Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-16-2012, 01:06 AM   #31
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
and then have people constantly complain that some particular piece of equipment they want isn't available. If you can't manage to take pictures with what *is* available, just what exactly does that say?
Thankfully, throughout history many photographers have taken full advantage of their equipment - in fact, well enough to know its limitations. Such people, who also care passionately about quality, have driven the improvements over the years. Without them, our camera equipment would have advanced little during the past 170 years, and we might still be looking at images comparable to a 1.3MP cell phone.

04-16-2012, 04:53 AM   #32
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 327
well fast glass can exist through MF besides, i like the FA series because of the compact size and relative quick speed

take a look at canikon and their fast primes and check out how large they are in comparison

ill say the only slightly frustrating thing is a digital FF from pentax not that it matters too much to me as im more than happy with my setup
04-16-2012, 05:20 AM   #33
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by L33tGreg Quote
Not sure what is more frustrating regarding the Pentax lens line:

1) Lack of fast glass. 5 current lenses are f/2 or faster: FA50, DA*55, FA Lmtds
2) Lack of more quality WR glass. I wish there were another normal zoom DA* option (16-50 SDM failures bother me, plus it seems to have worst quality than the 17-50s from the other brands). Even more so wish there were more wide, normal, and short tele prime WR choices.

Any of you share these feelings?
Not really, tho as a prime shooter I'd like a * or ltd quality WR lens in the 20-35 range, but I can live without it. To be truthful I find the DA* 16-50 plenty good enough, even wide open. But I would jump on a DA* 24 F/2.0 (or faster) WR like a duck on a beetle.

NaCl(as my grandpa used to say)H2O
04-16-2012, 05:23 AM   #34
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 29
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
What's most frustrating to me is having cameras that can take technically better images than anything possible over the first century of photographic history, and hundreds of lenses to choose to in a variety of focal lengths, speeds, sizes, and prices, and then have people constantly complain that some particular piece of equipment they want isn't available. If you can't manage to take pictures with what *is* available, just what exactly does that say?
Standards change all the time, otherwise death from sickness wouldn't be an issue at all and all fields would not have ever advanced. I know it makes people feel like more worthy and better photographers when they slag on people who talk about gear, but they manage to do nothing useful while distracting from the valid issues at hand.

Obviously everyone can take fine pictures with a kit lens, but most people find them lacking in some areas at times. This argument would be more valid if pentax had a complete selection of the most basic bread and butter lenses, such as a 50/1.8 equivalent. I know the 31/1.8 costs a lot of money (so it must be good), but all the pictures I've seen from it look no better, or even worse than the 35/1.8 from sony and nikon.

04-16-2012, 02:04 PM   #35
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
QuoteOriginally posted by Trysaeder Quote
Standards change all the time, otherwise death from sickness wouldn't be an issue at all and all fields would not have ever advanced. I know it makes people feel like more worthy and better photographers when they slag on people who talk about gear, but they manage to do nothing useful while distracting from the valid issues at hand.
This counter argument is similar not entirely valid as it assumes people pursuing photography as a professional and enthusiast vocation are the same in the digital era as it was in the film era. What we're seeing more now is the demand for more capable gear as a surrogate for better results, rather than reliance on better innate skill and creativity to produce better results. This I believe is a pertinent aspect of today's consumerism phenomenon.

QuoteQuote:
Obviously everyone can take fine pictures with a kit lens, but most people find them lacking in some areas at times. This argument would be more valid if pentax had a complete selection of the most basic bread and butter lenses, such as a 50/1.8 equivalent. I know the 31/1.8 costs a lot of money (so it must be good), but all the pictures I've seen from it look no better, or even worse than the 35/1.8 from sony and nikon.
This, I would disagree with. Pentax have a standard and affordable AF fast fifty that is still in production. There is a DA* fast 55 available that takes it to the next level. From experience, the FA 43 Ltd is a significant improvement on the standard fast fifties, both current and historical, in aspects other than sharpness that make all the difference where it matters in genres like portraiture (better micro contrast, crisper colour rendition and overall 3D look).

The FA 31 Ltd is similarly acclaimed, which IMO earns the legendary status of all the FA Ltd lenses. The 31 produces results for me that add life to a scene that I just haven't been able to reproduce with a kit lens, a Tamron 28-75, or FA 35. The DA 35 f/2.4 does come close, though. what a fine little budget lens it really is.
04-16-2012, 02:17 PM   #36
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
.....This, I would disagree with. Pentax have a standard and affordable AF fast fifty that is still in production. There is a DA* fast 55 available that takes it to the next level. From experience, the FA 43 Ltd is a significant improvement on the standard fast fifties, both current and historical, in aspects other than sharpness that make all the difference where it matters in genres like portraiture (better micro contrast, crisper colour rendition and overall 3D look)......
Perhaps the issue isn't that they offer lenses at those focal lengths but that they have no introductory lenses at those lengths to compete with their major competition? The FA50/1.4 is a nice lens, I own one, but it went for ~$350 new and is not at the crazy price of $495 new, and the 55 is far more expensive new, while the Nikon 50/1.8 is ~$140 and the Canon is even cheaper at ~$115. Those Nikon and Canon offerings are great ways for new photographers to branch out into primes for very little up front cost. My hope is that this is why Pentax has a 50/1.8 on the roadmap, however with the recent insane price jumps I have little hope that their new 50/1.8 will be competitive with the Nikon and Canon on price
04-16-2012, 02:27 PM   #37
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
I did mention the 35/2.4 - it was produced as a budget prime with a 50mm equivalent FOV for APS-C cameras...
It is a very impressive lens, cheap or not.
04-16-2012, 02:34 PM   #38
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
I did mention the 35/2.4 - it was produced as a budget prime with a 50mm equivalent FOV for APS-C cameras...
It is a very impressive lens, cheap or not.
I agree. And they forced it to sell for $219 and not the $169 that it was routinely going for over the past many months. But its not a fast-50, which everyone knows is THE lens for REAL photographers, nor is it price competitive with the Nikon or Canon 50/1.8s.

04-16-2012, 05:00 PM   #39
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Charleston, SC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 350
Original Poster
What I was getting at with speed, is that I love my DA*55 but its so long when used indoors with my kids that I usually resort to something shorter, and not as fast which has me either cranking up the ISO until noise starts to become obvious or using a bounced flash (a good solution) and I can't get that amazing background bokeh that I love about the DA*. Don't get my wrong, I love my DA40 (and other DA Limiteds) and my Sigma 28/1.8 is really filling the void nicely. It's just frustrated that The only fast, modern, AF Pentax prime wider than 40mm is the 31 (a ~$1000 prime). It frustrates me that Pentax is known for primes and for weather sealing, but not really both at the same time.... I'm able to accomplish great things with what I have, and I have no desire to change systems what so ever, but if I had my pie-in-the-sky, I'd want a DA* Prime between 20-35 mm and F/2 or faster. I can understand for some, what is missing is the >300 mm FLs. I can understand that too. I was just curious if anyone else felt this need or if everyone wants something different or is 100% happy with what they have (cured of LBA)....
04-16-2012, 05:10 PM   #40
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,795
QuoteOriginally posted by Trysaeder Quote
I know the 31/1.8 costs a lot of money (so it must be good), but all the pictures I've seen from it look no better, or even worse than the 35/1.8 from sony and nikon.
the FA31 is in a different league to those two lenses the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 - which I have experience with using is nowhere near as well built as the FA31, and optically it is rather soft in the corners at f/1.8. The nikkor does sharpen up in the corners by f/2.8 but by then the FA31 is sharper still.
04-16-2012, 05:19 PM   #41
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
the FA31 is in a different league to those two lenses the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 - which I have experience with using is nowhere near as well built as the FA31, and optically it is rather soft in the corners at f/1.8. The nikkor does sharpen up in the corners by f/2.8 but by then the FA31 is sharper still.

Yes, that all may be true but in all fairness the FA31 is $989 and the Nikkor F 35mm f/1.8 is $200, the DX is $350, the G is $230, the D is $125.......
04-16-2012, 05:22 PM   #42
Veteran Member
lguckert79's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 588
im doing this in a couple of postes i dont know if the price hike is effecting every store out there but i foung a few stores that still have good pricing on the better da lenses check out ritz they did not seem to get the memo about the price change so get them while you can good luck

ps they still offer the 50-135 for a better price
04-16-2012, 05:25 PM   #43
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by lguckert79 Quote
im doing this in a couple of postes i dont know if the price hike is effecting every store out there but i foung a few stores that still have good pricing on the better da lenses check out ritz they did not seem to get the memo about the price change so get them while you can good luck
Do you mean in store pricing? Because their online site has the 60-250 for $1,874.94 which is pretty much in line with everyone else now and the 50-135 is "Currently Out of Stock".
04-16-2012, 05:29 PM   #44
Veteran Member
lguckert79's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 588
oh yeah the 60-250 in the store abound my house is still 1300.00 but i didnot ask about that one so it could be changed in the system dont know but it seems they missed the memo
04-16-2012, 05:35 PM   #45
Site Supporter
jamesk8752's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Suburban Detroit, MI, USA
Posts: 226
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
I agree. And they forced it to sell for $219 and not the $169 that it was routinely going for over the past many months. But its not a fast-50, which everyone knows is THE lens for REAL photographers, nor is it price competitive with the Nikon or Canon 50/1.8s.
That might arguably have been true in the days of 35mm film, but is most certainly not true for APS-c DSLRs. The classic "normal" FOV is now obtained with a 35mm lens. BTW, note that a 35mm lens on APS-c delivers the equivalent FOV of a 53mm lens, and the so-called 50mm lens of the film era actually was about 52mm...

Regards, Jim
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!
glass, k-mount, lack, pentax lens, quality, slr lens, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax USA - VERY frustrating Docrwm Pentax DSLR Discussion 14 06-17-2011 12:02 PM
Frustrating KX battery meter, what to do? jlaubza Pentax DSLR Discussion 25 06-23-2010 05:50 PM
Very frustrating results from shooting today...need help kklabunde Photographic Technique 29 10-18-2009 10:12 AM
frustrating shutter problems with MX, ME Super h734790 Pentax Film SLR Discussion 5 08-02-2009 10:30 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:48 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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