Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

Gooshin · 08-09-2008, 04:18 PM

so i did some non chart tests today at F1.8/1.9 F2.0 between these two lenses by photographing a portrait in outdoor lighting of a girl.

honestly? i dont know... hahahahah

both cover a full frame

both are pretty small, the FA50 is larger, but on the other hand has a larger rubberized focusing ring.

both are *relativly* slow to focus and have long focus throws, when in the dark both will hunt like a drunken blind man in a desert, so neither really wins.

the FA43 is supposebly ultimatley sharper at F4.0...

is there a difference in contrast? yes, but i would not at any point say if its better or worse, its just different

3D look? the FA50 can make images pop out just as much as the FA43

FA50 has F1.4, while soft, its still there, and usable!

colour rendition? i dont bother with this one since its digital and people will screw around with the white balance after anyway

FA43 has more shock factor, its a limited after all (still kicking myself for not getting the silver one)

FA50 just looks better with the huge glass element (about half a n inch wider than the 43!!!)

bokeh? man if you can honestly sit there and tell me with a straight face that you can tell the difference?? whatever..

so.... if you have the 43, dont bother with the 50 and if you have the 50, dont bother with the 43 because you'll be chasing something only detectable on a 1x1 pixel level

as for the other stuff, user error, making things look 3D is a factor of DOF, angle at which your shooting and your subject matter.

i want to see soemone make a pciture of a brick wall look 3D..

there, that is my non scientific comparison of the two lenses

now to decide if i sell one....

Last edited by Unregistered User 8; 07-08-2017 at 07:41 AM. Reason: remove swearing

Nesster · 08-09-2008, 04:24 PM

Thanks, I figured as much.

Just out of curiosity, for the same scene, which one's JPEGs are larger?

Gooshin · 08-09-2008, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by Nesster

Thanks, I figured as much.

Just out of curiosity, for the same scene, which one's JPEGs are larger?

i shot raw... so i dunno

Gooshin · 08-09-2008, 04:34 PM

50 1.4 43 1.9
43 2.0 50 2.0
50 1.8 50 1.6

i mean, the difference is there, but these were just quick snapshots, not even controlled experiments.

because as we all know, in controlled environments even point and shoots can be made to shoot stellar SLR competative pictures

Nesster · 08-09-2008, 04:57 PM

The funny thing about boy toys... erm, cognoscenti objects... is how much we're willing to pay for increasingly small differences - but once seen, we KNOW they are there, LOL!

Gooshin · 08-09-2008, 05:02 PM

Originally posted by Nesster

The funny thing about boy toys... erm, cognoscenti objects... is how much we're willing to pay for increasingly small differences - but once seen, we KNOW they are there, LOL!

and the problem is that the differences are not even determinant of good and bad! just that, different.

Nesster · 08-09-2008, 05:34 PM

LOL we're on dangerous ground here... heh heh... with all that, I do feel my 43 is better in many situations than any 50 I have around, and I don't regret getting it instead of the af 50 or 35. Perhaps it was planning: this way I can indulge in bottom feeding the 35's and 50's.

The 43 has better flare/haze performance, though it does get a green halo inside the lens in the dark when there's a light in the frame.

troyz · 08-09-2008, 05:45 PM

Originally posted by Gooshin

FA50 just looks better with the huge glass element (about half a n inch wider than the 43!!!)

Nyaaaah, chicks dig pancake lenses!

ll_coffee_lP · 08-09-2008, 05:53 PM

Gooshin...not only do I appreciate the information that you've provided, I also appreciate your writing and candor.

c[_]

Gooshin · 08-09-2008, 06:01 PM

Originally posted by ll_coffee_lP

Gooshin...not only do I appreciate the information that you've provided, I also appreciate your writing and candor.

c[_]

thank you very much, i only wish more people appreciated it too... as tehre are many users on this forum that feel my... impatrialitity-mix-vuglarity is, insulting?

glad to hear there are people out there that understand me

jsherman999 · 08-09-2008, 07:10 PM

Have you done any infinity/landscape tests? I'd like to see if there's a noticeable difference in resolution there.

Originally posted by Gooshin

thank you very much, i only wish more people appreciated it too... as tehre are many users on this forum that feel my... impatrialitity-mix-vuglarity is, insulting?

glad to hear there are people out there that understand me

EDIT:

In light of the above, let me rephrase:

Gooshin, you bastard, Have you done any infinity/landscape tests? I'd like to see if there's a noticeable difference in resolution there.

.

Stratario · 08-09-2008, 07:39 PM

Good work Gooshin. Very useful. A lot of us have one or the other and are always doubtful what if I had gotten the other one. Now we know there differences are very small, if any.

One observation I have is that in the 43mm shots there is a lot more detail in the wall behind. So I think the DOF distribution in front and behind the subject is a little different between the two lenses. I don't know if that makes any difference. Just thought I mention it.

k100d · 08-09-2008, 10:41 PM

thanks for doing tests gooshin, always helps. out of all the photos, i liked 43 1.9 the best due to ... colour and contrast. i know your philosophy is towards more PP, mines is to the least as required.
i like the smaller size of the FA43 personally and i'm going to ditch my 50 just due to lack of use
in terms of bokeh, the FA43 is usually said to have rough bokeh and i do remember seeing some samples but don't remember in what situation it arises

Nesster · 08-10-2008, 04:38 AM

The bokeh thing I think is when there are highlights at a certain distance zone with the 43.

ftpaddict · 08-10-2008, 04:46 AM

Originally posted by troyz

Nyaaaah, chicks dig pancake lenses!

False. Chicks dig the Bigma.

08-09-2008, 04:18 PM	#1
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	FA43 vs FA50 so i did some non chart tests today at F1.8/1.9 F2.0 between these two lenses by photographing a portrait in outdoor lighting of a girl. honestly? i dont know... hahahahah both cover a full frame both are pretty small, the FA50 is larger, but on the other hand has a larger rubberized focusing ring. both are relativly slow to focus and have long focus throws, when in the dark both will hunt like a drunken blind man in a desert, so neither really wins. the FA43 is supposebly ultimatley sharper at F4.0... is there a difference in contrast? yes, but i would not at any point say if its better or worse, its just different 3D look? the FA50 can make images pop out just as much as the FA43 FA50 has F1.4, while soft, its still there, and usable! colour rendition? i dont bother with this one since its digital and people will screw around with the white balance after anyway FA43 has more shock factor, its a limited after all (still kicking myself for not getting the silver one) FA50 just looks better with the huge glass element (about half a n inch wider than the 43!!!) bokeh? man if you can honestly sit there and tell me with a straight face that you can tell the difference?? whatever.. so.... if you have the 43, dont bother with the 50 and if you have the 50, dont bother with the 43 because you'll be chasing something only detectable on a 1x1 pixel level as for the other stuff, user error, making things look 3D is a factor of DOF, angle at which your shooting and your subject matter. i want to see soemone make a pciture of a brick wall look 3D.. there, that is my non scientific comparison of the two lenses now to decide if i sell one.... Last edited by Unregistered User 8; 07-08-2017 at 07:41 AM. Reason: remove swearing

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Which one do you prefer, FA43 f1.9 or DA*55 f1.4 ?	janury87	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	1	01-12-2010 07:02 AM
DA35 or FA43	gokenin	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	02-04-2009 04:50 PM
my pimpin FA43	Gooshin	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	08-25-2008 06:58 AM
Both FA35 and FA50/1.4 or sell for the FA43	Optigrab	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	09-26-2007 07:09 AM

08-09-2008, 04:24 PM	#2
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	Thanks, I figured as much. Just out of curiosity, for the same scene, which one's JPEGs are larger?

08-09-2008, 04:30 PM	#3
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610 Original Poster	Originally posted by Nesster Thanks, I figured as much. Just out of curiosity, for the same scene, which one's JPEGs are larger? i shot raw... so i dunno

08-09-2008, 04:34 PM	#4
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610 Original Poster	50 1.4 43 1.9 43 2.0 50 2.0 50 1.8 50 1.6 i mean, the difference is there, but these were just quick snapshots, not even controlled experiments. because as we all know, in controlled environments even point and shoots can be made to shoot stellar SLR competative pictures

08-09-2008, 04:57 PM	#5
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	The funny thing about boy toys... erm, cognoscenti objects... is how much we're willing to pay for increasingly small differences - but once seen, we KNOW they are there, LOL!

08-09-2008, 05:02 PM	#6
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610 Original Poster	Originally posted by Nesster The funny thing about boy toys... erm, cognoscenti objects... is how much we're willing to pay for increasingly small differences - but once seen, we KNOW they are there, LOL! and the problem is that the differences are not even determinant of good and bad! just that, different.

08-09-2008, 05:34 PM	#7
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	LOL we're on dangerous ground here... heh heh... with all that, I do feel my 43 is better in many situations than any 50 I have around, and I don't regret getting it instead of the af 50 or 35. Perhaps it was planning: this way I can indulge in bottom feeding the 35's and 50's. The 43 has better flare/haze performance, though it does get a green halo inside the lens in the dark when there's a light in the frame.

08-09-2008, 05:45 PM	#8
troyz Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 389	Originally posted by Gooshin FA50 just looks better with the huge glass element (about half a n inch wider than the 43!!!) Nyaaaah, chicks dig pancake lenses!

08-09-2008, 05:53 PM	#9
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	Gooshin...not only do I appreciate the information that you've provided, I also appreciate your writing and candor. c[_]

08-09-2008, 06:01 PM	#10
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610 Original Poster	Originally posted by ll_coffee_lP Gooshin...not only do I appreciate the information that you've provided, I also appreciate your writing and candor. c[_] thank you very much, i only wish more people appreciated it too... as tehre are many users on this forum that feel my... impatrialitity-mix-vuglarity is, insulting? glad to hear there are people out there that understand me

08-09-2008, 07:10 PM	#11
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Have you done any infinity/landscape tests? I'd like to see if there's a noticeable difference in resolution there. Originally posted by Gooshin thank you very much, i only wish more people appreciated it too... as tehre are many users on this forum that feel my... impatrialitity-mix-vuglarity is, insulting? glad to hear there are people out there that understand me EDIT: In light of the above, let me rephrase: Gooshin, you bastard, Have you done any infinity/landscape tests? I'd like to see if there's a noticeable difference in resolution there. .

08-09-2008, 07:39 PM	#12
Stratario Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 366	Good work Gooshin. Very useful. A lot of us have one or the other and are always doubtful what if I had gotten the other one. Now we know there differences are very small, if any. One observation I have is that in the 43mm shots there is a lot more detail in the wall behind. So I think the DOF distribution in front and behind the subject is a little different between the two lenses. I don't know if that makes any difference. Just thought I mention it.

08-09-2008, 10:41 PM	#13
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	thanks for doing tests gooshin, always helps. out of all the photos, i liked 43 1.9 the best due to ... colour and contrast. i know your philosophy is towards more PP, mines is to the least as required. i like the smaller size of the FA43 personally and i'm going to ditch my 50 just due to lack of use in terms of bokeh, the FA43 is usually said to have rough bokeh and i do remember seeing some samples but don't remember in what situation it arises

08-10-2008, 04:38 AM	#14
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	The bokeh thing I think is when there are highlights at a certain distance zone with the 43.

08-10-2008, 04:46 AM	#15
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,666	Originally posted by troyz Nyaaaah, chicks dig pancake lenses! False. Chicks dig the Bigma.

FA43 vs FA50

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!