[Sperdynamite]

I have used the Nikon 58mm lens extensively at my weddings. It has an absolutely gorgeous rendering that makes it look almost medium format at times. You can see examples of this on the thread dedicated to it at FM. However I'll be getting into Pentax soon and I'm wondering if the 55mm is a good replacement for the 58? Similar focal lengths, same aperture. The 58mm is not famous for sharpness, just knock down drop dead gorgeous rendering. Would anyone be interested in blowing up this feed with 55mm 1.4 portraits on the K-1?

[Belnan]

The new DFA* 50 is all the rage these days. I think the da 55 would be very similar to the nikon 58 1.4. Pentax Forums did a comparison with the DFA* 50 and the Da* 55 which would be a good start.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-d-fa-50mm-vs-da-55mm-vs-samyang/introduction.html

[Sperdynamite]

If you look at the rendering of the 58, you'll see no 50/1.4 is a replacement for it.

[pid]

so show us some examples

[Sperdynamite]

so show us some examples

I'm not sure how this forum is about linking to other forums, but here is a great place to start if you want to see what folks are doing with the 58/1.4. Just trying to find out if the 55 has the same magic.

The review samples are great, but I'd like to see some actual people portraits at close and middle distances at 1.4 and 2.0. Just asking in case someone has them. Also not at all knocking the 50/1.4 that just came it, but it just won't be the same rendering for people and detail work.

[normhead]

so show us some examples

exactly... do people really think we are just going to take their word for it?
We don't want your confirmation bias causing us to make a purchasing error.

---------- Post added 05-31-19 at 11:54 AM ----------

I'm not sure how this forum is about linking to other forums, but here is a great place to start if you want to see what folks are doing with the 58/1.4. Just trying to find out if the 55 has the same magic.

The review samples are great, but I'd like to see some actual people portraits at close and middle distances at 1.4 and 2.0. Just asking in case someone has them. Also not at all knocking the 50/1.4 that just came it, but it just won't be the same rendering for people and detail work.

And yet many have declared the DFA 50 1.4 best in class.The rendering is simply astounding.
Personally I wouldn't be saying such things about which was better unless I had side by side comparisons to offer taken at the same time and location. The way confirmation bias works is you select images that favour your opinion and your opinion is based on that. That's not relevant until you post the photos you used for your comparison so we can see if we can agree with your assessment. We don't take anyone's word for anything.

I am always skeptical of corse brand comparisons because then brand bias can influence the decision as well as the lenses previous rep in the photo community. Maybe the Nikon 58 was the king once. That doesn't mean it will be forever.

[Sperdynamite]

exactly... do people really think we are just going to take their word for it?
We don't want your confirmation bias causing us to make a purchasing error.

---------- Post added 05-31-19 at 11:54 AM ----------


And yet many have declared the DFA 50 1.4 best in class.The rendering is simply astounding.

Two things can be true...the 50mm DFA is good and the 55mm is also good. Maybe they're both good for different reasons? I'm literally just asking if anyone happens to have any portraits shot with the 55 that they'd like to share.

Reason why in the context of a wedding a 55 or 58 might be preferred. When you focus close with a 50mm you begin to have a little bit of face widening, where as a 55/58 acts a tiny bit more like a portrait lens and is just a bit more pleasing. Also the 58/1.4 has the same effective DoF as a Noctilux at 1.0, just thanks to the slight extra reach. AGAIN, the DFA is a fine lens, but some people may choose to use other lenses for their own reasons. Same reasons why someone may have wanted to own the 43 over a 50mm. Little differences go a long way, and one person's preferences don't invalidate yours.

[pid]

I would recommend you the FA77 f1.8
It has exactly the look you are looking for and mabe better. It is my favorite Portrait lens.
I am sure you will love it. It is magic!

[Sperdynamite]

I would recommend you the FA77 f1.8
It has exactly the look you are looking for and mabe better. It is my favorite Portrait lens.
I am sure you will love it. It is magic!

Oh that's definitely on my must buy list! Looking for more of a 'normal' here.

[pid]

than you are right with the DA*55 .
I own both and both are special ;-)

[repaap]

I'm not sure how this forum is about linking to other forums, but here is a great place to start if you want to see what folks are doing with the 58/1.4. Just trying to find out if the 55 has the same magic.

The review samples are great, but I'd like to see some actual people portraits at close and middle distances at 1.4 and 2.0. Just asking in case someone has them. Also not at all knocking the 50/1.4 that just came it, but it just won't be the same rendering for people and detail work.

I’d actually say that DA*55 would be quite close of this. what I saw from those examples there is lot of ’finished’ photos aswell as almost SOOC shots. Ofcourse 50/1,4 is more controlled and sharp, so you could actually shoot wide open more.

[luftfluss]

I'm literally just asking if anyone happens to have any portraits shot with the 55 that they'd like to share.

Then you should emend your thread title to reflect that, because you were literally not asking that question to begin with.

There's possibly already a forum thread about using the 55/1.4 on the K-1.

[Sperdynamite]

Then you should emend your thread title to reflect that, because you were literally not asking that question to begin with.

There's possibly already a forum thread about using the 55/1.4 on the K-1.

I have used the Nikon 58mm lens extensively at my weddings. It has an absolutely gorgeous rendering that makes it look almost medium format at times. You can see examples of this on the thread dedicated to it at FM. However I'll be getting into Pentax soon and I'm wondering if the 55mm is a good replacement for the 58? Similar focal lengths, same aperture. The 58mm is not famous for sharpness, just knock down drop dead gorgeous rendering. Would anyone be interested in blowing up this feed with 55mm 1.4 portraits on the K-1?

C'mon man. Is hyper accurate thread tittling the internet hill you need to die on today?

Also, if there were a lot of portraits in that thread, I would not have started this one.

[CarlJF]

Just putting my grain of salt (or sand). It should be noted that the DA* 55 1.4 is an APS-C lens. And although it works fine on FF more often not, it's difficult to recommend to buy one for this without any afterthought. The DFA 50 1.4 or the 77 1.8 are thus preferable since they're both FF lenses.


That said, if you look for the exact same rendering as the 58 1.4 on a Nikon, I fear there's no substitute to using the 58 1.4 on a Nikon! Each lenses will render differently and are "good" in their own rights. But none are designed to be a Pentax copy of the 58 1.4. Either you like their rendering or not, but it shouldn't be expected to be the same.

[normhead]

Two things can be true...the 50mm DFA is good and the 55mm is also good. Maybe they're both good for different reasons? I'm literally just asking if anyone happens to have any portraits shot with the 55 that they'd like to share.

Reason why in the context of a wedding a 55 or 58 might be preferred. When you focus close with a 50mm you begin to have a little bit of face widening, where as a 55/58 acts a tiny bit more like a portrait lens and is just a bit more pleasing. Also the 58/1.4 has the same effective DoF as a Noctilux at 1.0, just thanks to the slight extra reach. AGAIN, the DFA is a fine lens, but some people may choose to use other lenses for their own reasons. Same reasons why someone may have wanted to own the 43 over a 50mm. Little differences go a long way, and one person's preferences don't invalidate yours.

Ya on FF my favourite portrait lens would probably be 77-100. I'm not sure the 58 is enough different from the 55 to make a difference.Traditionally for me 55mm has been the FL for images with two subjects. I'm guessing that's why you may have trouble finding DA* 55 1.4 portraits. Rondec has many portraits of his kids taken with the DA*55.

RICOH ANNOUNCES AVAILABILITY OF HD PENTAX-D FA★50mm F1.4 SDM AW STAR-SERIES LENS - Page 66 - PentaxForums.com

---------- Post added 05-31-19 at 01:17 PM ----------

Just putting my grain of salt (or sand). It should be noted that the DA* 55 1.4 is an APS-C lens. And although it works fine on FF more often not, it's difficult to recommend to buy one for this without any afterthought. The DFA 50 1.4 or the 77 1.8 are thus preferable since they're both FF lenses.


That said, if you look for the exact same rendering as the 58 1.4 on a Nikon, I fear there's no substitute to using the 58 1.4 on a Nikon! Each lenses will render differently and are "good" in their own rights. But none are designed to be a Pentax copy of the 58 1.4. Either you like their rendering or not, but it shouldn't be expected to be the same.

Really good point. As my studio instructor once said, "find the lens you love, buy the camera it goes on." If what you want is the Nikon 58 1.4 buy it. Expecting another lens to be the same is getting lost in a pipe dream.

If it were me, I'd be going to flicker and typing in the name of each lens in the search engine. The cheap and dirty way to see what any given lens can do.