[Gooshin]

How about testing these lenses on Marketplace, $200 each, sit back see which one gets snapped up first. That's the truest sign of the better lens

More seriously, I was able to pick out the 43's rendering on the red bear. This bear was a minor item in the whole pic so imagine when it's a larger part it does make a difference overall.

I don't like picking out single pics, but I'm prepared to have this bet with you anytime: give me two fair collections of 10 pics each, one from 43 and one from your $5 lens, I will pick which collection is which. Right I win one wrong I pay you two ... interested??

deal time to fire up the creativity engine.

[Kguru]

deal time to fire up the creativity engine.

Hell .... you've got too much free time on your hands

[ankit]

deal time to fire up the creativity engine.

This should be fun...

/me goes to get popcorn and a coke

[Gooshin]

This should be fun...

/me goes to get popcorn and a coke

this WILL take awhile.... probably a week.

[rparmar]

rparmar, I have both the Fa50 f1.4 and 43 before, then I sold the 50. Wideopen 50@1.4 is slightly worst than 43@1.9, both @2 the sharpness were almost same. However, this was just some quick test when I just bought the 43, I didn't do formal tests. But in daily use, the 43mm produced more "wow" photos to me, but probably I use it more frequently. 43 is also a better FOV for indoor. Anyway, both are the very best lenses in this focal length, you won't be disappointed for getting either one IMO..

Thanks for the info. On Photozone the 50mm at f/2 had sharper borders than the 43mm and less barrel distortion. The 43 also had more CA than the 40mm. But I know that's not the whole story.

As far as focal length goes, I am sure either would work for me; I just don't see 7mm makes a whole lot of difference in that range.

[WendyB]

On digital, 50mm isn't the ideal focal lenght anymore. The 43mm has considerably more coverage. I felt the bad effects of that today when I was shooting. I nearly ruined a shot due to framing and then salvaged it in GIMP.

Just out of curiosity. Have any of you ever actually shot with a F50 1.7?

Pick a subject and range and I will fire off a few snaps for you with a 10d and 20d.

[mer]

either way people just dont want to admit that alens that got handed to me by a used camera gear clerk from the bottom of some drawer with no lens cap that i paid with the 5 dollars in change i had left over from a night full of partying could even remotely compete with a world famous 400 dollar lens. (and by remotely i mean nearly indistinguishable unless you pixel peep)

someone up top said they could clearly see a difference... yeah.. okay... i guess if you stare long and hard and read exifs you could figure out

but BETTER? or MINDBLOWING? come on...

our "art" is for the massess, people seem to forget that sometimes.

you fail to understand something though ....

Let me explain . A lens that costs 100usd is 90% good . A lens which costs 400usd is 95% . You only pay 5% more quality ( be it resolution , color rendition or whatever ) for 400% more money .

Well you see this is the case *especially* for standard lenses ( ~50mm ) . They are so easy to produce nowadays . Also , Some people pay for build quality . The pentax FA limiteds ( or expensive lenses in general ) are of very good build quality and will withstand lets say a drop on the floor .. or whatever . And in general a good quality lens will have a better manual focussing feeling . Many people shoot only manual focus so thats a big plus .

Then again , you are resizing to 500~ pixels width , so basically you are only comparing lens' rendering and not resolution . So if there are any resolution advantages for the FA limited , you are minimizing it . A professional photographer will require as good as large prints he can get . Another thing is that I hope you do understand that the FA limited outresolves resolution sensor resolution if stopped down a couple of stops , even on the K20D , right ? That also means something .

Hell , I am sure you can take a pic with a digital compact camera with the same equivalent field of view and the quality will look 95% the same as the FA limited , in a 500x500 image size . But a good professional photographer cares for resolution as much as other lens characteristics , such as Bokeh quality and knows how to distinguish these qualities . Do a bokeh test with your chinon and the limited and you will see .

If a group of people are given two photographs , same depth of field and field of view , but one with harsh bokeh and the other with smooth buttery bokeh 90% of people will not be able to distinguish the two photos ( they will look the same to their eyes ) but a good photographer is willing to pay 2x the price to get good out of focus characteristics .

Don't forget that the cost of a particular product is driven by demand and supply . That means that a company will produce 100000's of 50mm F/1.9 ( stolen optical formula too ) , so they will be able to sell it very cheap ( eg 50usd ) . For example , the 43mm limited has a new optical formula , designed by pentax engineers and well ... its a LIMITED so that means its not a mass production product . So this means it will cost more than a mass produced lens with stolen optical formula . But a good photographer is willing to pay for these qualities .

I am willing to take a 1000usd ( hell , make that 1 million ) bet that I can tell again and again a set of photographs taken with your chinon 50mm and a set from 43mm , as long as the pics are straight conversion from RAW , not PP or resized .

Of course there are many times that cheaper products offer better quality than more expensive products , or at least very similar . It really depends how much you want to spend and how much you think that difference worths .

Sorry for my bad english , have fun

[CWL]

On Photozone the 50mm at f/2 had sharper borders than the 43mm and less barrel distortion...

I only did few quick tests and judge by 100% photo view, so no numbers confirmation. Also it was a test in indoor low light, so the longer focal length of 50mm(=75mm) means harder to handheld perhaps? As for distortion, my eyes can't see any on the photos from 43mm, so I don't think it is a concern in practicle (at least for me)... 7mm difference in K10D ~ 11mm, not much, the difference probably just 1 or 2 steps back, but sometimes I don't have that room, for example, sitting in a restaurant.

[Tom M]

I'd skip both the 50mm and the 43mm and just buy the DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited for $265

[Gooshin]

I'd skip both the 50mm and the 43mm and just buy the DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited for $265

why not just go for the FA50 1.4 then, cheapest out of all of them, and the fastest! lol

[Buddha Jones]

actualy the 50 is not the Pentax 50 1.7, its the Chinon 50 f1.9 that i mentioned in another thread.

and Buddah actualy got it right, its 50, 43 then 35 but i have a feeling he snuck a peak at the exifs

ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!! I actually got it right!! Holy crap! I forgot that I posted a reply in this thread and was just poking around when I stumbled on it again just now.

I will tell you that I did not look at the EXIF, that takes too much work (yes I am that lazy). I just looked at the pictures. You had two Pentax lneses and one odd-ball. Of the three images the bottom two had the colors rendered in like manner, the top one was way off base so I deduced that one to be the Chinon. The second one seemed crisper to me around the text so I figured that was the DA Limited and that left the bottom one to be the FA.

Wow, that is pretty cool if I do say so myself.

[rparmar]

why not just go for the FA50 1.4 then, cheapest out of all of them, and the fastest! lol

Yeah. This makes sense here in Ireland.

Our weather is 2 stops slower than everyone else's!

[Tom M]

why not just go for the FA50 1.4 then, cheapest out of all of them, and the fastest! lol

Why not? Here's my reason... 50mm x 1.5 crop factor = 75mm vs. 40mm x 1.5 crop factor = 60mm

60mm falls into that sweet spot and I have found it to be more usable than the 75mm in closer quarters. For instance, I'll default to the 16-45 to use the 35-45 range when I really need the speed of the 50mm f1.4 but find it too long to work with.

FYI - I have the following 50mm lenses

S-M-C 50/f1.4
SMC-M 50/f1.7
SMC-M 50/f1.4
SMC-M 50/f2

The S-M-C 50/f1.4 is stunningly sharp and the rest are nearly so.

[heatherslightbox]

Wow, it looks like I've created a monster! When I go out to shoot on Friday, both the 50 and 43 will go with me and I'll take test shots with both and post so everybody can see and judge for themselves.

Heather

[WendyB]

Wow, it looks like I've created a monster! When I go out to shoot on Friday, both the 50 and 43 will go with me and I'll take test shots with both and post so everybody can see and judge for themselves.

Heather

Drop the 50 down one or two stops and surprise yourself. Its not at its best as POS lens as even the DA's and FA's are not.