Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-29-2015, 01:58 PM   #16
Veteran Member
Outis's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 935
I don't have much of a preference between the first two (the Sony and the Takumar), but I definitely like those two better than the third (50mm 1.2).

06-29-2015, 03:54 PM - 1 Like   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 603
Sony is more contrasty and sharper wide open. I also prefer it's smooth bokeh. 50 1.2 lags behind in every aspect.
06-29-2015, 07:18 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,356
The differences in bokeh are entirely neglegible to me. The only substantial difference I see in the images are in the colors and contrast in some of the images. This easily dealt with in post. I'd say the Pentax lenses, particularly the Takumar, performed extremely admirably, especially for the price. That was a steal of a lens!
06-30-2015, 12:42 AM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 241
The Tak competes well. It would be interesting to see a K 55 1.8. I have that lens and it is extremely sharp and has the smc coatings.

Very interesting though and thanks for sharing.

06-30-2015, 11:01 AM   #20
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Woodstock, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,502
To my eyes the bokeh of the Tak is a bit worse, except wide open. That is consistent with what I see in my K 55 f2 (pretty much the same lens, just mechanically limited to f2, and in K mount). Still, not bad at all. I paid 24 dollars for mine, so maybe I overpaid? lol Just kidding, it's a gem, but the M 50 1.7 is at least as good! I mean, even famous Pentax-hater Ken Rockwell had to admit the M 50 1.7 is as good as what he considers the best lens ever made (Summicron 50 f2), except wide open. So, no surprises when cheap Pentax nifty fifties perform superbly
06-30-2015, 11:06 AM   #21
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Stavri's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: at a Bean & Leaf
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,779
The SMC K 55 f1.88 is the lens you need in this comparison, even closer in IQ to the T* than the super-tak.
07-05-2015, 04:26 AM   #22
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Hm, from the photos it looks like the Sony is a tad sharper if you look at the spider webs on the flowers. But in terms of bokeh rendering, colours, they are both quite good. The big difference in price, just to get AF.. well, dunno if its worth it. Maybe for some people
When overall we see the prices of AF and manual lenses (except a few leica and Zeiss) I'd say for most, AF is a very valuable difference.
07-06-2015, 01:59 AM   #23
Veteran Member
redcat's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Paris
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,929
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
AF is a very valuable difference
Exactly, if the shot is not in focus, the leica/zeiss lens is useless ^^ and the more I use MF lens, the more I appreciate the AF =))

07-06-2015, 03:03 AM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Newcastle
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,954
The colours in the Tak are a little yellow (warmer), which could be due to thoriated element(s). If so subject the lens to UV for a week or two (or a Ikea LED lamp for 48hrs) and you should see better colours.

I have to be honest, I would be upset if I shelled out $1000 for the sony.
07-06-2015, 05:35 PM   #25
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 113
When I see this comparison I'm glad to have my 50mm Pentax, are really extraordinary over the years.
07-06-2015, 08:02 PM   #26
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 42
Time is $$$$$

The math:
Pentaxt55mmf1.8 = Zeiss55mmf1.8 - AF
$10 = $1000 - $990
AF = $990

In other words:
Time is money.
The Autofocus function is worth $990 because the photographer with AF lens took less than a second to shoot, he left while the photographer with the MF lens was still spinning his focus ring back and forth.
07-06-2015, 10:35 PM   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Newcastle
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,954
QuoteOriginally posted by nikono Quote
The math:
Pentaxt55mmf1.8 = Zeiss55mmf1.8 - AF
$10 = $1000 - $990
AF = $990

In other words:
Time is money.
The Autofocus function is worth $990 because the photographer with AF lens took less than a second to shoot, he left while the photographer with the MF lens was still spinning his focus ring back and forth.
Ahhh not necessarily so. By using the hyperfocal approach, one can stroll with the camera set permanently in a focal range and take shots using Aperture mode or the like.
07-06-2015, 11:02 PM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by Wild Mark Quote
Ahhh not necessarily so. By using the hyperfocal approach, one can stroll with the camera set permanently in a focal range and take shots using Aperture mode or the like.
Just to say, hyperfocal distance on APSC for a 55mm is:
f/1.8 => 90m
f/4 => 40m
f/8 => 20m.

And the deph of field for a shallow deph of field shoot at 1.5m:
f/1.8 => 5cm of deph of field
f/2.8 => 8cm of deph of field
f/5.6 => 15cm of deph of field

Good luck with it. In particular if you plan for a shallow deph of field shoot !
07-06-2015, 11:12 PM - 1 Like   #29
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 14,357
QuoteOriginally posted by nikono Quote

In other words:
Time is money.
The Autofocus function is worth $990 because the photographer with AF lens took less than a second to shoot, he left while the photographer with the MF lens was still spinning his focus ring back and forth.
True.

But the AF guy could get back home to find that one shot you talk about at f1.8 autofocused on the tip of the nose instead of an eye. ☺
07-06-2015, 11:17 PM   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
True.

But the AF guy could get back home to find that one shot you talk about at f1.8 autofocused on the tip of the nose instead of an eye. ☺
1) I can perfectly manage to have this issue when doing manual focus myself.
2) While it was true with K5, with K3 and its small off center points the issue is no longer there
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!
55mm, af, camera, distance, f1.8, f1.8 vs sony, fe, ff, focus, k-mount, lens, lenses, mf, pentax, pentax lens, people, photos, screen, sharpness, slr lens, sony, sony zeiss fe, takumar, test, vs sony zeiss, zeiss, zeiss fe 55mm
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Super Takumar 55mm F1.8 vs DA 50mm f1.8 hjoseph7 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 05-11-2015 09:54 AM
Battle: SMC Takumar 55mm f1.8 VS Pentax FA 50mm f1.4 on the Q EarlVonTapia Pentax Q 13 09-11-2014 07:56 PM
If there is a lens like Sony FE 55mm F1.8 for pentax... starjedi Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 35 02-13-2014 11:32 AM
K55mm f1.8 vs SMC Super Tak 55mm f1.8 JeffJS Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 22 06-04-2012 03:32 PM
Mamiya / Sekor 55mm f1.8 or SMC Takumar 55mm f1.8? -kb- Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 09-16-2009 05:54 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:06 AM. | 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