[bdparker]

Question? Has anyone done a review/comparison of the Pentax SMC M or A 50mm f(1.2 -> 2.0)

I'm looking around for one or the other, which is the best M and with is the best A. I know this may come down individual manufacturing and there current condition, but in terms of IQ and Bokeh? not value for money or cheapest.

I don't what you think is good cause you got a bargain. I want psychical, photographically comparison.

[Adam]

Questions don't go in the article section. Moved

[RioRico]

The K (M-mount) and A 50/1.2 are acknowledged as the best Pentax Fifties, among the best Fifties from any makers. A-line lenses often demand higher prices because of the aperture automation, although many feel that M-line lenses are better built, and K-line lnses are even sturdier. Beyond that, the 50/1.2, 50/1.4, 50/1.7 and 50/2 lenses in M and A mounts can't really be compared -- they are different optics for different purposes. See the reviews to get an idea of what's involved. Cheers!

[DSims]

For Bokeh and wide-open or near wide-open IQ nothing will beat the A50/1.2 - it wins hands down. That's why it commands the price it does. Just look at the PPG and see for yourself:

PENTAX : Select a PENTAX interchangeable lens camera or a lens model

Personally I prefer the bokeh and overall look from the K50/1.2, which is what I got instead. I realize that some of what I like in the K50/1.2's image quality can technically be labeled as flaws, but I still like the softer look of the bokeh over the A50/1.2.

I think you can actually see the differences on the PPG without needing to do any direct head-to-head testing.

In other words, the best A 50 is the A50/1.2, and the best M is not really an M but the SMC "K" 50/1.2. Amongst all Pentax "50s" the best ones are those two plus the FA43 and the DA*55. Each is uniquely different, however, so it depends on one's needs. The F50/1.4 is a good ways behind those four, but overall (by a small margin) it's the best of the rest.



I hope this last part helps answer your question, even though it may not be a direct answer:

I don't feel the need to do or read any head-to-head testing at this point. I've owned the K50/1.2, F50/1.4, M50/1.4, FA50/1.7, F50/1.7, and A50/1.7. Not a single one was a bad lens, or even mediocre. They were all good. But I've only kept the K50/1.2 and A50/1.7, because I like them better.

In reality my purchase of the FA43 made all but the K50/1.2 obsolete. However, I still love the A50/1.7 and it's such a good value I couldn't see selling it.

---

Last edited by DSims; 05-19-2012 at 11:40 PM.

[Philoslothical]

I've owned the K50/1.2, F50/1.4, M50/1.4, FA50/1.7, F50/1.7, and A50/1.7.

Did you notice any objective difference (besides AF and auto aperture) between the F 50/1.4 and the M 50/1.4? I'm looking to pick up a faster 50mm and f./1.4 is the fastest within reach in terms of price.

[RioRico]

Did you notice any objective difference (besides AF and auto aperture) between the F 50/1.4 and the M 50/1.4?

For a wider generational span: I have the SuperTak and FA 50/1.4. The images produced are nearly indistinguishable. Their use is quite different; their results aren't.

[gofour3]

Did you notice any objective difference (besides AF and auto aperture) between the F 50/1.4 and the M 50/1.4? I'm looking to pick up a faster 50mm and f./1.4 is the fastest within reach in terms of price.

Don't forget to include the K50/1.4.

Phil.