55mm, just don't get the point?

slip · 03-17-2011, 07:59 AM

I know that the build quality is likely better with the 55mm compared to the standard 50mm. but is it worth x2 as much? is it that much more Bang for the buck?
can't see myself owning 2 lenses that are so close in focal length....

any opinions welcome!

randy

ducdao · 03-17-2011, 08:19 AM

Originally posted by slipchuck

I know that the build quality is likely better with the 55mm compared to the standard 50mm. but is it worth x2 as much? is it that much more Bang for the buck?
can't see myself owning 2 lenses that are so close in focal length....

any opinions welcome!

randy

Randy - I like the 55's better for portrait because on crop sensor it has FOV of 82.5mm which is very close to those 85mm on FF. I don't get your point of the 55mm being 2x more expensive than the 50mm. I have over 30-40 lenses from several brands for each focal length and never seen any big difference in price between them.

keyser · 03-17-2011, 08:22 AM

I assume we're specifically talking about the FA50/1.4 Vs the DA*55/1.4. These are two lenses that are only really similar on paper... if you take the same picture with both lenses, you'll be able to see the difference immediately, I'm sure!

danielausparis · 03-17-2011, 08:23 AM

Originally posted by ducdao

I have over 30-40 lenses from several brands for each focal length

Aaaaaah - thank you my friend, now i feel much better, having only 2 or 3 lenses for each focal length! I am relieved! I have only very minor, even neglectible LBA!

DogLover · 03-17-2011, 08:24 AM

Originally posted by slipchuck

I know that the build quality is likely better with the 55mm compared to the standard 50mm. but is it worth x2 as much? is it that much more Bang for the buck?
can't see myself owning 2 lenses that are so close in focal length....

any opinions welcome!

randy

No, I wouldn't say that anyone needs to own both, but I sold my FA50 to get the 55 many moons ago and have never looked back. I get much sharper results (more so than what tests would lead one to believe) and wonderful portraits. At f/2 this baby really struts her stuff and it's easy to believe that Pentax made this lens as a portrait specialist, as is the common belief. AF speed is the only negative as far as I am concerned.

ducdao · 03-17-2011, 08:25 AM

Originally posted by danielausparis

Aaaaaah - thank you my friend, now i feel much better, having only 2 or 3 lenses for each focal length! I am relieved! I have only very minor, even neglectible LBA!

I'm glad it helped. My turn to look for someone else crazier than myself to justify my LBA

Wombat · 03-17-2011, 08:31 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by danielausparis

Aaaaaah - thank you my friend, now i feel much better, having only 2 or 3 lenses for each focal length! I am relieved! I have only very minor, even neglectible LBA!

Two or three lenses for each focal length? Looxury! When I were a lad, all we 'ad were a magnifying glass from Woolworths. My broother used ter hold it in front of 't camera body and start walkin' until I told him to stop...

Wheatfield · 03-17-2011, 08:45 AM

Originally posted by slipchuck

I know that the build quality is likely better with the 55mm compared to the standard 50mm. but is it worth x2 as much? is it that much more Bang for the buck?
can't see myself owning 2 lenses that are so close in focal length....

any opinions welcome!

randy

The DA55 is substantially sharper wide open than the FA50 and stays substantially sharper until ~f/5.6. By f/8 they are pretty close.
Whether this difference is important to you or not is, of course, up to you.
Sharp wide open = $$$$$

eddie1960 · 03-17-2011, 08:49 AM

Originally posted by Wombat

Two or three lenses for each focal length? Looxury! When I were a lad, all we 'ad were a magnifying glass from Woolworths. My broother used ter hold it in front of 't camera body and start walkin' until I told him to stop...

Damn you made my day Wombat +1 rep for humour

einstrigger · 03-17-2011, 08:54 AM

I can understand just choosing one or the other, but I think having both would be redundant. Outside of a severe case of LBA, I just don't see the reason to get both when there are other lenses available (i.e. all the limiteds). If I could only choose one without worrying about a budget, it would be the DA* 55, but if I were approaching this from a value perspective, then it would be the FA 50. Outside of eyeballing the IQ, which is subjective, Photozone's tests show they aren't too different in terms of resolution.

Ubuntu_user · 03-17-2011, 08:55 AM

The DA* 55mm is a freaking sharp lens... I have a photo of one of my cats that I took at f/5.6 and I'd say it's the sharpest a photo could possibly get (no pp either).

After having my hands on one, I'd never buy an FA 50mm...

RioRico · 03-17-2011, 09:17 AM

If your application is portraits, you can skip AF and get a SuperTak 55/1.8 or 55/2 (same great optics, different aperture limit) for very little $$$ -- I've seen 55/2's NOT sell for US$15. Or for a little more there's the legendary Helios-44 58/2. Ooh, ooh, I just bought a CZJ Biotar 58/2 for US$25!! Now I need a Tak and a Noktor and...

I'm not quite as OCD as Ducdao on 55's and 50's, I only have a dozen of the one and 2.5 dozen of the other. Maybe that limits my perspective a bit, eh? And I've no f/1.2's at all. I feel so deprived. I'm depraved on account'a I'm deprived. Yes, that's my excuse. But I digress.

Yes, the the DA*55 immediately. Buy it directly from a Pentax online store, so all the proceeds go to PenHoya in their time of need. YOU need the lens; THEY need your money. Simple, eh?

Wheatfield · 03-17-2011, 09:58 AM

Originally posted by einstrigger

I can understand just choosing one or the other, but I think having both would be redundant. Outside of a severe case of LBA, I just don't see the reason to get both when there are other lenses available (i.e. all the limiteds). If I could only choose one without worrying about a budget, it would be the DA* 55, but if I were approaching this from a value perspective, then it would be the FA 50. Outside of eyeballing the IQ, which is subjective, Photozone's tests show they aren't too different in terms of resolution.

They ran their test on the relatively low resolution K10. I did a side by side test on the somewhat higher resolution K20 and found the 55 to have quite an advantage.
I suspect in this instance, Photozone's test bed ran out of resolution before the DA* lens did.
What is especially telling is that he puts the 50 slightly ahead of the 55 wide open, which is just plain wrong.

RonHendriks1966 · 03-17-2011, 10:24 AM

Well I have the DA*55 and it is a wonderfull lens. So if you can affort it you won't regret it.

GeneV · 03-17-2011, 10:29 AM

I've got several in this area as well, but I'm still kicking around a VL 58mm Nokton.

03-17-2011, 07:59 AM	#1
slip Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,535	55mm, just don't get the point? I know that the build quality is likely better with the 55mm compared to the standard 50mm. but is it worth x2 as much? is it that much more Bang for the buck? can't see myself owning 2 lenses that are so close in focal length.... any opinions welcome! randy

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Takumar 55mm/135mm/200mm, Vivitar 55mm, Pentax-F 70-210mm	sposnjak	Sold Items	4	01-11-2011 12:32 AM
For Sale - Sold: K20D - DBG Grip - DA18-55mm WR - 18-55mm DAL	VaughnA	Sold Items	7	03-13-2010 05:40 PM
DA 18-55mm AL II vs DAL 18-55mm (kit lens) vs DA 18-55mm WR	rustynail925	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	01-08-2010 02:06 PM
auto-takumar 55mm F2.2 (yes, two point two)	Gooshin	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	01-20-2009 01:56 PM

03-17-2011, 08:19 AM	#2
ducdao Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Montreal/Vermont Posts: 2,160	Originally posted by slipchuck I know that the build quality is likely better with the 55mm compared to the standard 50mm. but is it worth x2 as much? is it that much more Bang for the buck? can't see myself owning 2 lenses that are so close in focal length.... any opinions welcome! randy Randy - I like the 55's better for portrait because on crop sensor it has FOV of 82.5mm which is very close to those 85mm on FF. I don't get your point of the 55mm being 2x more expensive than the 50mm. I have over 30-40 lenses from several brands for each focal length and never seen any big difference in price between them.

03-17-2011, 08:22 AM	#3
keyser Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Tsawwassen, BC Posts: 376	I assume we're specifically talking about the FA50/1.4 Vs the DA*55/1.4. These are two lenses that are only really similar on paper... if you take the same picture with both lenses, you'll be able to see the difference immediately, I'm sure!

03-17-2011, 08:23 AM	#4
danielausparis Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 94	Originally posted by ducdao I have over 30-40 lenses from several brands for each focal length Aaaaaah - thank you my friend, now i feel much better, having only 2 or 3 lenses for each focal length! I am relieved! I have only very minor, even neglectible LBA!

03-17-2011, 08:24 AM	#5
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by slipchuck I know that the build quality is likely better with the 55mm compared to the standard 50mm. but is it worth x2 as much? is it that much more Bang for the buck? can't see myself owning 2 lenses that are so close in focal length.... any opinions welcome! randy No, I wouldn't say that anyone needs to own both, but I sold my FA50 to get the 55 many moons ago and have never looked back. I get much sharper results (more so than what tests would lead one to believe) and wonderful portraits. At f/2 this baby really struts her stuff and it's easy to believe that Pentax made this lens as a portrait specialist, as is the common belief. AF speed is the only negative as far as I am concerned.

03-17-2011, 08:25 AM	#6
ducdao Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Montreal/Vermont Posts: 2,160	Originally posted by danielausparis Aaaaaah - thank you my friend, now i feel much better, having only 2 or 3 lenses for each focal length! I am relieved! I have only very minor, even neglectible LBA! I'm glad it helped. My turn to look for someone else crazier than myself to justify my LBA

03-17-2011, 08:31 AM - 2 Likes	#7
Wombat Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 901	Originally posted by danielausparis Aaaaaah - thank you my friend, now i feel much better, having only 2 or 3 lenses for each focal length! I am relieved! I have only very minor, even neglectible LBA! Two or three lenses for each focal length? Looxury! When I were a lad, all we 'ad were a magnifying glass from Woolworths. My broother used ter hold it in front of 't camera body and start walkin' until I told him to stop...

03-17-2011, 08:45 AM	#8
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,986	Originally posted by slipchuck I know that the build quality is likely better with the 55mm compared to the standard 50mm. but is it worth x2 as much? is it that much more Bang for the buck? can't see myself owning 2 lenses that are so close in focal length.... any opinions welcome! randy The DA55 is substantially sharper wide open than the FA50 and stays substantially sharper until ~f/5.6. By f/8 they are pretty close. Whether this difference is important to you or not is, of course, up to you. Sharp wide open = $$$$$

03-17-2011, 08:49 AM	#9
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	Originally posted by Wombat Two or three lenses for each focal length? Looxury! When I were a lad, all we 'ad were a magnifying glass from Woolworths. My broother used ter hold it in front of 't camera body and start walkin' until I told him to stop... Damn you made my day Wombat +1 rep for humour

03-17-2011, 08:54 AM	#10
einstrigger Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Sacramento, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 728	I can understand just choosing one or the other, but I think having both would be redundant. Outside of a severe case of LBA, I just don't see the reason to get both when there are other lenses available (i.e. all the limiteds). If I could only choose one without worrying about a budget, it would be the DA* 55, but if I were approaching this from a value perspective, then it would be the FA 50. Outside of eyeballing the IQ, which is subjective, Photozone's tests show they aren't too different in terms of resolution.

03-17-2011, 08:55 AM	#11
Ubuntu_user Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,545	The DA* 55mm is a freaking sharp lens... I have a photo of one of my cats that I took at f/5.6 and I'd say it's the sharpest a photo could possibly get (no pp either). After having my hands on one, I'd never buy an FA 50mm...

03-17-2011, 09:17 AM	#12
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	If your application is portraits, you can skip AF and get a SuperTak 55/1.8 or 55/2 (same great optics, different aperture limit) for very little $$$ -- I've seen 55/2's NOT sell for US$15. Or for a little more there's the legendary Helios-44 58/2. Ooh, ooh, I just bought a CZJ Biotar 58/2 for US$25!! Now I need a Tak and a Noktor and... I'm not quite as OCD as Ducdao on 55's and 50's, I only have a dozen of the one and 2.5 dozen of the other. Maybe that limits my perspective a bit, eh? And I've no f/1.2's at all. I feel so deprived. I'm depraved on account'a I'm deprived. Yes, that's my excuse. But I digress. Yes, the the DA*55 immediately. Buy it directly from a Pentax online store, so all the proceeds go to PenHoya in their time of need. YOU need the lens; THEY need your money. Simple, eh?

03-17-2011, 09:58 AM	#13
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,986	Originally posted by einstrigger I can understand just choosing one or the other, but I think having both would be redundant. Outside of a severe case of LBA, I just don't see the reason to get both when there are other lenses available (i.e. all the limiteds). If I could only choose one without worrying about a budget, it would be the DA* 55, but if I were approaching this from a value perspective, then it would be the FA 50. Outside of eyeballing the IQ, which is subjective, Photozone's tests show they aren't too different in terms of resolution. They ran their test on the relatively low resolution K10. I did a side by side test on the somewhat higher resolution K20 and found the 55 to have quite an advantage. I suspect in this instance, Photozone's test bed ran out of resolution before the DA* lens did. What is especially telling is that he puts the 50 slightly ahead of the 55 wide open, which is just plain wrong.

03-17-2011, 10:24 AM	#14
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Well I have the DA*55 and it is a wonderfull lens. So if you can affort it you won't regret it.

03-17-2011, 10:29 AM	#15
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	I've got several in this area as well, but I'm still kicking around a VL 58mm Nokton.