[pres589]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

I wouldn't get a non-AF lens for an AF-equipped body unless you want to mod the body with a focusing screen. And that's not something I would consider if I were at your level of experience.

SO, F's, FA's, and DA's are where I would recommend looking. The DA 50 1.8 is fast focusing and light weight and the IQ is pretty good as is flare resistance. The F and FA 50 1.4's and 1.7's will outperform it a bit but you may not really notice this in practice, especially without pixel peeping. You really can't go wrong with any of these. The D-FA 50 isn't something I would recommend as it is massive and costly. The DA*55 seems very nice (I've never used it) but I would almost rather get a cheap 50 1.7 or 1.8 and sell that on if you decide to try the DA*55 and like it.

You can buy used for the price of renting these lenses twice, so honestly, I might suggest just buying one and giving that a shot. Full disclosure: I have a DA 50 for sale here and would recommend buying even if I wasn't. Rent for $45 all in vs. buy for $80? Seems like buying makes more sense here (which is rare).

[stevebrot]

I would add that there is only one star lens in the group:

Ha! Ha! Thanks for addressing the omission! One might also add the D FA* 50/1.4 at an even higher premium price. Both are outside my radar, mostly because of price and because I already have a ton of decent fast 50s including the DA 50/1.8.


Steve

[aslyfox]

Ha! Ha! Thanks for addressing the omission! One might also add the D FA* 50/1.4 at an even higher premium price. Both are outside my radar, mostly because of price and because I already have a ton of decent fast 50s including the DA 50/1.8.


Steve

opps

2 star lenses

Pentax * lenses do they live up to the reputation and why

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/360193-pen...#ixzz62iy3SoMf

[stevebrot]

I wouldn't get a non-AF lens for an AF-equipped body unless you want to mod the body with a focusing screen. And that's not something I would consider if I were at your level of experience.

You make an excellent point in regards to real-world usability. The stock focus screen is often inadequate by itself and even with focus confirmation the combination may often disappoint.* Some users recommend a viewfinder magnifier such as the Pentax O-ME53 for manual focus and report good results.

I use an aftermarket screen with split-image focus aid, but this is not an option I advise for other than the experienced user since screen calibration is essential and difficult to do. The fall-back for fine focus is magnified live view which works great, except that it is pretty much limited to tripod use.

For the benefit of the OP ( @gump ), I believe that @jsherman999 still has a Pentax-FA 50/1.7 for sale on the Marketplace at a decent price (LINK)


Steve

* The flip side is that manual focus confirmation has the same success rate as regular PDAF AF with the same lens...deep subject.

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 10-18-2019 at 09:50 AM.

[Madaboutpix]

After a year with a K-70 I am comfortable enough to look at additional lenses. At this time it is improve upon the 18-55 kit lens for "portrait" shots. I am not professional and do not do a lot in this area so that makes me hesitate to invest big bucks. The Pentax 50mm seems a logical choice. It get high marks in PF reviews. There seems to be good selection in the used market. Where I have been stopped is that there are apparently 3 varieties, full AF and aperture control, MF with "A" setting, and the "M" which recalls the good old days. Yes, one is faster than another, aren't we all. The usual stuff I shoot does not demand any of these particular features.
The question. Are there any aspects, quirks, or problems in any variety of the lens that are missing from the reviews?

It's probably not even missing from the reviews but might fail to register, given the avalanche of excellent and detailed information you've already received in this thread and if you followed the links. What I'm referring to is the simple fact that you almost can't go wrong by getting the truly plastic-fantastic smc DA 50mm F1.8, unless you're looking for something to take to the Amazon or the Gobi Desert. Not only is it dirt-cheap for a new AF lens, super-lightweight, and compact. It also packs a punch in terms of image quality that will, dare I say it, blow you away when you're used to the kit zoom output. There's a very convenient dedicated rubber hood by JJC for it, which is called LH-RA52, and you may also want a proper Pentax rear cap to replace the cheapo version coming with the lens, but otherwise, you're in for a ton of fun:

[gump]

"I'm referring to is the simple fact that you almost can't go wrong by getting the truly plastic-fantastic smc DA 50mm F1.8,"

Yeah, after digesting the abundance of info/opinions from my question, I have come back to the 50 1.8. Although I am not adverse to dealing with ancient technologies the price-value factor seems dominant. Also, I have a filter set in that size. That save a buck or two. Thanks to you and all for the responses.

[mikesbike]

Great choice. I second the recommendation of Madaboutpix regarding the rubber hood. It will screw into the front filter threads of the lens or the filter if using one. Just be sure to screw it in very lightly. it does't even matter if it is slightly loose. It could quickly grab too tight and be hard to remove. There are also some hard plastic inexpensive screw-on hoods, but the rubber one can be rolled up while on the lens for temporary storage purposes. Having a hood in place can maximize clarity and contrast in your photos.

[Paul the Sunman]

The DA 50 f/1.8 is $97 new at B&H. For your purposes, it is a nice improvement in IQ and speed from your 18-55. The PF user rating is 9.22, so you won't go wrong. A generic screw-in hood will cost you less than $10 if you want one.

[stevebrot]

A generic screw-in hood will cost you less than $10 if you want one.

That is basically what I use, though for 50mm on APS-C one may quite reasonably use a deeper hood intended for "tele". I have been dealing with heavystar on eBay for years for generic metal hoods and use the one linked below on my DA 50/1.8. The cool part is that the hood opening will accept a 58mm pinch-type lens cap so one does not have to be swapping the hood on and off. No, its not as handy as a collapsible rubber hood, but the extra depth is nice.

New! Metal Tele 52mm Screw-in Lens Hood Telephoto | eBay


Steve

[kiwi_jono]

The great think about Pentax is you have so much choice when it comes to second hand lens, as anything from a M42 Takumar to a modern DA / DFA can be used on all current K mount bodies.

When I was shooting exclusively APS-C I quite liked lenses around 35mm (loved the FA 35 f2) - and strangely still quite like the focal length on the K-1 (even though its wider now).

However if 50mm is a preferred focal length (or actually a fast 50mm is probably worth having anyway), then there are plenty of options as has already pointed out. Older lenses (like the early K mount and Takumar lenses) have pros and cons. For example I have a Super Takumar 50 f1.4 that I quite like.
Pros:
* I quite like the rendering of the bokeh and still used it occasionally for this reason
* Small, solid build
* Still relatively cheap
Cons:
* Flare and contrast in bright light is an issue and a good hood makes a huge difference (pretty much manditory for outdoor use)
* Not as sharp wide open (especially near edges) as modern DA, DA*, DFA* are.
* CA is also higher than modern lenses

Also the Takumar 55mm f1.8, are pretty capable lens.

Moving on from Takumar Optically the K 50 f1.4, and M 50 1.4 are same I believe. There was a tweak to the formula from the A 50 f1.4 (I noticed a bit more sharpness on my A 50). The FA 50 f1.4 is also slightly tweaked I believe (certainly mine has subtle differences from my A 50 f1.4). FA 50 f1.4 contrast is not as good wide open as more modern lenses but its still a great lens to have and its wide open character can be used to good affect (although I prefer the rendering of mine around f2).

[tvdtvdtvd]

There is an old adage, there's no such thing as a bad fast fifty.

Stevebrot's synopsis above is quite thorough. Nonetheless, I think any dedicated 50mm prime will show a marked improvement
at that FL over your kit lens. My advice is to simply dive in with something inexpensive, then tweak that choice per requirements.
The recommendation to forego the 50/2.0 is sound; you can typically buy a 50/1.7 for about the same money. So the big question
is manual or AF. If you're not afraid of MF, then get a M50/1.7. These can often be found for as cheap as $20, though $30-$50 is
not unreasonable for a good clean copy. If you definitely prefer AF, then get a DA50/1.8. Either lens will give you more speed,
sharper images and better rendering than the 18-55mm.

[RGlasel]

Are there any aspects, quirks, or problems in any variety of the lens that are missing from the reviews?

Sticking to the DA f1.8, a couple of things to keep in mind: Focusing on a subject at f1.8 (or f1.7 or f1.4, for that matter) presents issues you will never have to deal with using your 18-55 kit lens. Using AF, getting the camera to focus on exactly the area you want it to is much less forgiving and can be almost impossible handheld. The plastic fantastic DA 50 does have a manual focus ring, but it is a poor cousin to the focus ring on the manual focus A or M versions. Compared to the f1.4 50mm lenses, bokeh is not as creamy and there is something lacking in the DA 50 f1.8 (micro-contrast maybe) that seems to reduce the visual impact of photos taken with it, but it still has smooth, not too busy bokeh and it is still reasonably sharp. On APS-C cameras, 50mm is a good focal length for portraits, especially if you don't have enough room to be 20 feet away from your subject. For the price, the DA 50 is an excellent value and a good gateway lens to get you started experimenting with portraiture.

[builttospill]

Just get the FA 43 and be forever done with the 50s.

[ZombieArmy]

You make an excellent point in regards to real-world usability. The stock focus screen is often inadequate by itself and even with focus confirmation the combination may often disappoint.* Some users recommend a viewfinder magnifier such as the Pentax O-ME53 for manual focus and report good results.

I use an aftermarket screen with split-image focus aid, but this is not an option I advise for other than the experienced user since screen calibration is essential and difficult to do. The fall-back for fine focus is magnified live view which works great, except that it is pretty much limited to tripod use.

For the benefit of the OP ( @gump ), I believe that @jsherman999 still has a Pentax-FA 50/1.7 for sale on the Marketplace at a decent price (LINK)


Steve

* The flip side is that manual focus confirmation has the same success rate as regular PDAF AF with the same lens...deep subject.

Focus peaking is perfectly fine for on the fly manual focus. With practice you can be extremely quick. It is of course not as accurate as magnified live view (what is?) but I usually get critical focus or close to it.

[stevebrot]

Focus peaking is perfectly fine for on the fly manual focus. With practice you can be extremely quick. It is of course not as accurate as magnified live view (what is?) but I usually get critical focus or close to it.

I have mixed feelings about focus peaking. It works well for shallow or moderate focus gradients and sucks if the gradients are steep with huge areas (sometimes a meter deep) showing the same "peak". Still though, the proof of the pudding is in the eating and if it works for you and others, that is good enough for me.


Steve