Finding a Pentax Equivalent to Canon's 50 mm - F/1.8

JustShane · 11-13-2010, 08:31 PM

The title says it all.

Here's a link to Canon's lens, just in cause you're not sure what I speak of here. (It's priced at only $100 brand new.)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-50mm-f-1.8-ii-lens-review.aspx
------

Pentax seems to be missing this focal length at a similar price-point, but maybe I'm wrong. Hence this thread...

Any assistance here guys?

henryjing · 11-13-2010, 08:51 PM

M50/1.7 or DA35/2.4

hcarvalhoalves · 11-13-2010, 08:56 PM

The 50mm focal-length is useless on current APS-C sensors like the ones Pentax uses, because of the crop factor. The equivalent to get the same FOV would be 35mm.

For 35mm, you have the DA 35mm f/2.4:

smc PENTAX DA L 35mm F2.4 AL - Official PENTAX Imaging Web Site

It's Pentax's "kit prime", although the IQ is already another league compared to the Canon, as it's already sharp starting at f/2.4 and build quality seems to be a little better. People who tested it have been blown away, check the reviews.

Rumor has it that the optical formula is the same from the FAs, just the build and materials were simplified to drop the price.

Other than that, if you really want to stick with 50mm regardless of crop factor, you can find the FA 50mm f/1.7, or even up to f/1.4:

SMC Pentax-FA 50mm F1.4 Lens Reviews - Pentax Lens Review Database

Those are the auto-focus options I can remember. If you throw in manual focus lenses to buy used, then there's another dozen from where you can choose from. Just use the PentaxForums lenses database:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/

Steinback · 11-13-2010, 08:57 PM

Lots of options around 50mm in Pentax mount, but nothing that cheap and new.

On the second hand market you can get a nice, manual focus lens that is at least equal to that Canon lens for well under $100.

If you need something that will autofocus then you are looking at $150 to $300 for an F or FA 50mm f/1.7 or f/1.4 on the used market.

The recently released Pentax 35mm f/2.4 is the lowest cost prime lens currently manufactured for the system at ~$200 US.

JustShane · 11-13-2010, 09:04 PM

I don't mind the crop factor. It's FAR from useless. (IMO.)

Nikon and Sony also have a cheapy 50, so I'm a bit shocked Pentax didn't throw one in there as well...

Granted, manual focus opens me up to sub-$100 pricing anyway.

(And truth be told, the AF ability on that Canon lens was quite pathetic. My best shots were usually Manual anyway.)

Hmm.

Decisions. :ugh:

Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves

The 50mm focal-length is useless on current APS-C sensors like the ones Pentax uses, because of the crop factor. The equivalent to get the same FOV would be 35mm.

For 35mm, you have the DA 35mm f/2.4:

smc PENTAX DA L 35mm F2.4 AL - Official PENTAX Imaging Web Site

It's Pentax's "kit prime", although the IQ is already another league compared to the Canon, as it's already sharp starting at f/2.4 and build quality seems to be a little better. People who tested it have been blown away, check the reviews.

Rumor has it that the optical formula is the same from the FAs, just the build and materials were simplified to drop the price.

Other than that, if you really want to stick with 50mm regardless of crop factor, you can find the FA 50mm f/1.7, or even up to f/1.4:

SMC Pentax-FA 50mm F1.4 Lens Reviews - Pentax Lens Review Database

Those are the auto-focus options I can remember. If you throw in manual focus lenses to buy used, then there's another dozen from where you can choose from. Just use the PentaxForums lenses database:

Comprehensive Pentax Lens Listings - Pentax Lens Review Database

hcarvalhoalves · 11-13-2010, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by JustShane

I don't mind the crop factor. It's FAR from useless. (IMO.)

I meant, useless if you expect to use it as you would in 35mm. In my K-x the 50mm gives such a different FOV that I don't even use it as much as a 28mm. Of course, it all boils down to what works for you.

Originally posted by JustShane

Nikon and Sony also have a cheapy 50, so I'm a bit shocked Pentax didn't throw one in there as well...

Both Nikon and Sony make full frame cameras. Pentax line is APS-C exclusively, so don't expect seeing them release a fifty. The 35mm is the new fifty in digtal.

Quote:

Granted, manual focus opens me up to sub-$100 pricing anyway.

(And truth be told, the AF ability on that Canon lens was quite pathetic. My best shots were usually Manual anyway.)

Hmm.

Decisions. :ugh:

You can literally collect fifties if you are willing to buy the M or A. Even then, the FAs are still a great choice and can be obtained for not much more.

From experience though, if you're after a walk-around prime, you should acquire something in the 28-35mm range which will see more use in APS-C than a fifty.

RolloR · 11-13-2010, 10:26 PM

Short answer: None.

50mm on APS-C is just as useless/useful as an ~85mm lens on full-frame.

DA35/2.4 is f2.4, not f1.8 and has a focal length of 35mm, not 50mm. Sure the IQ is phenomenal, but it's still f2.4 and 35mm. It can never achieve the shallow DOF of a 50/1.8.

Pentaxor · 11-14-2010, 12:51 AM

a 50mm and 85mm respectively are quite challenging to use these days especially for Pentax APS-C size sensors. however, it is far from being useless. both lenses somehow became different lenses. a 50mm became a short telephoto portrait lens, and the 85mm telephoto portrait. the thing is, Pentax somehow is missing a much faster 35mm equivalent normal lens. the FA31 is fast and does display the mark of what a 35mm portrait lens should be, but it's not that really fast (f1.8) and expensive for it's price right now. but if we are talking about a Canon 50/1.8 lens equivalent for the Pentax, the FA31 has done more than being a mere equivalent.

elho_cid · 11-14-2010, 04:25 AM

Actually we have the EF50/1,8 at home. It doesn't see much use. If Pentax had an equvalent I wouldn't buy it. The discontinued FA 50/1.7 was a lot better.

Pentaxor · 11-14-2010, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by elho_cid

Actually we have the EF50/1,8 at home. It doesn't see much use. If Pentax had an equvalent I wouldn't buy it. The discontinued FA 50/1.7 was a lot better.

I would had mentioned the FA50/1.7 if it wasn't only discontinued. having said that, another existing focal length/speed equivalent would be the FA43. that is the closest in-production lens that came close to the 50mm focal length. although I would prefer the FA43 over the Canon 50/1.8.

elho_cid · 11-14-2010, 11:35 AM

Comparing the EF50/1.8 with FA43/1.9 is a blasphemy.

keyser · 11-14-2010, 11:55 AM

The EF50/1.8 is not a shoddy lens by any optical measure. It's a derivative of the Zeiss Biotar and is therefore very sharp despite having a simple optical scheme. Downsides would be ugly bokeh, but I get that sometimes with the 50/1.7 so I'm guessing that the Pentax and Canon lenses are similar but not identical.

Still, back on topic.. it's surprises me that Pentax HAVE a sharp lens, potential buyers and wouldn't need to spend much on R&D... I'm not sure why they don't bring the 1.7 back at the killer $100 price point.

paperbag846 · 11-14-2010, 02:42 PM

Originally posted by keyser

Downsides would be ugly bokeh, but I get that sometimes with the 50/1.7

Yes, I believe the 50 1.7 would be a direct replacement for the 1.8 in canon land.

You can find the F 1.7 for 100 ish on the used market.

It might be a little odd that they don't make it anymore, but they likely axed it because it was not selling. 50mm is just not a user-friendly focal length for beginners who don't want to pay for the 50 1.4... so they kept the 1.4 I'm guessing.

Steinback · 11-14-2010, 06:32 PM

Back when both were available new, the FA 50mm f/1.7 still went for quite a bit more than the Canon 50 f/1.8.

I've got a B&H ad from 1999 that lists the Canon lens at $75 (grey market)/ $85 USA, vs. $140 for the Pentax 50. The prices listed from other dealers are in the same range.

Wheatfield · 11-14-2010, 07:53 PM

Originally posted by JustShane

I don't mind the crop factor. It's FAR from useless. (IMO.)

Nikon and Sony also have a cheapy 50, so I'm a bit shocked Pentax didn't throw one in there as well...

Granted, manual focus opens me up to sub-$100 pricing anyway.

(And truth be told, the AF ability on that Canon lens was quite pathetic. My best shots were usually Manual anyway.)

Hmm.

Decisions. :ugh:

Nikon, Canon and Sony all have 135 format cameras where the 50 is a standard lens.

11-13-2010, 08:31 PM	#1
JustShane Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20	Finding a Pentax Equivalent to Canon's 50 mm - F/1.8 The title says it all. Here's a link to Canon's lens, just in cause you're not sure what I speak of here. (It's priced at only $100 brand new.) http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-50mm-f-1.8-ii-lens-review.aspx ------ Pentax seems to be missing this focal length at a similar price-point, but maybe I'm wrong. Hence this thread... Any assistance here guys?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Equivalent of Pentax primes on Canon and Nikon FF systems	dexmus	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	10-01-2010 11:16 PM
Whats the Pentax equivalent to the Canon 70-200mm F4L	dude163	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	44	05-08-2010 12:47 PM
New to Pentax from the Canon Camp Pentax equivalent to Canon 70-200mm f/4 L	frank2001	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	53	12-23-2009 05:07 PM
Pentax Mount Equivalent for Canon 135mm F/2?	dantekgeek	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	12-18-2008 10:06 AM
Pentax equivalent of a 100-400 L	bsierens	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	11-04-2008 10:00 AM

11-13-2010, 08:51 PM	#2
henryjing Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: United States Posts: 467	M50/1.7 or DA35/2.4

11-13-2010, 08:56 PM	#3
hcarvalhoalves Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: São Paulo, Brazil Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,019	The 50mm focal-length is useless on current APS-C sensors like the ones Pentax uses, because of the crop factor. The equivalent to get the same FOV would be 35mm. For 35mm, you have the DA 35mm f/2.4: smc PENTAX DA L 35mm F2.4 AL - Official PENTAX Imaging Web Site It's Pentax's "kit prime", although the IQ is already another league compared to the Canon, as it's already sharp starting at f/2.4 and build quality seems to be a little better. People who tested it have been blown away, check the reviews. Rumor has it that the optical formula is the same from the FAs, just the build and materials were simplified to drop the price. Other than that, if you really want to stick with 50mm regardless of crop factor, you can find the FA 50mm f/1.7, or even up to f/1.4: SMC Pentax-FA 50mm F1.4 Lens Reviews - Pentax Lens Review Database Those are the auto-focus options I can remember. If you throw in manual focus lenses to buy used, then there's another dozen from where you can choose from. Just use the PentaxForums lenses database: https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/

11-13-2010, 08:57 PM	#4
Steinback Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: GTA, ON, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,673	Lots of options around 50mm in Pentax mount, but nothing that cheap and new. On the second hand market you can get a nice, manual focus lens that is at least equal to that Canon lens for well under $100. If you need something that will autofocus then you are looking at $150 to $300 for an F or FA 50mm f/1.7 or f/1.4 on the used market. The recently released Pentax 35mm f/2.4 is the lowest cost prime lens currently manufactured for the system at ~$200 US.

11-13-2010, 09:04 PM	#5
JustShane Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20 Original Poster	I don't mind the crop factor. It's FAR from useless. (IMO.) Nikon and Sony also have a cheapy 50, so I'm a bit shocked Pentax didn't throw one in there as well... Granted, manual focus opens me up to sub-$100 pricing anyway. (And truth be told, the AF ability on that Canon lens was quite pathetic. My best shots were usually Manual anyway.) Hmm. Decisions. :ugh: Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves The 50mm focal-length is useless on current APS-C sensors like the ones Pentax uses, because of the crop factor. The equivalent to get the same FOV would be 35mm. For 35mm, you have the DA 35mm f/2.4: smc PENTAX DA L 35mm F2.4 AL - Official PENTAX Imaging Web Site It's Pentax's "kit prime", although the IQ is already another league compared to the Canon, as it's already sharp starting at f/2.4 and build quality seems to be a little better. People who tested it have been blown away, check the reviews. Rumor has it that the optical formula is the same from the FAs, just the build and materials were simplified to drop the price. Other than that, if you really want to stick with 50mm regardless of crop factor, you can find the FA 50mm f/1.7, or even up to f/1.4: SMC Pentax-FA 50mm F1.4 Lens Reviews - Pentax Lens Review Database Those are the auto-focus options I can remember. If you throw in manual focus lenses to buy used, then there's another dozen from where you can choose from. Just use the PentaxForums lenses database: Comprehensive Pentax Lens Listings - Pentax Lens Review Database

11-13-2010, 09:18 PM	#6
hcarvalhoalves Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: São Paulo, Brazil Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,019	Originally posted by JustShane I don't mind the crop factor. It's FAR from useless. (IMO.) I meant, useless if you expect to use it as you would in 35mm. In my K-x the 50mm gives such a different FOV that I don't even use it as much as a 28mm. Of course, it all boils down to what works for you. Originally posted by JustShane Nikon and Sony also have a cheapy 50, so I'm a bit shocked Pentax didn't throw one in there as well... Both Nikon and Sony make full frame cameras. Pentax line is APS-C exclusively, so don't expect seeing them release a fifty. The 35mm is the new fifty in digtal. Quote: Granted, manual focus opens me up to sub-$100 pricing anyway. (And truth be told, the AF ability on that Canon lens was quite pathetic. My best shots were usually Manual anyway.) Hmm. Decisions. :ugh: You can literally collect fifties if you are willing to buy the M or A. Even then, the FAs are still a great choice and can be obtained for not much more. From experience though, if you're after a walk-around prime, you should acquire something in the 28-35mm range which will see more use in APS-C than a fifty.

11-13-2010, 10:26 PM	#7
RolloR Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 264	Short answer: None. 50mm on APS-C is just as useless/useful as an ~85mm lens on full-frame. DA35/2.4 is f2.4, not f1.8 and has a focal length of 35mm, not 50mm. Sure the IQ is phenomenal, but it's still f2.4 and 35mm. It can never achieve the shallow DOF of a 50/1.8.

11-14-2010, 12:51 AM	#8
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	a 50mm and 85mm respectively are quite challenging to use these days especially for Pentax APS-C size sensors. however, it is far from being useless. both lenses somehow became different lenses. a 50mm became a short telephoto portrait lens, and the 85mm telephoto portrait. the thing is, Pentax somehow is missing a much faster 35mm equivalent normal lens. the FA31 is fast and does display the mark of what a 35mm portrait lens should be, but it's not that really fast (f1.8) and expensive for it's price right now. but if we are talking about a Canon 50/1.8 lens equivalent for the Pentax, the FA31 has done more than being a mere equivalent.

11-14-2010, 04:25 AM	#9
elho_cid Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Prague Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,199	Actually we have the EF50/1,8 at home. It doesn't see much use. If Pentax had an equvalent I wouldn't buy it. The discontinued FA 50/1.7 was a lot better.

11-14-2010, 10:25 AM	#10
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by elho_cid Actually we have the EF50/1,8 at home. It doesn't see much use. If Pentax had an equvalent I wouldn't buy it. The discontinued FA 50/1.7 was a lot better. I would had mentioned the FA50/1.7 if it wasn't only discontinued. having said that, another existing focal length/speed equivalent would be the FA43. that is the closest in-production lens that came close to the 50mm focal length. although I would prefer the FA43 over the Canon 50/1.8.

11-14-2010, 11:35 AM	#11
elho_cid Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Prague Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,199	Comparing the EF50/1.8 with FA43/1.9 is a blasphemy.

11-14-2010, 11:55 AM	#12
keyser Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Tsawwassen, BC Posts: 376	The EF50/1.8 is not a shoddy lens by any optical measure. It's a derivative of the Zeiss Biotar and is therefore very sharp despite having a simple optical scheme. Downsides would be ugly bokeh, but I get that sometimes with the 50/1.7 so I'm guessing that the Pentax and Canon lenses are similar but not identical. Still, back on topic.. it's surprises me that Pentax HAVE a sharp lens, potential buyers and wouldn't need to spend much on R&D... I'm not sure why they don't bring the 1.7 back at the killer $100 price point.

11-14-2010, 02:42 PM	#13
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by keyser Downsides would be ugly bokeh, but I get that sometimes with the 50/1.7 Yes, I believe the 50 1.7 would be a direct replacement for the 1.8 in canon land. You can find the F 1.7 for 100 ish on the used market. It might be a little odd that they don't make it anymore, but they likely axed it because it was not selling. 50mm is just not a user-friendly focal length for beginners who don't want to pay for the 50 1.4... so they kept the 1.4 I'm guessing.

11-14-2010, 06:32 PM	#14
Steinback Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: GTA, ON, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,673	Back when both were available new, the FA 50mm f/1.7 still went for quite a bit more than the Canon 50 f/1.8. I've got a B&H ad from 1999 that lists the Canon lens at $75 (grey market)/ $85 USA, vs. $140 for the Pentax 50. The prices listed from other dealers are in the same range.

11-14-2010, 07:53 PM	#15
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by JustShane I don't mind the crop factor. It's FAR from useless. (IMO.) Nikon and Sony also have a cheapy 50, so I'm a bit shocked Pentax didn't throw one in there as well... Granted, manual focus opens me up to sub-$100 pricing anyway. (And truth be told, the AF ability on that Canon lens was quite pathetic. My best shots were usually Manual anyway.) Hmm. Decisions. :ugh: Nikon, Canon and Sony all have 135 format cameras where the 50 is a standard lens.