Best K-mount lens for hand held low light photography

Pete82 · 10-08-2019, 10:06 AM

Which one would be a better choice for hand held low light photography with K3 - SMC Pentax 50mm f/1.2 (399€) or SMC Pentax-DA* 55mm F1.4 SDM (699€)?
How would they compare with each other in terms of an image quality at f1.4 or for an example at f2.0?

Are there some other lenses I should be considering as well? I don't have M42 to K adapter and the original Pentax ones are hard to find atm where I live, so I am stuck with K-mount options for now.
Also I'd prefer non radioactive ones. (I don't eat bananas)

Until now I have been using the DA 50 mm f1.8 (couple of examples from the last weekend below) but for what ever reason I have never really bonded with that lens.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

View Picture EXIF

**MossyRocks** · 10-08-2019, 10:23 AM

I really like my A 50/1.2. It is soft almost glowy wide open but stop it down to 1.6 or 1.8 and it starts getting really sharp. I haven't used the 55/1.4 SDM so I can't speak to it. I've had some fun shooting with the 50/1.2 wide open at ISO 100 about an hour after sunset and the ultra shallow DoF is fun. Some other lenses to consider would be any of the 50/1.4 lenses. I don't think you will find a bad lens (maybe really old or beat to hell ones as the exception) at either 1.4 or 1.2 as these were meant to be a good step up from the 1.7, 1.8 or 2.0 kit lenses which weren't bad by any means.

**pepperberry farm** · 10-08-2019, 10:31 AM

Cosina 55/1.2 in k-mount...

DeadJohn · 10-08-2019, 10:41 AM - **1 Like**

Are you committed to a 50mm-ish focal length? If not, wider angles will tolerate a slower handheld shutter speed. Consider the FA 31 f1.8.

**MossyRocks** · 10-08-2019, 10:46 AM

Originally posted by DeadJohn

Are you committed to a 50mm-ish focal length? If not, wider angles will tolerate a slower handheld shutter speed. Consider the FA 31 f1.8.

I had forgotten about that as a suggestion.

**Wingincamera** · 10-08-2019, 11:09 AM

Your examples show you are not shooting wide open, might not need those 1.4 lenses.

Pete82 · 10-08-2019, 11:09 AM

Thanks for good suggestions!
I kinda like 50mm-ish short telephoto lengths but anything between 28mm and 35mm would be fine as well, especially as they allow longer shutter speeds.

Cosina 55/1.2 and FA 31 f1.8 are not availabe around here right now so I might opt for the 50mm f1.2.

---------- Post added 08-10-19 at 21:13 ----------

Originally posted by Wingincamera

Your examples show you are not shooting wide open, might not need those 1.4 lenses.

That's true. Any f2.0 that is quite sharp wide open might be enough..
Altough the reason why I didn't shoot those examples any wider is that my copy of DA 50 mm f1.8 doesn't look good if it's not stopped down enough. Those examples were shot at f2.5 and there was still lots of fringing.

Last edited by Pete82; 10-08-2019 at 11:23 AM.

Qman · 10-08-2019, 12:26 PM

Since you didn't give a price limit, I'll say the D FA* 50mm 1.4 is the best option.
If you want hand-held, then go wide! DA15mm or DA14mm give excellent, distinctive results. The 14mm is F2.8, so it works quite well hand-held.

bob5050 · 10-08-2019, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by Pete82

Until now I have been using the DA 50 mm f1.8 (couple of examples from the last weekend below) but for what ever reason I have never really bonded with that lens.

First question is what's wrong with the current lens? Only you know why you haven't warmed to that.

Since both your suggested replacements are also in the 50-55mm range, I gather that it's more a question of best glass available than focal length. Generally the * lenses are what gets recommended: so the DA* 55mm.

If you think you might be happier with a slightly wider focal length, I like the Pentax 31mm F/1.8 FA Limited suggestion. Wish I had one.

But to date, I've been more of a value buyer than absolute best. My current low-light walk-around companions are the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 and the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, both still available in K-mount.

traveler

tokyoscape · 10-08-2019, 04:21 PM - **1 Like**

I am using 55* with a k3. I don't have a 50 f1.2. so I can't compare them. i will talk about 55* alone.
It usable even at f1.4. Good at 1.8 and everything very good after that. Assume that you can nail focus at larger aperture.

It is a star lens so the rendering is very good. I love my copy. Never have problem doing handheld for night street photo at 1.8. but autofocus can be tricky. I usually manual focus by magnifying the live view.

When it is flared it flare like nobody business. You might find your f1.8 flared less. I used to have fa50 f2.8 and the flare uglyness is acceptable! When 55* flare, it is unusable most of the time.
But it is not really a deal breaker if you can change composition to avoid it.

**clickclick** · 10-08-2019, 06:43 PM

I agree with MossyRocks on liking my A 1.2. It can have a glow wide open, and it clears quickly. I even think at 1.4 it's on it's way, enough so I will grab this lens over my A 1.4. It is also very nicely made and just feels nice.

Thinking of pepperberry farm's recommendation, a Porst 50/1.2 comes to mind. I have not used this lens, but it's another folks seem to like.

Don't forget your depth of field is going to be silly thin wide open at 1.2.

**MossyRocks** · 10-08-2019, 07:01 PM

Originally posted by clickclick

It can have a glow wide open, and it clears quickly. I even think at 1.4 it's on it's way, enough so I will grab this lens over my A 1.4.

I like playing with the glow and it is much strong in high contrast situations and it will purple fringe like mad in such a situation. it is a fun effect, and if you shoot in a low contrast setting it will be substantially less. I will always take it over my 50/1.4s since at 1.4 the 1.2 is sharper than the 1.4s. Get it above 2.8 and nail the focus and it is getting silly sharp. I like it because when you get thing right with it you will get textures rendered like I get on my 77 ltd.

Sandy Hancock · 10-08-2019, 07:27 PM

If price and weight are not limitations, the Sigma Art 35/1.4 and or DFA* 50/1.4 are the creme de la creme.

Both are razor sharp wide open across the frame - especially on crop.

**Just1MoreDave** · 10-08-2019, 08:34 PM

Originally posted by clickclick

...Don't forget your depth of field is going to be silly thin wide open at 1.2.

Many people don't realize that the wide open depth of field of a 55/1.4 is just about the same as a 50/1.2.

A used DA* 55/1.4 is often about the price of a K50/1.2 and cheaper than the A version, because people are afraid of the SDM. But if it breaks you still have weather seals and other modern stuff. The flare is important; it's unexpected for Pentax lenses. The DA* 55/1.4 would be my choice around 50mm.

I like the DA21/3.2 which might be overlooked because it seems slow. The focal length means you don't need a high shutter speed, and focusing is easier. I like the Sigma Superwide II 24mm f2.8 or the Pentax-F 28mm f2.8 for the same reasons.

stevebrot · 10-08-2019, 08:58 PM

A few points to consider:

Difference between f/2.0 and f/1.4 = one stop

Difference between f/1.7 and f/1.2 = one stop

Difference between f/1.4 and f/1.2 = 1/3 or 1/2 stop depending on how one counts

I own three f/1.4 lenses and none are my first choice for low-light shooting.*

Steve

* Hard to fine focus even in good light.

10-08-2019, 04:21 PM - 1 Like	#10
tokyoscape Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2018 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,256	I am using 55* with a k3. I don't have a 50 f1.2. so I can't compare them. i will talk about 55* alone. It usable even at f1.4. Good at 1.8 and everything very good after that. Assume that you can nail focus at larger aperture. It is a star lens so the rendering is very good. I love my copy. Never have problem doing handheld for night street photo at 1.8. but autofocus can be tricky. I usually manual focus by magnifying the live view. When it is flared it flare like nobody business. You might find your f1.8 flared less. I used to have fa50 f2.8 and the flare uglyness is acceptable! When 55* flare, it is unusable most of the time. But it is not really a deal breaker if you can change composition to avoid it. Last edited by tokyoscape; 10-08-2019 at 04:29 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Do you still use a hand held light meter when shooting with a Pentax DSLR?	Saltwater Images	General Photography	14	08-15-2017 09:53 AM
hand held light meters?	JLW	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	3	08-14-2013 09:54 PM
How low can hand held go? Not ready for Vogue.	Mark K5	Pentax DSLR Discussion	15	05-12-2012 08:55 AM
Hand held light meters	squarerigger	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	19	07-02-2007 09:51 AM
Need for hand-held light meters?	Ash	Pentax DSLR Discussion	14	05-16-2007 05:08 AM

10-08-2019, 10:23 AM	#2
MossyRocks Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,982	I really like my A 50/1.2. It is soft almost glowy wide open but stop it down to 1.6 or 1.8 and it starts getting really sharp. I haven't used the 55/1.4 SDM so I can't speak to it. I've had some fun shooting with the 50/1.2 wide open at ISO 100 about an hour after sunset and the ultra shallow DoF is fun. Some other lenses to consider would be any of the 50/1.4 lenses. I don't think you will find a bad lens (maybe really old or beat to hell ones as the exception) at either 1.4 or 1.2 as these were meant to be a good step up from the 1.7, 1.8 or 2.0 kit lenses which weren't bad by any means.

10-08-2019, 10:31 AM	#3
pepperberry farm amateur dirt farmer Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: probably out in a field somewhere... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 41,765	Cosina 55/1.2 in k-mount...

10-08-2019, 10:41 AM - 1 Like	#4
DeadJohn Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: New York Posts: 4,834	Are you committed to a 50mm-ish focal length? If not, wider angles will tolerate a slower handheld shutter speed. Consider the FA 31 f1.8.

10-08-2019, 10:46 AM	#5
MossyRocks Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,982	Originally posted by DeadJohn Are you committed to a 50mm-ish focal length? If not, wider angles will tolerate a slower handheld shutter speed. Consider the FA 31 f1.8. I had forgotten about that as a suggestion.

10-08-2019, 11:09 AM	#6
Wingincamera Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Pine Haven, Wyoming Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,182	Your examples show you are not shooting wide open, might not need those 1.4 lenses.

10-08-2019, 11:09 AM	#7
Pete82 Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2016 Posts: 97 Original Poster	Thanks for good suggestions! I kinda like 50mm-ish short telephoto lengths but anything between 28mm and 35mm would be fine as well, especially as they allow longer shutter speeds. Cosina 55/1.2 and FA 31 f1.8 are not availabe around here right now so I might opt for the 50mm f1.2. ---------- Post added 08-10-19 at 21:13 ---------- Originally posted by Wingincamera Your examples show you are not shooting wide open, might not need those 1.4 lenses. That's true. Any f2.0 that is quite sharp wide open might be enough.. Altough the reason why I didn't shoot those examples any wider is that my copy of DA 50 mm f1.8 doesn't look good if it's not stopped down enough. Those examples were shot at f2.5 and there was still lots of fringing. Last edited by Pete82; 10-08-2019 at 11:23 AM.

10-08-2019, 12:26 PM	#8
Qman Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2017 Posts: 232	Since you didn't give a price limit, I'll say the D FA* 50mm 1.4 is the best option. If you want hand-held, then go wide! DA15mm or DA14mm give excellent, distinctive results. The 14mm is F2.8, so it works quite well hand-held.

10-08-2019, 02:23 PM	#9
bob5050 Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 41	Originally posted by Pete82 Until now I have been using the DA 50 mm f1.8 (couple of examples from the last weekend below) but for what ever reason I have never really bonded with that lens. First question is what's wrong with the current lens? Only you know why you haven't warmed to that. Since both your suggested replacements are also in the 50-55mm range, I gather that it's more a question of best glass available than focal length. Generally the * lenses are what gets recommended: so the DA* 55mm. If you think you might be happier with a slightly wider focal length, I like the Pentax 31mm F/1.8 FA Limited suggestion. Wish I had one. But to date, I've been more of a value buyer than absolute best. My current low-light walk-around companions are the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 and the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, both still available in K-mount. traveler

10-08-2019, 06:43 PM	#11
clickclick Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Location: East Coast Posts: 2,903	I agree with MossyRocks on liking my A 1.2. It can have a glow wide open, and it clears quickly. I even think at 1.4 it's on it's way, enough so I will grab this lens over my A 1.4. It is also very nicely made and just feels nice. Thinking of pepperberry farm's recommendation, a Porst 50/1.2 comes to mind. I have not used this lens, but it's another folks seem to like. Don't forget your depth of field is going to be silly thin wide open at 1.2.

10-08-2019, 07:01 PM	#12
MossyRocks Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,982	Originally posted by clickclick It can have a glow wide open, and it clears quickly. I even think at 1.4 it's on it's way, enough so I will grab this lens over my A 1.4. I like playing with the glow and it is much strong in high contrast situations and it will purple fringe like mad in such a situation. it is a fun effect, and if you shoot in a low contrast setting it will be substantially less. I will always take it over my 50/1.4s since at 1.4 the 1.2 is sharper than the 1.4s. Get it above 2.8 and nail the focus and it is getting silly sharp. I like it because when you get thing right with it you will get textures rendered like I get on my 77 ltd.

10-08-2019, 07:27 PM	#13
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,275	If price and weight are not limitations, the Sigma Art 35/1.4 and or DFA* 50/1.4 are the creme de la creme. Both are razor sharp wide open across the frame - especially on crop.

10-08-2019, 08:34 PM	#14
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	Originally posted by clickclick ...Don't forget your depth of field is going to be silly thin wide open at 1.2. Many people don't realize that the wide open depth of field of a 55/1.4 is just about the same as a 50/1.2. A used DA* 55/1.4 is often about the price of a K50/1.2 and cheaper than the A version, because people are afraid of the SDM. But if it breaks you still have weather seals and other modern stuff. The flare is important; it's unexpected for Pentax lenses. The DA* 55/1.4 would be my choice around 50mm. I like the DA21/3.2 which might be overlooked because it seems slow. The focal length means you don't need a high shutter speed, and focusing is easier. I like the Sigma Superwide II 24mm f2.8 or the Pentax-F 28mm f2.8 for the same reasons.

10-08-2019, 08:58 PM	#15
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	A few points to consider: Difference between f/2.0 and f/1.4 = one stop Difference between f/1.7 and f/1.2 = one stop Difference between f/1.4 and f/1.2 = 1/3 or 1/2 stop depending on how one counts I own three f/1.4 lenses and none are my first choice for low-light shooting.* Steve * Hard to fine focus even in good light.