[paperbag846]

The DA 40 is sharper that the FA50 isn't it?

The DA 40 is sharper than the FA 50 at f2.8, but they are pretty equal after that.

DA 40 is better with corner sharpness, but I think the FA 50 actually wins in peak sharpness.

[MSM]

Yeah, I am sorry I wasn't more clear. I new you were looking at the non macro version. I was just considering the FOV of the respective lenses. My main point was that although not ideal for portraits the wider FOV will serve you well as an all around walk around lens. You still have the 50 for portraits. From the most practical viewpoint, if you buy the FA 50, then at the end of the day you will have two 50 mm lenses and one is by default obsolete. At this point you should expand your photographic range and not duplicate it especially with a limited budget. Just my thoughts...

[s.randy]

Thanks Irishwhite! I really appreciated your in depth reply; I found it very helpful.

I think I might just draw from a hat to choose between the DA 40 and the FA 50

[s.randy]

The DA 40 is sharper than the FA 50 at f2.8, but they are pretty equal after that.

DA 40 is better with corner sharpness, but I think the FA 50 actually wins in peak sharpness.

Oh I see hmm that leaves me with some more to think about.

Yeah, I am sorry I wasn't more clear. I new you were looking at the non macro version. I was just considering the FOV of the respective lenses. My main point was that although not ideal for portraits the wider FOV will serve you well as an all around walk around lens. You still have the 50 for portraits. From the most practical viewpoint, if you buy the FA 50, then at the end of the day you will have two 50 mm lenses and one is by default obsolete. At this point you should expand your photographic range and not duplicate it especially with a limited budget. Just my thoughts...

Very good points and takes me back to my original thoughts at the beginning of this post. However I know I like to 50 FL and I already have a 50 but I get super mad when I miss focus with it and I have to scrap a good photo. So that brings me back to why I'm concerned with which lens will give me the best sharpness, bokeh, build quality and work well for portraits and I'm not so worried about FL. If I didn't suck at focusing that M 50 so much I think the choice would be way easier

Thanks again for all the feed back this has been an awesome and informative thread...at least for me

[paperbag846]

Oh I see hmm that leaves me with some more to think about.



Very good points and takes me back to my original thoughts at the beginning of this post. However I know I like to 50 FL and I already have a 50 but I get super mad when I miss focus with it and I have to scrap a good photo. So that brings me back to why I'm concerned with which lens will give me the best sharpness, bokeh, build quality and work well for portraits and I'm not so worried about FL. If I didn't suck at focusing that M 50 so much I think the choice would be way easier

Thanks again for all the feed back this has been an awesome and informative thread...at least for me

If you like the 50, but just hate manual focus, sell the M 50 1.7 for whatever you paid for it.

Sharpness differences between these lenses are unimportant really. The FA 50 is only soft at 1.4. The difference is field of view (the 40 is slightly more flexible, and worse for traditional portraits), DOF (the 40 can do low DOF if you get fairly close, and the bokeh is smooth, but it's just not the same as f2). The 50 and 40 are crazy sharp. The 50 is a larger lens (not that big though) and requires a good hood, which makes it substantially larger than the 40. The 40's colour and contrast are so good they are actually enhancements of the real world... while the 50 is very good, but more faithful. Most of those differences aren't so important with post-processing.

The 50 and 40 are both insanely good for the price. The 50 gives you more flexibility with DOF, and the 40 gives you more flexibility with composition.

In the end though, it's not an easy choice. I don't find the 50 too hard to work with (I use my 55 inside all the time), but if you pefer a wider FOV, the 40 is really nice. I also think the 40 focuses faster too.

For portraits though, there is no question in my mind - get the 50 (used try to find it for 250, it can be done!) Sell the M 50 1.7 as well.

[s.randy]

If you like the 50, but just hate manual focus, sell the M 50 1.7 for whatever you paid for it.

Sharpness differences between these lenses are unimportant really. The FA 50 is only soft at 1.4. The difference is field of view (the 40 is slightly more flexible, and worse for traditional portraits), DOF (the 40 can do low DOF if you get fairly close, and the bokeh is smooth, but it's just not the same as f2). The 50 and 40 are crazy sharp. The 50 is a larger lens (not that big though) and requires a good hood, which makes it substantially larger than the 40. The 40's colour and contrast are so good they are actually enhancements of the real world... while the 50 is very good, but more faithful. Most of those differences aren't so important with post-processing.

The 50 and 40 are both insanely good for the price. The 50 gives you more flexibility with DOF, and the 40 gives you more flexibility with composition.

In the end though, it's not an easy choice. I don't find the 50 too hard to work with (I use my 55 inside all the time), but if you pefer a wider FOV, the 40 is really nice. I also think the 40 focuses faster too.

For portraits though, there is no question in my mind - get the 50 (used try to find it for 250, it can be done!) Sell the M 50 1.7 as well.

The reviews on the FA50 are as consistently good as the DA40 but the people that own them seem to really back them up. The AF speed seems to be one of the lower points of the FA50 were the DA40 seems to be really fast AF. I really wish I could just try both but I don't know anyone with Pentax and all the shops are nothing bit Canon and Nikon.

I don't think I want to sell the M50 even if I get the FA50 just because its a classic and I only paid 35 bucks for it.

[paperbag846]

The reviews on the FA50 are as consistently good as the DA40 but the people that own them seem to really back them up. The AF speed seems to be one of the lower points of the FA50 were the DA40 seems to be really fast AF. I really wish I could just try both but I don't know anyone with Pentax and all the shops are nothing bit Canon and Nikon.

I don't think I want to sell the M50 even if I get the FA50 just because its a classic and I only paid 35 bucks for it.

AF differences are only going to matter for action, for portraits the speed won't make a difference (ps I at one time owned the 50).

[Metalwizards]

The reviews on the FA50 are as consistently good as the DA40 but the people that own them seem to really back them up. The AF speed seems to be one of the lower points of the FA50 were the DA40 seems to be really fast AF. I really wish I could just try both but I don't know anyone with Pentax and all the shops are nothing bit Canon and Nikon.

I don't think I want to sell the M50 even if I get the FA50 just because its a classic and I only paid 35 bucks for it.

You can get one from Adorama, try it for 2 weeks, and if you don't like it return it and get the other. Just be real careful with* it.

[s.randy]

AF differences are only going to matter for action, for portraits the speed won't make a difference (ps I at one time owned the 50).

Thanks for the help! Its been instrumental!

[kenyee]

I really wish I could just try both but I don't know anyone with Pentax and all the shops are nothing bit Canon and Nikon.

You're in Seattle and you can't stop by Glazer's?
They should carry Pentax IIRC...
p.s., and FWIW, I can't tell the different in bokeh between the FA50 and FA43. The FA43 is very slightly contrastier to me, but that's about it. I like the slightly wider field of view which is why I'm selling the FA50 in the marketplace...
Once you stop down the FA50, it's ridiculously sharp like most primes...

[s.randy]

You're in Seattle and you can't stop by Glazer's?
They should carry Pentax IIRC...
p.s., and FWIW, I can't tell the different in bokeh between the FA50 and FA43. The FA43 is very slightly contrastier to me, but that's about it. I like the slightly wider field of view which is why I'm selling the FA50 in the marketplace...
Once you stop down the FA50, it's ridiculously sharp like most primes...

Yeah I need to make it over to Glazer's I think thats my only hope for having Pentax in stock.

[irishwhite]

You can always try renting the lenses. not a bad price for a "try before you buy" for the minimum of 4 days. Don't know much about the company as I just saw them mentioned yesterday.

CameraLensRentals.com - Pentax 50mm f/1.4 smcP-FA Lens Rental

Looks like they've only got the 50 to rent though :-(

[s.randy]

You can always try renting the lenses. not a bad price for a "try before you buy" for the minimum of 4 days. Don't know much about the company as I just saw them mentioned yesterday.

CameraLensRentals.com - Pentax 50mm f/1.4 smcP-FA Lens Rental

Looks like they've only got the 50 to rent though :-(

Interesting!

[s.randy]

Damn the DA 40 f2.8 just jumped $100 on Amazon right in front of my face!

[s.randy]

I think I'll just get that 35 2.4 and some YN-560s to strobe with since the DA40 price went up