[robbiec]

My lens list is the following:

FA31 f/1.8
K35 f/3.5 - Sold
FA43 f/1.9
FA50 f/1.7 - Sold
A 50 f/1.2
K55 f/1.8 - Sold
FA77 f/1.8



and soon (as in next week sometime) I'll be adding a Carl Zeiss T* 50 f/2 Makro-Planar ZK

Would you keep all or trim down the collection?
FA Limiteds are safe, I adore them. So is the A50 f/1.2 as it is a crazy lens, capable of magic.
The two Ks are fine capable optics, but do they deserve to be in the same bag? Same question with the FA50 f/1.7 (surprisingly sharp but cheap)
What would you do?

---

Last edited by robbiec; 06-08-2013 at 06:42 AM.

[LaurenOE]

I say keep them all.
Having said that, there are some stellar lenses in other focal lengths that could use some love too!

[Na Horuk]

Mmmh, thats a mighty fine collection there. If I had it, I would have to be very hard pressed to part with it

Edit: Urm, I mean, you should really sell them all. At absurdly low prices. ..to other forum members

[kenafein]

They're all great lenses, but you might as well give some newbie a shot at those K lenses and pick up something longer or wider for yourself. I do think having a 1.2 lens around, for the abstract stuff, is a good idea.

[kcmadr]

Beauts!

If I found myself in your situation I would pass the K55 f1.8 and the FA50 f1.7 to new owners.
The K35 f3.5 is excellent for landscapes I hear. I haven't tried mine yet.
The A50 f1.2 is another specialty lens.

That leaves three in the bag - FA31, FA43, and FA77. I'd look at adding the DA 15mm f4 Limited if have a need for a wider prime.

[scratchpaddy]

I dunno. Is there a reason to have four nifty fifties? Whenever I see another 50 that catches my eye, I say NO, I already have the A 50 f/1.2. (and a macro... and a Helios... and pancake... ) How could you possibly top that?

Edit:

If I found myself in your situation I would pass the K55 f1.8 and the FA50 f1.7 to new owners.

What he said.

[robbiec]

Thinking something along those lines. Sell the K's and the FA50 and put the proceeds towards a Zeiss T* Distagon 25 f/2.8 :-)

Have a Helios somewhere in the house as well :-P More of a curiosity than anything else.

[boriscleto]

I dunno. Is there a reason to have four nifty fifties? Whenever I see another 50 that catches my eye, I say NO, I already have the A 50 f/1.2. (and a macro... and a Helios... and pancake... ) How could you possibly top that?

Edit:

What he said.

There is always room for more 50s. Just ask @Digitalis.

[lytrytyr]

The only reason to keep the FA 50/1.7
would be to have AF at that focal length,
but the FA 43 essentially does that for you.

The MF 50-somethings, on the other hand,
well they're all different, and all great lenses.
(I don't have the K55/1.8, but do have its M42 ancestor.)

Whatever, don't pass up the chance of a ZK 25/2.8.

[Kerrowdown]

I'd ditch the K's and the FA50 F1.7, just leaving you a great outfit of 31, 43, 50 and 77.

[robbiec]

The only reason to keep the FA 50/1.7
would be to have AF at that focal length,
but the FA 43 essentially does that for you.

Agree and it has developed a certain aura of 'can do' for me. Anytime I put it on it just delivers, no fuss (Edit: talking about the 43)

The MF 50-somethings, on the other hand,
well they're all different, and all great lenses.
(I don't have the K55/1.8, but do have its M42 ancestor.)

I have described the K55 f/1.8 as a very underrated and great value lens for a long time now, the A50 f/1.2 stomps all over the f/1.7s and f/1.4s IMO once you figure it out and practice focusing at wider than f/2.0

Whatever, don't pass up the chance of a ZK 25/2.8.

Interesting, care to expand? Reading the various reviews on the interweb it comes across as either ho hum, flawed and viewed as the runt of the current Zeiss lineup. I'm have a suspicion that it is another specialty lens in that you have to get up close and personal with the subject to reveal it charms but which can also behave as a moderately good landscape wide angle. Will be fun finding out.

[robbiec]

There is always room for more 50s. Just ask @Digitalis.

There are 50s and then there are 50s
A50 f/1.2 and the Makro-Planar are uber 50s

[robbiec]

They're all great lenses, but you might as well give some newbie a shot at those K lenses and pick up something longer or wider for yourself. I do think having a 1.2 lens around, for the abstract stuff, is a good idea.

Agree, contemplating parting with the K35 f/3.5 hurts though...

[kcmadr]

Agree, contemplating parting with the K35 f/3.5 hurts though...

Then don't.

It's not like you can nip down to the corner store and pick up another one when you realise you made a mistake selling it.

It's not going to make or break you financially either.

[lytrytyr]

the A50 f/1.2 stomps all over the f/1.7s and f/1.4s IMO once you figure it out and practice focusing at wider than f/2.0

With focus peaking, that has now become a whole lot easier.
The A50/1.2 and K-01 is a marriage made in heaven,
as the weak AA filter and PRIME M processing
bring out the best in the lens.

Interesting, care to expand? Reading the various reviews on the interweb it comes across as either ho hum, flawed and viewed as the runt of the current Zeiss lineup.

The 25/2 has now replaced it, but is not available in K-mount or M42.
Even the 25/2.8 is now hard to find.

I'm have a suspicion that it is another specialty lens in that you have to get up close and personal with the subject to reveal it charms but which can also behave as a moderately good landscape wide angle. Will be fun finding out.

Ultimately, it's a very versatile lens, at least on APS-C.

The big issue that people complain about is the field curvature.
But by composing carefully, you can make that work for you,
by having the center subject further away than any edge subjects
that you want to keep in focus.

Captain Scheimpflug cooperates with Professor Petzval.