[Pentaxke]

Absolutely not true. The difference in performance is vanishingly small between the Ricoh and Pentax equivalents. Some consider the Ricoh to be superior.

Ok, I am going to rephrase that: while I want argue that the Ricoh is capable (hardly any 50mm from that area was really bad), the Pentax has the edge because of SMC, which should give it a clear advantage when used on a DSLR. Recently I don't even consider third party lenses from that area anymore for that sole reason...

[RAART]

BTW I forget to include lens I am using in regards of 50mm for landscape. I have used DA50mm 1.8 and it is good but the Sigma 50mm F1.4 is better. I am also thinking to get Sigma 50mm F2.8 Macro as it is very sharp and will be using it for landscape as well.

[DSLRnovice]

A local store has this one fo $90US and some M 50s. The reviews on this site for the 1.4 are very good, but don't know how many are about FF quality. Regarding the 28-105 WR, would it at 50mm be as good as the DFA 50/2.8 macro?

I should mention that I am a bit of a cheapskate, I can't see myself spending $700 for a 50mm right now. I am fishing for a good deal that will still justify an upgrade from my Ricoh 50/1.7. The DFA 50/2.8 macro sounds like a good suggestion for landscape. I have the DFA 100 macro and love it.

Also, I have the FA35/2, which is very useful for landscape as well. When shooting the same scene, I can see very little difference from the Ricoh, other than the FOV. I guess I could try the local dealers used 1.4 or the 28-105 for a few days, to satisfy my curiosity. I just hate to take advantage of them unless I am fairly sure of what I want.

Dan

[Na Horuk]

A local store has this one fo $90US and some M 50s. The reviews on this site for the 1.4 are very good, but don't know how many are about FF quality.

I think I mentioned the A series. The thing is, the 50mm f1.4 and 50mm f1.7 both have long lineages, since the M series. There have been tweaks and updates, so the newer ones have more automation and features, possibly better lens coatings, but they will be in the same ballpark optically. I think the 50mm A series is optically very similar to the M series, but it has auto-aperture and I think that's worth it.
You can check detailed user reviews here:
Full Frame Prime Lenses between 42mm and 58mm | PentaxForums.com
Just find the lens and click it to see the user reviews to get a good idea.
I don't think any Pentax 50mm will disappoint you, none of them are terrible. But some might be above and beyond

Regarding the 28-105 WR, would it at 50mm be as good as the DFA 50/2.8 macro?

I don't have those lenses to do a test, but I don't think any zoom lens will be as sharp as a macro prime. But its a question of what is acceptable. If you have higher standards for what is acceptable, you will have to pay more money to reach them. DA 50mm f1.8 is sharp enough for a lot of people. But clearly a number of people are willing to pay 10x its price for more correction, better colours, nicer bokeh, faster aperture, WR, QS, better construction, faster AF, etc. etc.
Macro also has the advantage that you can use it for product photos, insect macro, and so on. Its good to have one macro prime in your kit. There are also older versions, like F and FA 50mm macro. Basically, there is no shortage of 50mm lenses and you will be hard pressed to find a bad Pentax 50mm
We had threads in the past of people comparing different 50mm lenses. By aperture f4 they are all so good almost nobody could guess which is which

Tl;dr: Get the A or F or FA series. f1.7 are a little cheaper. f1.4 are brighter, but might be a hair softer until f2.8. Macro are usually brutally sharp, but are bigger and have slower AF

[Sandy Hancock]

I don't have any personal experience of it, but the DFA28-105 gets big raps as a landscape lens and is excellent value for money.

By the way - if you're a cheapskate why did you get a K-1?

[sibyrnes]

Regarding the 28-105 WR, would it at 50mm be as good as the DFA 50/2.8 macro?

I don't know how you define "good", but if you mean edge to edge sharpness, i doubt any lens you buy will be as "good" as the DFA 50/2.8 - especially at that price. The DFA 50 is a real bargain.

The 28-105 offers much more flexibility and is a lens I think any K1 user should have. I don't think I have read of anyone here that has been disappointed by the image quality of the 28-105.

I have both lens and when I am really serious about my landscape shooting I am using live view and a tripod, so, I have time to choose the lens I want. If the scene calls for a 50mm lens than I use the DFA50. I consider the 28 -105 a "walk around" lens.

[Digitalis]

just pick a fast 50 and stick with it, I own nearly 200 50mm lenses, and most* 50mm lenses all perform identically at f/8

* With a few exceptions, mostly among the exotic superspeed lenses which tend to perform better at wider apertures. I should go through the collection and pick out the absolute worst 50mm lens in it, that could be fun. I recall the Meyer-Optik Görlitz Domiplan 50mm f/2.8 has a reputation for being an optical obscenity.

[Pentaxke]

just pick a fast 50 and stick with it, I own nearly 200 50mm lenses, and most* 50mm lenses all perform identically at f/8

* With a few exceptions, mostly among the exotic superspeed lenses which tend to perform better at wider apertures. I should go through the collection and pick out the absolute worst 50mm lens in it, that could be fun. I recall the Meyer-Optik Görlitz Domiplan 50mm f/2.8 has a reputation for being an optical obscenity.

200? As in t-w-o hundred...? Wow!

[timw4mail]

just pick a fast 50 and stick with it, I own nearly 200 50mm lenses, and most* 50mm lenses all perform identically at f/8

* With a few exceptions, mostly among the exotic superspeed lenses which tend to perform better at wider apertures. I should go through the collection and pick out the absolute worst 50mm lens in it, that could be fun. I recall the Meyer-Optik Görlitz Domiplan 50mm f/2.8 has a reputation for being an optical obscenity.

The Isco-Gottingen Westanar isn't great either. Stiffest focus ring and worst quality at infinity of all of my lenses.

[stevebrot]

No votes for the 50/1.4 A Pentax?

There are long-standing debates regarding the 50/1.4 vs. the slower 55/1.8 and 50/1.7 Pentax lenses. Conventional wisdom is that the f/1.4 models are softer at comparable apertures down to about f/8 and then only manage parity. This trend is fairly consistent across brands. If you already own or want to purchase a 50/1.4, go for it, though I can guaranty that the extra money spent and the extra weight/bulk* will not pay any dividend in outright optical quality over the f/1.7 models unless one is particularly bothered by six-sided aperture blade shadows.

As for FF quality of the A 50/1.4, it shares design with the M, F, and FA versions, all of which were designed for FF 35mm film.

I am fishing for a good deal that will still justify an upgrade from my Ricoh 50/1.7

Pentax-M 50/1.7 or Pentax-K 55/1.8...both might be had for less than $50 USD.


Steve

* One may not fully appreciate the bulk/weight of the average f/1.4 50mm until compared directly with the same maker's f/1.7 or f/1.8 model.

[DSLRnovice]

I don't have any personal experience of it, but the DFA28-105 gets big raps as a landscape lens and is excellent value for money.

By the way - if you're a cheapskate why did you get a K-1?

That's easy. The K-1 is the best value in full frame for landscape, and I already had a collection of Kmount full frame lenses from the film days. Little by little I have been able to update my lens collection as needed and as finances permitted. I guess I am saying I to get the most for my money.

Dan

[DSLRnovice]

I don't know how you define "good", but if you mean edge to edge sharpness, i doubt any lens you buy will be as "good" as the DFA 50/2.8 - especially at that price. The DFA 50 is a real bargain.

The 28-105 offers much more flexibility and is a lens I think any K1 user should have. I don't think I have read of anyone here that has been disappointed by the image quality of the 28-105.

I have both lens and when I am really serious about my landscape shooting I am using live view and a tripod, so, I have time to choose the lens I want. If the scene calls for a 50mm lens than I use the DFA50. I consider the 28 -105 a "walk around" lens.

You've got me curious. Are there any comparison shots of the DFA50 with other Pentax 50's, macro or otherwise?

[Rondec]

For landscape, it doesn't really matter. You will be shooting stopped down for the most part. The biggest problem with older 50s is going to be flare. You can help that some with a hood, but it still will be there and truthfully, the f1.4 50s are going to be more prone to flare than the slower ones.

I really like the DA *55 and it seems to work well, although I think I get some vignetting from the hood. Definitely seems to perform better at f1.4 and 2 than the FA 50 f1.4 I used to own, but I haven't ever used f2 for landscape (usually f8 or f11) so that wouldn't be particularly important.

[Na Horuk]

You've got me curious. Are there any comparison shots of the DFA50 with other Pentax 50's, macro or otherwise?

The reviews I linked above have lots of photos.
There is also a sample photo gallery: Pentax Camera & Lens Sample Photo Search Engine - PentaxForums.com
And a nifty fifty thread with all kinds of fifties (check the most current post, it is cityscape with FA 50mm macro): The 50mm Lens Club - Page 78 - PentaxForums.com

[jatrax]

Obviously the OP has no sign of LBA. In the time this thread has taken many of us would have already bought (and possibly sold) a half dozen 50mm lenses.

OP: part of the fun with these old lenses for many of us is trying them out to see if they fit our particular vision of what a good image is. The advantage of them being 30 years old is that there is no 'new' depreciation. The value is fairly well set by the used market and if you pay attention to the price you can sell on a lens you do not like for only the cost of the shipping. So for under $350 you might get a Pentax-A 1.4, 1.7 and 2.8 and try them all out. Then keep the one you like best and sell on the rest.