Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-04-2015, 12:32 PM   #31
Pentaxian
Hattifnatt's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,416
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
You forgot about the Sigma 35mm F1.4...it's more of a wide normal but probably be best lens in its class that money can buy right now. I'd recommend it especially if you're looking for something that's FF ready.
True that. I'm using this lens for quite a while and it's amazing... should be even better on FF.

08-04-2015, 12:45 PM   #32
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Vancouver Island, BC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 236
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
I always find something to pick on and cant find the perfect walk around normal prime for the upcoming FF. First i'll present the shortcomings, then a wish to Pentax.

Pentax 40mm f/2,8 (4 variants): I have the M variant the only one officially covering full frame, but it lacks AF and have no effective lens hood. The AF variants just have unofficial support full frame, but none of them have a hood. f/2,8 is a bit slow too and the focus ring is too small in my opinion. They also lack WR.

Pentax FA 50mm f/1,4: Nice size, but the size isn't used for a comfortable focus ring. The ring should be wider. Also its a very old design both externally and internally. Its far from sharp at f/1,4. Why buy a f/1,4 lens if its "useless" at f/1,4? I will rather have a f/2 lens that performs well from f/2. At apertures where it is sharp the bokeh is edgy/not good. It lacks WR. Hood lacks filter turning window.

Pentax DA 55mm f/1,4: Very nice. WR, sharp and hood with filter turning window. But its pricey, the hood is not flower shaped and its a bit much longitudinal CA (green-purple edges of out of focus lights). Its also a bit long.

Pentax DA 50mm f/1,8: Very nice price, but it its not sharp at f/1,8 or f/2. Why buy a f/1,8 lens if it should be used at f/2,8 or smaller? Also it lacks a plastic reversible hood with filter turning window. Lacks WR.

Pentax f/2,8 Macro DA 35, HD 35 or 50: Sharp and nice but only f/2,8, no WR, a bit long and not very chap to compensate for the shortcomings. Macro is also something i personally need myself in this focal length.

Pentax 35mm f/2,4: Sharp and nice from full aperture, lightweight and cheap. Much nice to say about it. But it doesn't have WR, is only f/2,4 a bit to wide for a normal on FF, no official support for FF, the rectangular plastic hood is bulky (and not reversible?)

Pentax 43mm f/1,9: Nice size, aperture and build quality. No WR, very pricey, old optical design could be better and have more magnification. Not the kind of hood i like.

Sigma 50mm f/1,4: The Art performs excellent, but its big, heavy, expensive and doesn't offer WR. The older siblings and a Sigma macro is cheaper and not that sharp, but still have the other shortcomings. Sigma is not treating Pentax users very well.


________________


My Wish for Pentax: Look at this list, pick the good sides and avoid the bad.

- Make a new D-FA normal prime with 40-50mm focal length and f/1,8-2,0 aperture
- Better optical formula (sharp from fully open, odd number rounded diaphragm, less aberrations, HD coatings, at least 0,2x magnification)
- WR and metal mount
- Quick shift focus on a 1,5 - 2 cm wide ring, and Ultrasonic AF
- Include a reversible plastic hood with flower shape and filter turning window. Add a hood extension ring optimized for APS-C image circle.
- Try to keep it 3 - 4 cm long, less then 250 grams and 250 $
When you are putting together a "wish list" for Ricoh/Pentax - why not include the holy grail... an updated AF 50mm F1.2 lens. If you look at the popularity of the K and A models, I'm pretty sure an AF version with WR would be a hot seller...
08-04-2015, 01:02 PM   #33
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,026
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
The petal lens hoods are very large at 50mm. Look to the 50-135 for an example. That hood is designed for a 50mm
That hood was made for a field of view equaling 75mm on FF. I want a petal shaped hood for 50mm on FF (or 33mm on APS-C, witch should pretty much equal the Sigma 30/1,4 hood:



QuoteOriginally posted by stillshot2 Quote
Have you considered a screw on collapsible rubber hood? They work with any lens and can be had for $4.
Rubber hoods are to soft to protect the lens and camera when its dropped or bumps into something. The rubber hoods are flimsy, not petal shaped, collects dust, soon get more gray then black, and steals the filter ring excluding use of filters. I wouldn't get one even if it was for free.

Look how many good hoods that does exist. It's not exactly expensive or rocket science to make a good plastic hood. I just don't work in a plastic molding company and don't have access to the right software and tools. Therefore i give my free suggestion to Ricoh/Pentax how to improve something that would cost them pocket change and give more value to their products. I would easily pay 20 $ for a hood that costs less then 1 $ to make, if its a good one.

---------- Post added 08-04-2015 at 10:26 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by mholford Quote
When you are putting together a "wish list" for Ricoh/Pentax - why not include the holy grail... an updated AF 50mm F1.2 lens. If you look at the popularity of the K and A models, I'm pretty sure an AF version with WR would be a hot seller...
That would probably cost 2000 $ and weigh 1 kg. I'm sure it will be on many peoples wishlist, but not on mine.

Last edited by Simen1; 08-04-2015 at 01:30 PM.
08-04-2015, 02:10 PM - 1 Like   #34
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,193
First - I'm not sure the 30 f/1.4 hood will work on FF 50 adequately. Moreover I don't know of anyone who makes one for any 50mm for any FF camera lens. This should tell you that this is either impractical or not market valued.

Second - I have seen rubber hoods cut into petal shape by people who desperately desire that. Do it validate the shape you want works as you expect and then...

Third - find a maker site and put out the design you want and get it made by a 3d printer. Should be rationally priced. I honestly think this is the only way you get this resolved.

Please understand it is not my intention to tell you that your opinion is not valued - but I think some of your reasons boil down to "I want it" and have no real backing. If you want it that doesn't mean everyone else does so I don't think it translates into market value. You may be willing to pay $20 but it may cost $50 and sell poorly and be a money losing proposition.

08-04-2015, 02:40 PM   #35
Pentaxian
stillshot2's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Albums
Posts: 916
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
steals the filter ring excluding use of filters.
False. You either screw a filter into the threads of the front your hood or screw the hood onto a filter.

QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
soon get more gray then black
Purely cosmetic, and takes quite a while for this to happen as my rubber hood from the early 80's still looks fine.

QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
protect the lens and camera when its dropped or bumps into something
If you are dropping your equipment, a lens hood is not going to save it!

The point I am trying to make is that if the worst thing you can find about this list of fine lenses is the lack of hood you want, then you are really grasping at straws. You should really give the DA 50mm 1.8 a try. It's priced low, the front element is recessed enough that I find a hood doesn't even make a difference, and it's actually reasonably sharp at f1.8 if you use proper technique and make sure it is calibrated to your camera. Sharpness is a relative term and the only way to know if it will work for you is to try it!

Last edited by stillshot2; 08-04-2015 at 02:46 PM.
08-04-2015, 03:20 PM - 2 Likes   #36
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,261
I have to disagree with the assessment of the lenses.
Just too much overthinking.

None of the above are bad.
None is perfect too.

Just get one within budget and go shoot some photos.


No love for a lowly Pentax 50/2?










Pentax 50/1.7, really one of the best out there for the price and size







50/1.4? -I really don't see why










40/2.8?
Here is the 40XS, so said with all the big theories out here that its not FF.



This one is f8 and I have a full size on Flickr, I'd say its totally FF usable.



f2.8 works with the high ISO for most cameras nowadays (in a dim market)......




DA*55 - taken by my friend
By design, its a 'portrait orientated' 50mm, so don't expect even corner to corner sharpness (esp wide open).
Used for its intended purpose it shines.
Yes, its on FF.

08-04-2015, 03:37 PM   #37
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 146
QuoteOriginally posted by pinholecam Quote
I have to disagree with the assessment of the lenses.
Just too much overthinking.

None of the above are bad.
None is perfect too.

Just get one within budget and go shoot some photos.


No love for a lowly Pentax 50/2?










Pentax 50/1.7, really one of the best out there for the price and size







50/1.4? -I really don't see why










40/2.8?
Here is the 40XS, so said with all the big theories out here that its not FF.



This one is f8 and I have a full size on Flickr, I'd say its totally FF usable.



f2.8 works with the high ISO for most cameras nowadays (in a dim market)......




DA*55 - taken by my friend
By design, its a 'portrait orientated' 50mm, so don't expect even corner to corner sharpness (esp wide open).
Used for its intended purpose it shines.
Yes, its on FF.

Beautiful Composition and Photos! This really shows Pentax 50mm Love.
Congratulations ....
08-04-2015, 04:24 PM   #38
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
ivanvernon's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Medina, OH
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,638
Hood for 50 mm Pentax lens

QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
First - I'm not sure the 30 f/1.4 hood will work on FF 50 adequately. Moreover I don't know of anyone who makes one for any 50mm for any FF camera lens. This should tell you that this is either impractical or not market valued.

Second - I have seen rubber hoods cut into petal shape by people who desperately desire that. Do it validate the shape you want works as you expect and then...

Third - find a maker site and put out the design you want and get it made by a 3d printer. Should be rationally priced. I honestly think this is the only way you get this resolved.

Please understand it is not my intention to tell you that your opinion is not valued - but I think some of your reasons boil down to "I want it" and have no real backing. If you want it that doesn't mean everyone else does so I don't think it translates into market value. You may be willing to pay $20 but it may cost $50 and sell poorly and be a money losing proposition.
The Pentax D FA 50 mm f 2.8 macro is apparently an exception to your first point above as it does in fact come with a hood.

08-04-2015, 05:25 PM   #39
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,193
QuoteOriginally posted by ivanvernon Quote
The Pentax D FA 50 mm f 2.8 macro is apparently an exception to your first point above as it does in fact come with a hood.
Shesh... of course some 50mm lenses come with HOODS - the discussion was about PETAL hoods. Specifically the 30 1.4 hood was held up as a possible 50mm hood and the ideal to shoot for.
08-04-2015, 05:49 PM - 1 Like   #40
Veteran Member
clawhammer's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Logan, Utah
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 975
QuoteOriginally posted by stillshot2 Quote
If you are dropping your equipment, a lens hood is not going to save it!
I accidentally dropped my k5 and 18-55 wr onto a wooden walkway. It landed hood first and cracked the hood by the filter window (but if you leave the window in it still stays on properly).

Another time I was rappelling with my k10d and da 14 when i swung into thr cliff a little harder than i would have liked with the camera between me and the wall. The impact stripped the threads of the three screws that hold the hood/filter mount ring onto the rest of the body.

In both cases the camera and lenses worked just as they had before the impact. I cant say for certain that the hoods saved them, but if i understand physics correctly the more bits that fly off the more energy goes with them and not into the main object- this is why bumpers and race car body pannels are designed to come off. So, it makes sense the hoods may have absorbed energy that would have otherwise borked the cameras and lenses.

Though to be fair, becaue the da14's filter ring holds the cap on, its tendancy to slide down to the focus ring does cause the cap to contact the first element, which is rather dangerous considering that the ring (and thus cap) now spins freely. But i digress.
08-04-2015, 05:55 PM   #41
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 897
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
I always find something to pick on and cant find the perfect walk around normal prime for the upcoming FF. First i'll present the shortcomings, then a wish to Pentax.

Pentax 40mm f/2,8 (4 variants): I have the M variant the only one officially covering full frame, but it lacks AF and have no effective lens hood. The AF variants just have unofficial support full frame, but none of them have a hood. f/2,8 is a bit slow too and the focus ring is too small in my opinion. They also lack WR.

Pentax FA 50mm f/1,4: Nice size, but the size isn't used for a comfortable focus ring. The ring should be wider. Also its a very old design both externally and internally. Its far from sharp at f/1,4. Why buy a f/1,4 lens if its "useless" at f/1,4? I will rather have a f/2 lens that performs well from f/2. At apertures where it is sharp the bokeh is edgy/not good. It lacks WR. Hood lacks filter turning window.

Pentax DA 55mm f/1,4: Very nice. WR, sharp and hood with filter turning window. But its pricey, the hood is not flower shaped and its a bit much longitudinal CA (green-purple edges of out of focus lights). Its also a bit long.

Pentax DA 50mm f/1,8: Very nice price, but it its not sharp at f/1,8 or f/2. Why buy a f/1,8 lens if it should be used at f/2,8 or smaller? Also it lacks a plastic reversible hood with filter turning window. Lacks WR.

Pentax f/2,8 Macro DA 35, HD 35 or 50: Sharp and nice but only f/2,8, no WR, a bit long and not very chap to compensate for the shortcomings. Macro is also something i personally need myself in this focal length.

Pentax 35mm f/2,4: Sharp and nice from full aperture, lightweight and cheap. Much nice to say about it. But it doesn't have WR, is only f/2,4 a bit to wide for a normal on FF, no official support for FF, the rectangular plastic hood is bulky (and not reversible?)

Pentax 43mm f/1,9: Nice size, aperture and build quality. No WR, very pricey, old optical design could be better and have more magnification. Not the kind of hood i like.

Sigma 50mm f/1,4: The Art performs excellent, but its big, heavy, expensive and doesn't offer WR. The older siblings and a Sigma macro is cheaper and not that sharp, but still have the other shortcomings. Sigma is not treating Pentax users very well.


________________


My Wish for Pentax: Look at this list, pick the good sides and avoid the bad.

- Make a new D-FA normal prime with 40-50mm focal length and f/1,8-2,0 aperture
- Better optical formula (sharp from fully open, odd number rounded diaphragm, less aberrations, HD coatings, at least 0,2x magnification)
- WR and metal mount
- Quick shift focus on a 1,5 - 2 cm wide ring, and Ultrasonic AF
- Include a reversible plastic hood with flower shape and filter turning window. Add a hood extension ring optimized for APS-C image circle.
- Try to keep it 3 - 4 cm long, less then 250 grams and 250 $
DA50 1.8 is one of Pentax sharpest lenses ... You might get a bad copy. If DA 50 1.8 cannot claim sharp wide open, no other Pentax lens can..
08-04-2015, 10:32 PM   #42
Forum Member
Aberrator's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Kaunas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 97
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
Pentax 43mm f/1,9: Nice size, aperture and build quality. No WR, very pricey, old optical design could be better and have more magnification.
It's nice to have extra closeup capability in regular lens, but now that sensors reached 24+ mp resolution, you can always just crop the hell out of it (I don't find it all that soft).

QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
Not the kind of hood i like.
Isn't it counterproductive to manufacture a pancake lens and then ship it with a huge hood? And its adequate for most situations.
08-04-2015, 10:33 PM   #43
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Vancouver Island, BC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 236
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote

[/COLOR]
That would probably cost 2000 $ and weigh 1 kg. I'm sure it will be on many peoples wishlist, but not on mine.
I doubt an AF 50mm F1.2 lens would either cost$2000 or weigh 1kg.

I agree it wouldn't be cheap ($1200?) but size/weight? I don't see why it would have to be *that* much bigger than the K version (yes the AF mechanism takes some space/weight but tripling the weight of the lens?)
08-05-2015, 12:25 AM   #44
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,026
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by stillshot2 Quote
False. You either screw a filter into the threads of the front your hood or screw the hood onto a filter.

Purely cosmetic, and takes quite a while for this to happen as my rubber hood from the early 80's still looks fine.

If you are dropping your equipment, a lens hood is not going to save it!

The point I am trying to make is that if the worst thing you can find about this list of fine lenses is the lack of hood you want, then you are really grasping at straws. You should really give the DA 50mm 1.8 a try. It's priced low, the front element is recessed enough that I find a hood doesn't even make a difference, and it's actually reasonably sharp at f1.8 if you use proper technique and make sure it is calibrated to your camera. Sharpness is a relative term and the only way to know if it will work for you is to try it!
Ok, screw on filters are not as bad as i thought, but still not the kind of hood i want.

Some people think UV filters protect their lenses when bumping into something. It's not because they break much more easy then the thick and solid front lens. Filters shatter into sharp pieces making marks on the front lens. Bumping the front lens on rock usually only makes a small spot on the glass. If its not violent enough to shatter the lens and possibly the camera to. A plastic hood is weaker then the camera, taking the hit and deforming or shattering. That takes the kinetic energy like a car bumper. The camera and lens is usually left unharmed. Of course if it's not a very hard hit. Plastic hoods are quite effective bumpers protecting the lens and camera.

I'm sorry much of the discussion circles around the hood. The list of improving points depends on what we compare my suggestion with, but the wish list is much more then just a hood for the DA 50/1,8. :

QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
My Wish for Pentax: Look at this list, pick the good sides and avoid the bad.

- Make a new D-FA normal prime with 40-50mm focal length and f/1,8-2,0 aperture
- Better optical formula (sharp from fully open, odd number rounded diaphragm, less aberrations, HD coatings, at least 0,2x magnification)
- WR and metal mount
- Quick shift focus on a 1,5 - 2 cm wide ring, and Ultrasonic AF
- Include a reversible plastic hood with flower shape and filter turning window. Add a hood extension ring optimized for APS-C image circle.
- Try to keep it 3 - 4 cm long, less then 250 grams and 250 $
08-05-2015, 01:31 AM   #45
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,026
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Aberrator Quote
It's nice to have extra closeup capability in regular lens, but now that sensors reached 24+ mp resolution, you can always just crop the hell out of it (I don't find it all that soft).
Isn't it counterproductive to manufacture a pancake lens and then ship it with a huge hood? And its adequate for most situations.
I know. Ruomors are that the FF reaches 42,5 Mp. That should make it quite crop-able if the lens is sharp in the center. Although i wouldn't crop as much as making 1:1 shots from a 1:5 magnifcation lens. But i think the existing 43mm with its 0,12x magnification is too little. At its closest focus it would offer a field of view no less then 300 * 200 mm. A (large) post card sized 150 * 100 mm crop would be 10,6 Mp. Thats enough for close face portraits but not anywhere near macro work. If the lens offers 0,2x magnification it can be used for close ups of medium-large flowers and dragonflies when cropped down to 10 Mp. I wouldn't crop much more then to 10 Mp. The existing DA 50mm f/1,8 also offers too little magnification in my opinion (0,15x). I prefer at least 0,2x for good versatility and understand that implies a slightly longer lens. Maybe 0,25x is to much to ask within the constraints of 4 cm length, internal focus and 250 grams, or maybe its within reach? The D FA 50mm macro 1:1 is 6 cm long at infinity focus and extends to about 10-11 cm at full magnification.

I don't find it counterproductive to have a pancake with a long hood. And i don't consider a 4 cm long lens a pancake. Thats a high stack of real pancakes in my opinion. I'm very happy that Pentax offers a limited lens lineup that is easy to carry several lenses in a small gear bag. That and the price is why i wont consider the Sigma 50 Art. Weight is another reason for pancakes and a hood doesn't add much.

QuoteOriginally posted by mholford Quote
I doubt an AF 50mm F1.2 lens would either cost$2000 or weigh 1kg.
I just thought that when Sigma 50 f/1,4 Art weighs a massive (for a 50mm) 815 grams and cost 950 $. Changing to the Pentax brand name would probably add cost and maybe reduce weight. Changing from f/1,4 to f/1,2 certainly will increase both weight and price. 2000$ and 1 kg is just a guesstimate. Maybe a bad one. Time will hopefully tell.
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!
50mm, af, aperture, bit, cost, ff, filter, focus, hood, hoods, k-mount, lens, lens hoods, normal, pentax, pentax lens, plastic, prime, ricoh/pentax, rubber, slr lens, window, wish, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Send your FF wishlist to Ricoh mgbirder Pentax Full Frame 69 08-04-2015 06:40 AM
Need a "normal" prime for kids indoor. is S30 F1.4 (non-ART) suit for that? alexbird Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 09-15-2014 08:44 AM
Teleconverter for normal fast prime? DirkG Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 01-20-2013 05:43 PM
Possible Solution for Fast, Cheap(er), Normal Prime? Biro Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 01-10-2010 03:40 PM
Looking for a f/2 or better normal-wide (24-28mm) prime Egg Salad Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 09-08-2009 10:44 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:35 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