[john mood]

Pentax has come thru again. Just recd. the lens today and shot about 30 pics of various topics from infinity to macro. This is a lens with many applications. The sharpness
is right with my DFA 100 mm WR. I heard some AF complaints about focus hunting, but with the manual capability in AF, not an issue. In macro, where I can get a
standoff position on the tripod with my 100mm, you are right on top of the subject with the 50mm. But the 50mm is also easier to hand hold due to its smaller size. Although not as small and light as my M50 macro, its capabilities are so much greater. $419 is not too much for this lens. The hood sucks, but won't use it anyway. So, should I have
gotten the DA 40mm instead for $100 less money? No. I'm sure the 40mm is great, but the 50mm's sharpness and added macro capability fit my requirements.
Maybe the 31mm is next. A few quick shots with my K-5.

Attached Images

       

[bdery]

Congratulations on your purchase.

Question : Since you have the DFA 100 WR, why go with a 50 macro also? Why not a FA50 f1,4 or a used f50 f1,7?

[elho_cid]

Having 50, 100 and 180mm macro lenses at home I do not feel like any of them is redundant. It is simply another FOV. Producing different pictures. Actually while short distance to subject may at times be a problem, other times it is actually better. Not all the critters are uncomfortable with camera up close.

And I had a FA50/1,4 but that was simply no match for DFA50 in sharpness. Sold it without regrets.

[loco]

Nice shots!

I wonder how the DFA 50 compares to the older FA 50 macro? Is one sharper than the other?

[GhoSStrider]

Question : Since you have the DFA 100 WR, why go with a 50 macro also?

I shoot reef aquariums from time to time. Since I'm limited on where and how I can shoot with those, it's really convenient to have multiple macro lenses for objects at different depths in the tank. I find the same can be said with more traditional macro photography from time to time, too.

[john mood]

I considered the 40mm, but being a macro nut....I have a very old, pristine M50 macro and a similar M50 1.4. vintage 1972. Both have great sharpness and bokeh. But they are manual and I don't do manual any more. This weekend I'll do a couple comparison shots with M50 macro and DFA 50 macro on a tripod for evaluation just for the heck of it, but already compared the M50 macro with the DFA 100 and the latter won by a margin. Thanks for the comments. Although there are never enough lenses, when you can only take one......???? Looks like the DFA 50 might win.

[cmohr]

Yes, Its a great lens, wondeful marco, and just a very sharp "50" as well.

I'm thinking of getting the same D FA 100, (not the WR) one as well.