokach, od 5,6 - robi się bardzo ostry na całej powierzchni APS-C. Od 8 do 13 bardzo ostry i kontrastowy na całej powierzchni - wręcz do zdjęć technicznych i makrofotografii.
Podsumowując - uniwersalny od 2,0-5,6 dla portretu , 5,6 - 13 dla fotografii wymagającej ostrego i kontrastowego obiektywu.  | | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2011 Posts: 2 | | Lens Review Date: September 8, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $50.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Nice Bokeh !! Cheap !!! | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
This is the cheapest yet best prime lens you can get in the market .. Since the aerture is automated .. You can just focus on the focus ring .. Nice OVERALL !!!
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: May, 2011 Posts: 1,482 | | Lens Review Date: August 6, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $30.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Cheap, Easy to use, Sharp, Nice colour and bokeh. | | Cons: | None. | |
For its price, this old lens is unbeatable. I get so much mileage out of it, it's not even funny. I needed a cheap prime after blowing all my money on a new K-r, and found this one on Kijiji.ca for $30, and thought to myself why he heck not? It came with an old film body, flash, tripod, so in reality it was much cheaper than I paid, on its own. If you hunt around you can probably pick one up for $20.
It has nice bokeh, great colour rendition, and while it's a bit soft wide open this can actually be a quality rather than a deficit. It's great for adding that dreamy soft focus look. Stopped down, nice and sharp - no complaints there.
I'm using this lens a lot as an inexpensive way to get into macro photography, on the end of a set of extension tubes. It has the aperture ring required for type A tubes, and is an ideal choice for getting started in macro on the cheap. Here is the first macro shot I ever took.
I think the best aspect of this lens is the massive throw on the focus ring. It allows for very precise focus, and makes the lens a joy to use. For a cheap kit lens from 25 years ago, this is one that should have a place in anyone's bag. It's a keeper.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: November, 2006 Location: New Mexico Posts: 76 | | Lens Review Date: August 5, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $20.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Cheap, Auto, Lightweight | | Cons: | Plastic | |
I purchased this just to have an Auto lens to add to my -M 1.7 and -M 1.4. It's cheap and takes sharp photos. The bokeh is not as creamy(a little more busy) as my 1.4, but It's currently on my K5, so that says something.
 | | | | | Junior Member Registered: May, 2011 Posts: 28 | | Lens Review Date: June 13, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $30.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | It's cheap, it has auto-aperture | | Cons: | It's not the 1.7, or the 1.4, or the 1.2 | |
I've played with various manual focus 50mm lenses. Apparently you can get good or bad SMC A 50 2.0s. I've gotten my hands on three of them, and all have performed admirably.
I can't discern any IQ difference among the A 50 2.0, the M 50 2.0, and the 50 2.0s by Sears or Ricoh. The A version is not as dense as the M version but still feels very solid. This lens definitely "feels" better than the non-Pentaxes.
I haven't had any complaints about softness using this lens, even with it wide open. I have a FA 50 1.4, and the depth of field is so shallow that I rarely open beyond 2.0 anyway. The price for the MF 1.7 and the 1.4 have climbed while the 2.0 seems to have stayed cheap due to availability / lack-of-desirability.
If you want to experiment with manual focus and are on a tight budget, grab this one (or the M version, or the Sears, etc.) I have really enjoyed the Green Button metering and the Catch in Focus. Manual focus on a Pentax is fun and easy!
A sample pic or two here | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: March, 2009 Location: North East Ohio, USA/ India Posts: 341 | | Lens Review Date: June 7, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: N/A
| Rating: 9 |
|
This is the good old standard kit lens. I used nothing but this lens for over 10 years on a vivitar v 3000. I was always happy with the result. The lens is even fast for indoor in available window light. It has excellent pentax colours.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: November, 2009 Location: Strand Posts: 916 | | Lens Review Date: March 10, 2011 | I can recommend this lens: Yes |
Price: $30.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Compact, light weight | | Cons: | slow, kit lens comparable | |
I have 10+ copies of this lens through the years, mostly came with a lens lot and an old body. Some made in japan, some from taiwan, both M and A versions. Build quality is compact, very light weight and feel just fine.
Price listed is estimated as average; higher if several of other lenses in the lot is not working; lower or free if other lenses are working fine.
As for physical and design rules, wide open is never good. f2 is the weakest spot. One/two click down does help a lot, but best at f5.6 and f8. As for bokeh at this best f-stops, the lens is almost as sharp in all distances, more like a PS pocket camera. That means this lens is only good for walking tour in day light when you are not need for bokeh.
50mm is not long and not wide. Putting this lens on a DSLR will litterally convert the DSLR to a 'cheap PS camera with MF'. Image quality is some what better than PS but no zoom, no AF, no stunning bokeh.
Why do I recommend this lens? Because it is cheap and gives good quality, and commonly available with every old body. At f8 it is very good. IQ is not bad at all as people uses to rate this lens by it's weak spot. After all, it is a F2.
Give this lens a try if you can get it cheap or with a lens lot.
| | |
