[chuck_c]

I wonder how well it renders the color. Do you use it often?

Not nearly as often as I probably should. However, here's a shot taken, mounted on the K-01, with some colorful fall bokeh.


Autumn path foliage-a-1 by Chuck Campbell, on Flickr

Here's one I just shot with it mounted on the K-1.


Fruit basket 6-23 by Chuck Campbell, on Flickr

---

Last edited by chuck_c; 06-23-2017 at 11:58 AM.

[chuck_c]

Not all the FA* lenses are still super-expensive. Those that have a true DA or DFA counterpart, such as the FA*300 f4.5, are generally more affordable now. The FA*300 f4.5 now goes for around $US600-700: F* / FA* 300 4.5 - price check? - PentaxForums.com
That's less than even a used FA 31 Ltd. I think it's a good price for such an excellent lens.

I think the F and FA lenses that will hold their best are those that are high quality and don't have a counterpart in the current range.


Those are magnificent Chuck.

Thank you Des!

[SunnyG.]

You could put the F50/1.7 in place of the FA50/1.4 if a sharp, flat-field lens is your preference. I have both . . . .

Flat field lens? Why?

---------- Post added 06-24-17 at 10:58 AM ----------

Not nearly as often as I probably should. However, here's a shot taken, mounted on the K-01, with some colorful fall bokeh.


Autumn path foliage-a-1 by Chuck Campbell, on Flickr

Here's one I just shot with it mounted on the K-1.


Fruit basket 6-23 by Chuck Campbell, on Flickr

Wow I gotta have it! It's like a really Sharp ART lens!

---------- Post added 06-24-17 at 11:02 AM ----------

Not all the FA* lenses are still super-expensive. Those that have a true DA or DFA counterpart, such as the FA*300 f4.5, are generally more affordable now. The FA*300 f4.5 now goes for around $US600-700: F* / FA* 300 4.5 - price check? - PentaxForums.com
That's less than even a used FA 31 Ltd. I think it's a good price for such an excellent lens.

I think the F and FA lenses that will hold their best are those that are high quality and don't have a counterpart in the current range.


Those are magnificent Chuck.

I wish I had won a lottery. All those lenses would have been mine! I have a lens buying syndrome! Lol. I want all those lenses and then some.

[monochrome]

Flat field lens? Why?

The FA50/1.4, at wide apertures, renders with a classsic sharp center and softer edges, which promotes the central subject. The 50/1.7 at wider apertures is nearly evenly sharp across the frame ('flat'), which at the time was meant for flat copying on a copipod. Sharp across the frame seems to be the more modern preference. By f/5.6 they are indistinguishable.

[SunnyG.]

The FA50/1.4 at wide apertures, renders with a classsic sharp center and softer edges, which promotes the central subject. The 50/1.7 at wider apertures is nearly evenly sharp across the fram ('flat'), which at the time was for flat copying on a copipod, sharp across the frame seems to be the more modern preference. By f/5.6 they are indistinguishable.

Wow I didn't know that. Maybe we should start new thread, comparing similar lenses, so that new budding photographers can get some info. It would be great learning experience for them. I mean there is a lens info page, maybe we need a lens comparison page. All that info you gave me, is really helpful. Thanks!

---------- Post added 06-24-17 at 11:21 AM ----------

But the new 70-200mm completely crushes the 80-200mm wide-open, and at every aperture setting in the corners. Wouldn't recommend that one given the relatively low price of the DFA*.

Umm it's like 1600$ and the old FA* is 800$. Know what I mean?

---------- Post added 06-24-17 at 11:23 AM ----------

OP needn't worry about that as he can afford neither

Lol maybe I can, in a couple of years. I'll buy a battered copy lol

---------- Post added 06-24-17 at 11:24 AM ----------

Not nearly as often as I probably should. However, here's a shot taken, mounted on the K-01, with some colorful fall bokeh.


Autumn path foliage-a-1 by Chuck Campbell, on Flickr

Here's one I just shot with it mounted on the K-1.


Fruit basket 6-23 by Chuck Campbell, on Flickr

You take amazing photos. You're good!

[Adam]

Umm it's like 1600$ and the old FA* is 800$. Know what I mean?

Man, that means the price has dropped like a rock. I paid $1400 ish for mine about 10 years ago.

[DHA]

I kept my F50mm F1:1.4 because it is that good. I actually sold my 31mm and 77mm because they weren't as sharp and the bokeh on my older 50 was better. To each their own. Mind you, the F50mm is a difficult lens to find.

[D1N0]

Mind you, the F50mm is a difficult lens to find.

But the FA 50mm 1.4 isn't and it has identical glass

[DHA]

I've had both and trust me...they are not identical. Much better bokeh rendering from my copy of the F.

[D1N0]

F: FA: Super Takumar:


Same design. The older takumar versions have weaker coatings (non smc) and thoriated glass (Including the SMC K-mount version). It was left out from the Pentax-m 50 1.4.

[SunnyG.]

Man, that means the price has dropped like a rock. I paid $1400 ish for mine about 10 years ago.

But if you get one in excellent condition, you're gonna have to sell out nearly 700$. There is no better lens at this price.

---------- Post added 06-25-17 at 11:47 AM ----------

I kept my F50mm F1:1.4 because it is that good. I actually sold my 31mm and 77mm because they weren't as sharp and the bokeh on my older 50 was better. To each their own. Mind you, the F50mm is a difficult lens to find.

I don't have any experience with either of those. But I definitely want to get the A 50mm f1.2! I am drooling just thinking about you!

---------- Post added 06-25-17 at 11:48 AM ----------

I kept my F50mm F1:1.4 because it is that good. I actually sold my 31mm and 77mm because they weren't as sharp and the bokeh on my older 50 was better. To each their own. Mind you, the F50mm is a difficult lens to find.

*thinking about it!!! My phone is ed up!!!!