Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Should PENTAX make a f/1.0 or faster lens?
Yes 5340.15%
No 7959.85%
Voters: 132. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-15-2011, 03:26 PM   #91
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,545
I'd buy both the DA* 24mm WR f/2 and the DA* 50mm f/1.0! Those would both be super-sonic lenses. And if the price was kept under $750 for both of them (respectively), I bet they'd sell really well.

06-15-2011, 03:44 PM   #92
Moderator PEG Judges
Kerrowdown's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Highlands of Scotland.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 30,701
I just love fast lenses and I'm lucky enough to already own one or two.

For me working much of the time in very low light conditions, faster lenses let me see in the viewfinder what I'm actually looking at, so for me, bring it on with more.
06-15-2011, 04:21 PM   #93
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well then thinking of wich lenses make people to buy a first Pentax dslr or to stay with the brand or to come back to it or to buy a second camerabody to work with that gear? Is there this 50mm/f1.0 the best choice for? Or would it be more attractive to develop DFA*200mm/f4 Macro? Completing the magical threesome FA-series with something on the wide-angle and something on the tele-site? Or offering a good long telelens for wildlifephotography?

I'm not going tho run on the Full Frame since this is a lenstopic and I'm not going to look for a FF at the time!
I wasn't pushing the 1.0 if you look back. The 50/1.2 is obviously viable in the market. Pentax proved that by selling a batch of them in Tokyo and Hong Kong last year. Given the DA* 200/2.8, I think an f4 would be unattractive at that focal length and the DA* 300/4 is the minimum for a lot of wildlife including birds. Anything above that gets real expensive fast. Plus, even using a 300 tele takes practice. Want to frustrate a newb, send them out with an expensive, heavy long lens without developing the skill.
06-15-2011, 04:26 PM   #94
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by NaClH2O Quote
Just because a lens is popular doesn't mean that it's "plasti-crap". One of the very big holes in the Pentax lens line up is a decent WR wide angle prime. The shortest WR prime is now the DA* 55mm F/1.4. It would be really nice to have something wider in the WR lineup, either a DA* prime like the 55mm or just a reasonably fast (F/2.0, F/2.5 or even F/2.8) wide angle, either 24mm or even 28mm WR. That particular lens is easily the most popular of all the lenses in Ron H's poll, clicky pulling more than 10 percentage points higher than the 50mm F/1.0. That superfast lens is polling in the middle of the pack with only (as of right now) a fraction over 15%.
My point is that I would rather, and according to the poll, most other people would rather see a moderately fast wide angle WR than a super fast 50.

NaCl(it's a hole that should be filled)H2O
There are no WR primes that do not hold the DA* designation at present. That's why I suggested recently a DA* 20/1.4 and DA* 35/1.4 based off the M prototypes. They would have a housing like the 55/1.4 with WR and optics from those prototypes with more current glass for the special elements along with Ghostless Coating and SP. After that they could re-release the A* 85mm as a DA* 85mm (skipping over the FA* 85.) I have stated in another thread that I'm not against a revised version of the F 28/2.8 (not the FA version) but maybe get it to 2.4 or 2.2. Lastly, where have you ever seen my pushing a 1.0? You haven't because I haven't.

06-15-2011, 04:30 PM   #95
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
personally, 1.2 is enough for me, but if they could offer an f1.0 for the same amount, why should I complain?
06-15-2011, 04:37 PM   #96
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
personally, 1.2 is enough for me, but if they could offer an f1.0 for the same amount, why should I complain?
I wouldn't complain, but go over to Steve Gandy's site and look at the various Nocti lenses in the f1.1, 1.0 and o.95 area and check the prices and those are mf. That extra .2 and auto focus would seriously effect the price.

Last edited by Blue; 06-15-2011 at 04:43 PM.
06-16-2011, 09:25 AM   #97
mer
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Greece
Posts: 237
Not sure if I read every single comment....


BUT YOU GUYS MISSING THE POINT !!!!


APS-C SUX with fast glass as it is nowadays, meaning with the lens selection we get.

My 55/1.2 is like a 85/1.8 lens on APS-C . A lens I could afford for much less and is MUCH less exotic.

Why pay for a 50/1.0 DA Pentax lens ( which would be 85~mm/f1.4 *guesstimate* eq . on Full APS.. ?????? )

Id rather buy a Nikon D700+Samyang 85/1.4 and trust me the results will be much MUCH MUCH better. You can do your own tests if you dont believe me, your A50/1.2 on APS-C is a waste of money! Also APS-C sensors are more demanding and using a lens such as A50/1.2 is a waste of glass, only the centre is used and is "enlarged" compared to FF so you demand more resolution from the VERY soft *ok not so soft but defintitely you wouldnt call it sharp* 1.2 lens to begin with.....

To have the same image FF+50/1.0 we would need something like a 37/0.7 . A lens pentax will never make. SOOOO if you are a shallow dof whore look elsewhere=AKA FF

Also the perspective of the 50mm on full frame is very natural to me ... I dont want to loose that field of view ... and pentax will never make 37/0.7 lens NOR ANYONE DOES !

Plus using my full frame lenses on APS-C I lose all the character of the lens * eg swirly bokeh *

All in all current ultra-fast glasses is a waste in the APS-C land and you would need ULTRA ULTRA fast lenses in the APS-C land to match the DOF of the FF eq.

Why do you think I still shoot film with my F1.2......
06-16-2011, 09:43 AM   #98
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by mer Quote
Not sure if I read every single comment....


BUT YOU GUYS MISSING THE POINT !!!!


APS-C SUX with fast glass as it is nowadays, meaning with the lens selection we get.

My 55/1.2 is like a 85/1.8 lens on APS-C . A lens I could afford for much less and is MUCH less exotic.

Why pay for a 50/1.0 DA Pentax lens ( which would be 85~mm/f1.4 *guesstimate* eq . on Full APS.. ?????? )

Id rather buy a Nikon D700+Samyang 85/1.4 and trust me the results will be much MUCH MUCH better. You can do your own tests if you dont believe me, your A50/1.2 on APS-C is a waste of money! Also APS-C sensors are more demanding and using a lens such as A50/1.2 is a waste of glass, only the centre is used and is "enlarged" compared to FF so you demand more resolution from the VERY soft *ok not so soft but defintitely you wouldnt call it sharp* 1.2 lens to begin with.....

To have the same image FF+50/1.0 we would need something like a 37/0.7 . A lens pentax will never make. SOOOO if you are a shallow dof whore look elsewhere=AKA FF

Also the perspective of the 50mm on full frame is very natural to me ... I dont want to loose that field of view ... and pentax will never make 37/0.7 lens NOR ANYONE DOES !

Plus using my full frame lenses on APS-C I lose all the character of the lens * eg swirly bokeh *

All in all current ultra-fast glasses is a waste in the APS-C land and you would need ULTRA ULTRA fast lenses in the APS-C land to match the DOF of the FF eq.

Why do you think I still shoot film with my F1.2......
Actually, the focal length and aperture DO NOT CHANGE. The only difference that changes is that the A 50/1.2 on 100 ASA film and 100 iso aps-c sensor, is the field of view. Sure, it effects the depth of field because of the sensor/film area change. Fast is still fast.

Edit: BTW, I just get out the MZ-3, FA 77/1.8 and Porta 160nc. The full frame digital argument is for other threads, there have been many.

06-16-2011, 11:41 AM   #99
mer
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Greece
Posts: 237
Who said the focal length and the aperture change ? It was not a FF vs APS-C argument .... I don't know if you understood ANYTHING really from my post ?

eq. = equivalent....

To get the same picture APS-C+50/1.0 you need something like FF+85/1.4~ . YOU WILL GET the same picture same DOF same FOV .

or APS-C+50/1.2 = FF+85/1.7~

....

I said that if you care about thin DOF, if pentax makes a 50/1.0 for 1000 then I can buy a D700+Samyang and get better sharpness and exactly the same picture,same picture meaning fov and dof.

And if you care about speed , then again it still makes sense to buy a d700+samyang85/1.4 and push the iso one stop. It will still take SUPERIOR pictures compared to any APS-C with a 50/1.0...

So if you really understood what I was saying is that NO , pentax shouldnt make a superfast lens for their APS-C cameras.
06-16-2011, 12:27 PM   #100
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by mer Quote
Who said the focal length and the aperture change ? It was not a FF vs APS-C argument .... I don't know if you understood ANYTHING really from my post ?

eq. = equivalent....

To get the same picture APS-C+50/1.0 you need something like FF+85/1.4~ . YOU WILL GET the same picture same DOF same FOV .

or APS-C+50/1.2 = FF+85/1.7~

....

I said that if you care about thin DOF, if pentax makes a 50/1.0 for 1000 then I can buy a D700+Samyang and get better sharpness and exactly the same picture,same picture meaning fov and dof.

And if you care about speed , then again it still makes sense to buy a d700+samyang85/1.4 and push the iso one stop. It will still take SUPERIOR pictures compared to any APS-C with a 50/1.0...

So if you really understood what I was saying is that NO , pentax shouldnt make a superfast lens for their APS-C cameras.
You keep talking about a full frame Nikon, so yes you made it a full frame aps-c discussion. Lastly, I haven't made an argument for 1.0 glass, just some 1.4 glass and the 50/1.2.

The A 50/1.2 is NOT f1.7 on APS-c. It is f1.2 with different field of view. The maximum f of a lens is determined by the focal length divided by the aperture of the glass.
06-17-2011, 06:01 AM   #101
mer
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Greece
Posts: 237
jeezus this guy doesnt understand a thing...

Where did I say the A50/1.2 is 1.7 on APS-C ????? Do you know what equivalent means ? what I said is you need a 85/1.7~ lens to achieve EXACTLY the same image (dof+fov)

When thinking about if pentax should make a superfast lens then you have to take account all the variables...

Its like saying should fiat (example) make a superfast car that runs on water for 50000000 ? Well if you can buy a ferrari that runs on diesel that will ultimately cost you less and run faster why the hell should you buy the fiat ( dont answer about enviroment pls lol ) .... If ferrari didnt built that car then of course we would love the fiat car but when you can get a ferrari for less then its only fiat fanboyism that would make you want that car.

So when you ask yourself if pentax should make a superfast lens you have to understand what this system produces COMPARED to other systems.... If you don't take into account these factors you are just a pentax fanboy that wants superfast lenses for their system no matter how good the results will be. For me those are simply idiots and I am not calling you one.

A good photographer doesnt care if its called nikon canon or pentax. He just wants to achieve certain results.... And when we are prepared to pay that amount of money we want the best results. Why should I buy a pentax APS-C+50/1.0 when I can get a FF+85/1.4 and get MUCH better results EVERY SINGLE TIME . There is NOTHING NOTHING better for the APS-C+50/1.0 compared to FF+85/1.4 ( unless the 50/1.0 is much better than a nocti, which would cost lots of money). Yes the 50/1.0 is still a faster lens but I can just bump the iso on the FF and get MUCH better results *i will get exactly the same fov and dof but much better sharpness

So ignoring the FF vs APS-C thing is just dumb. You HAVE to make a comparison if you want to know if pentax should make a superfast lens or not .... unless you are a pentax fanboy.

What I basically say is :

Pentax shouldn't make a 50/1.0 or 50/1.2 because it will cost more and give worse results... There isn't a single reason except fanboyism if pentax should make a superfast 50 lens... Unless they can make a very good and cheap one...
06-17-2011, 07:57 AM   #102
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by mer Quote
jeezus this guy doesnt understand a thing...

Where did I say the A50/1.2 is 1.7 on APS-C ????? Do you know what equivalent means ? what I said is you need a 85/1.7~ lens to achieve EXACTLY the same image (dof+fov)

When thinking about if pentax should make a superfast lens then you have to take account all the variables...

Its like saying should fiat (example) make a superfast car that runs on water for 50000000 ? Well if you can buy a ferrari that runs on diesel that will ultimately cost you less and run faster why the hell should you buy the fiat ( dont answer about enviroment pls lol ) .... If ferrari didnt built that car then of course we would love the fiat car but when you can get a ferrari for less then its only fiat fanboyism that would make you want that car.

So when you ask yourself if pentax should make a superfast lens you have to understand what this system produces COMPARED to other systems.... If you don't take into account these factors you are just a pentax fanboy that wants superfast lenses for their system no matter how good the results will be. For me those are simply idiots and I am not calling you one.

A good photographer doesnt care if its called nikon canon or pentax. He just wants to achieve certain results.... And when we are prepared to pay that amount of money we want the best results. Why should I buy a pentax APS-C+50/1.0 when I can get a FF+85/1.4 and get MUCH better results EVERY SINGLE TIME . There is NOTHING NOTHING better for the APS-C+50/1.0 compared to FF+85/1.4 ( unless the 50/1.0 is much better than a nocti, which would cost lots of money). Yes the 50/1.0 is still a faster lens but I can just bump the iso on the FF and get MUCH better results *i will get exactly the same fov and dof but much better sharpness

So ignoring the FF vs APS-C thing is just dumb. You HAVE to make a comparison if you want to know if pentax should make a superfast lens or not .... unless you are a pentax fanboy.

What I basically say is :

Pentax shouldn't make a 50/1.0 or 50/1.2 because it will cost more and give worse results... There isn't a single reason except fanboyism if pentax should make a superfast 50 lens... Unless they can make a very good and cheap one...
You don't have to talk by me, I am right here. We get the fov and dof is different on the full frame and aps-c formats. It doesn't have anything to do with fanboyism or in your case egocentrism. While I agree they don't need to develop anything to 1.0, they already have designs in the vault to 1.2 and 1.4 and there is no point in walking away from them. I could care less about Fiat and Ferrari although I would be interested in a Porsche Cayenne. Back to the point, there is more than just the dof, with a lens. A slow lens isn't going to do anything to make the dof more shallow. Aperture and ISO effect speed for low light and/or action.

Last edited by Blue; 06-17-2011 at 08:03 AM.
06-17-2011, 11:04 AM   #103
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,236
Is there anyone here with enough technical knowledge or research to explain the costs and technical hurdles involved in fast lenses?

For example, an f0.95, f1.2, and f1.4 in say 35mm... What makes them cost so much?
f-number = focal length / diameter of the entrance pupil.

35mm / 30mm = Around a f1.2 lens. A 30mm diameter front lens element doesn't really sound large. Is it really the cost of the glass or something else?

I started skimming through tutorials online about how to make your own lenses and one mentioned a single element lens that was around f0.95 that was just basically a cheap piece of glass placed in front of the lens mount. With some correction the results looks pretty decent. Well technically it was stopped down to f4 with a piece of cardboard.

It seems like a fascinating subject and I'd like to try my luck at it someday. I wonder what computer software the professionals use in the design process?
06-17-2011, 01:32 PM   #104
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,557
QuoteOriginally posted by sjwaldron Quote
Is there anyone here with enough technical knowledge or research to explain the costs and technical hurdles involved in fast lenses?
Well not my knowledge, but I share part of a conversation I had over this matter.

QuoteOriginally posted by bdery:
Focal length / max aperture gives you the diameter of the aperture stop, which is usually the smallest diameter in the optical assembly of the lens. NOT the front element. Try it and you will see the calculation does not hold with the front element.
So having more light will cost more, but no idea to what extend, since my question was more directed towards big frontglass for fast telelenses.
06-17-2011, 02:17 PM   #105
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,236
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well not my knowledge, but I share part of a conversation I had over this matter.

So having more light will cost more, but no idea to what extend, since my question was more directed towards big frontglass for fast telelenses.
Yeah, I was thinking that would be the case. Using my example of a 35mm f1.2 prime I would guess the front element would need to be a lot bigger than the calculation suggests (meaning the correction and focusing elements inside would be the ones that are 30mm or larger in diameter) and explains why 35mm f1.4 lenses are pretty substantial pieces of glass.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, lens, pentax, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Example of AF, DR, high ISO and high shutter speed on K-5 benisona Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 11-30-2010 02:25 PM
People High Speed tootall Post Your Photos! 5 03-04-2010 06:36 AM
High speed fps - Pentax K100D IsaacSteiner Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 05-12-2009 12:00 PM
Make work a 50mm lens with my k100d super ? loopingz Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 12-16-2008 12:17 PM
Sigma EF 530 Super and high-speed sync mattdm Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 5 02-11-2008 05:52 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:40 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top