Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-29-2008, 09:21 PM   #16
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 3
Original Poster
Very Nice photos Jay, but K20D is still long way for me...Just getting used to K100D + Tamron 18-200mm.

About the lens, there are so many suggestion & I am more confused about it.

So after reading some reviews & seeing sample photos, I have to decide between these two lenses.

1. Pentax SMCP-FA 50mm f/1.4 Lens - Good for portrait & Low light conditions. Not sure about MACRO performance.

2. Pentax SMCP-D FA 50mm f/2.8 Lens - Good MACRO Lense. Not sure about Portarait & Low light performance.

I am more inclined toward 50mm f/1.4 because of cost factor.

Regards
Sandy

03-29-2008, 09:33 PM   #17
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
QuoteOriginally posted by sandy Quote
Very Nice photos Jay, but K20D is still long way for me...Just getting used to K100D + Tamron 18-200mm.

About the lens, there are so many suggestion & I am more confused about it.

So after reading some reviews & seeing sample photos, I have to decide between these two lenses.

1. Pentax SMCP-FA 50mm f/1.4 Lens - Good for portrait & Low light conditions. Not sure about MACRO performance.

2. Pentax SMCP-D FA 50mm f/2.8 Lens - Good MACRO Lense. Not sure about Portarait & Low light performance.

I am more inclined toward 50mm f/1.4 because of cost factor.

Regards
Sandy
50/1.4 won't have true macro performance. The "portrait" capability between the two lenses is essentially the same if there is enough light. The 1.4 has the advantage in low light, but not night and day difference. The 50mm macro will allow you to get *really close* and also give you 1:1 magnification.

If I only could have one, I'd get the 50/2.8 macro. Then pick up a used FA-50/1.7 cheap on eBay later on if you find that the lens is too slow.
03-29-2008, 09:40 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
will the 50mm Macro not be too sharp for portraits? at least that's what i've heard
and another con is that it's kinda cheaply constructed
03-30-2008, 02:04 AM   #19
hll
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: new york
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 297
for indoor shots, da 35 mm macro or fa 35 mm....
imho 50 is too long....

03-30-2008, 03:20 AM   #20
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
Macro lens would certainly do both, and very well. Just to point you in slightly different direction: what kind of shots of your daughter do you mean? If it's portraits let's say head and shoulders, you would do nicely with Sigma 70 macro, or Tamron 90 macro, both f2.8.
But beware, indoors either of them will be to narrow for anything else then portraiture (unless you don't live in a huge castle or something ).
03-30-2008, 05:55 AM   #21
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,396
In order to draw the points back to the question raised by the OP, lets go back a step.

The OP wants to shoot flowers, and as a result a true macro lens is not really needed.

ALso a zoom may be better for portraits because of both flexibility and longer focal lengths compared to the bulk of the macro lenses being recommented here that are appearing in the 35-50mm range.

The zoom has the additional ability to be a general purpose lens for many things, with the capability of going to close focus without changing the lens, this may have some advantages down the road, when you are out walking about, and see something you want to get up close
03-30-2008, 06:29 AM   #22
Veteran Member
heatherslightbox's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gainesville, FL
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,595
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
ALso a zoom may be better for portraits because of both flexibility and longer focal lengths compared to the bulk of the macro lenses being recommented here that are appearing in the 35-50mm range.
I'll put in my vote for the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. It's not the most lightweight lens, but it's great for both general and close-up photography (macro ratio 1:2.3). Check these images out...

IMGP1668.JPG photo - Heather photos at pbase.com
washington oaks1.jpg photo - Heather photos at pbase.com
crescent beach3.jpg photo - Heather photos at pbase.com
Picasa Web Albums - HeatherB - Flower pics

Also, you can go to Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro Lens Sample Photos and Specifications to find an even greater variety of pics taken with this lens.

You can snag one of these gently used for around $300 or so.

HTH,
Heather
03-31-2008, 09:25 PM   #23
Senior Member
Cedar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Texas Hillcountry
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 102
I'd suggest the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 - but that may be biased - it's simply the lens I typically find most useful for capturing my kids. :-)

The f/2.8, simply because you have children... and you’ll need a quick shutter speed. And the value of a fast / low-light lens can’t be overstated.

The zoom, because you have children... and they can sure move!

The combination of the f/2.8 and zoom gives you easier control over how deep a DOF you want (and where your drop off points are) – which gives you much finer control over how much “household clutter” becomes the much more attractive blur/bokeh. But perhaps I’m projecting. :-)

I’ve also been quite happy with the close-up work, including some flower/nature photos which I’ve taken with it.

My only real complaint with the lens is the lack of manual quick-shift focus (allowing manual focus adjustments while still auto leaving on auto-focus) like the "Pancake" Pentax DA f2.8/40mm has.

I have both the 50mm f/2.8 AF and the 50mm f/1,4 manual-focus lenses, but even if really want a prime vs. a zoom lens, I would strongly suggest something “wider” than 50mm if you’re contemplating any indoor use at all.

While 50mm was fine for film use indoors, when used with the smaller digital sensor a 50mm lens actually gives a view similar to a 75mm film lens (as you likely already know). And 75mm is much too long for most of my indoor photos... but maybe your house, and your rooms, are much larger than mine. :-) Actually I even find 18mm to be too ‘narrow/far’ a lot of the time.

Likewise the 40mm ltd is IMO a fine choice. It’s really a remarkable lens. It’s fast, sharp, has the very handy quick-shift focus, produces lovely bokeh, and the price makes it a real bargain. But even with all of it’s pros, 40mm x 1.5 = 60mm, which is still fairly 'narrow' (even if a lot more useful than 75mm indoors IMO) for most indoor shooting. And honestly, I can’t say I’ve taken (even tried to take) any close up / flower shots with it.

Hope this helps!


Last edited by Cedar; 04-01-2008 at 01:21 AM.
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!
flower, k-mount, lense, macro, pentax lens, portrait, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
People First kids photography! :) D4rknezz Post Your Photos! 3 09-18-2010 05:08 PM
Macro Single Flower Macro Shots stl09 Post Your Photos! 5 11-15-2009 03:11 PM
Kids photography ranjus Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 7 08-04-2009 10:47 AM
Single Mother with 15 Kids... HogRider Post Your Photos! 3 09-16-2006 04:24 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:53 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