[MNB]

Looking for something which obviously is a good lens. But also if there is any lenses that are like...known for some kind of special thing about them. Which make the photos ”special” due to the lens.

A lens which will make Black and white photos a special feel about them.

Not sure how to descibe what i’m looking for here...

Is there any vintage lens that are affordable?

Is the SMC Pentax-M Asahi 50mm f/1.4 ”the one” or anything else that you would recommend?

For my K-70.

[ramseybuckeye]

Looking for something which obviously is a good lens. But also if there is any lenses that are like...known for some kind of special thing about them. Which make the photos ”special” due to the lens.

A lens which will make Black and white photos a special feel about them.

Not sure how to descibe what i’m looking for here...

Is there any vintage lens that are affordable?

Is the SMC Pentax-M Asahi 50mm f/1.4 ”the one” or anything else that you would recommend?

For my K-70.

Most of the vintage lenses are affordable, even autofocus in the F50/1.7. You may get as many different answers as responses on which lens. I haven't used enough 50s to say any are special. I had a couple Takumar 50/1.4 that did not seem anything special, BUT, I don't think I really knew how to use them, as I had them not long after I had a DSLR, I later had a Tak 55/1.8 which put out nice results. Personally I just don't use the 50mm focal length that much5, so I haven't kept many for very long. I currently have an F 50/1.7 and a Sigma Macro 50/2.8. The Sigma is manual focus with an A setting, and I use it quite a bit on occasion for close work. So a macro is another option, although I think you may be looking for pixie dust, the F may have a little of that, I'm always pleased with the results, but as I mentioned, not a real useful length for me in most cases, which maybe different for you, especially if you have a K-1. One thing to add, for any of them a hood will certainly help give more contrast and less flare for black and white shooting. And there are more than just Pentax, like Mamiya in M42 mounts, Ricoh, and others.

[jlstrawman]

Look around the site. Many resources including:

Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

[boojum]

If you browse YouTube there are a lot of vids on that Super Takumar and SMC F1.4 50mm lens. It is a good lens. It can be had pretty cheap. The Super Takumar hovers around $125 while the SMC hovers around $75. For a lens as good as these that is a good price. I cannot tell you how enhancing it is for B&W. That's your job. Pour a new cup of coffee, sit down in front of the computer and do a search for "pentax 1.4 50mm" in YouTube and see what those vids say. And really, for this kind of money how can you go wrong for such a good lens? This is a world-class lens that was designed to be better that Zeiss.

[pschlute]

Pentax didn't make a bad 50. I suggest you go for a 1.4 or 1.7

The 1.4 are generally regarded higher than the 1.7. Go for the SMC "K" series or the slightly cheaper later M series, either 1.4 or 1.7. If you go for an A series you will get auto exposure but focus will still be manual. If you want AF then you need a F series or the later FA series.

The M and A series f2.0 50mm lenses are not well regarded (mainly because they are slow and soft wide open) although will still provide a very decent picture.

"Special feel" ?...... well that is your job

[swanlefitte]

Hard to go wrong with a 50. The special lens talked about alot is the helios for cheap.
Helios 44-2 58mm F/2 Lens Reviews - Russian and Zenitar Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database
There are many versions, i believe it is the 44-2 considered the most special followed by the 44-m.

Looking for something which obviously is a good lens. But also if there is any lenses that are like...known for some kind of special thing about them. Which make the photos ”special” due to the lens.

A lens which will make Black and white photos a special feel about them.

Not sure how to descibe what i’m looking for here...

Is there any vintage lens that are affordable?

Is the SMC Pentax-M Asahi 50mm f/1.4 ”the one” or anything else that you would recommend?

For my K-70.

Any Pentax 50mm F1.4 or 1.7 is a good one. In the film era you usually bought a camera with a 50mm. I do like the A 50mm F1.4 and the F 50mm F1.4 is even better than the A. I made a lot of portraits of children with the A one. Lovely skin tones and very sharp and still there was a soft quality that made those children look very friendly. The F version on the other hand, very sharp and very detailed. Great in the outdoors. Both I think very affordable now a days. The F version has a better build than the FA version.
Another amazing lens is the not vintage DA* 55mm. I own one because, I guess it was a stroke of luck, a new one was offered for a price less than that of the FA 50mm 1.4. And as I have APS-C camera's it works very well on these.
The M 50mm F1.7 is also a very good lens, I own two of them, one came with the LX and the other with an ME Super and I cannot recall why I did not trade it in.
Prime lenses, however, ask a bit more from the photographer than a zoom does. After using zooms for a long time you have to adapt yourself to the single focal length.

[Benz3ne]

I personally really like the SMC-M 50mm f/1.4. It was nice on the K-70 I previously owned and is nice on full-frame.
Bokeh is smooth and soft where it needs to be and the lens is sharp stopped down a little.
The SMC-M 50mm f/1.7 is also a strong lens for not a lot of money, but marginally slower. It still produces wonderful out-of-focus areas and is easy to find and handle, and typically inexpensive compared to some of the other options for a fast 50.
I'd suggest seeing if you could try the 50mm f/1.7 first, see how you get on with that and you can 'upgrade' to a f/1.4 in due course as the characteristics are, in my opinion, similar. Same goes for the SMC-K 55mm f/1.8 which shares a design with some of the Takumar 55mm's.

[Jonathan Mac]

As already said, there are no bad Pentax 50s. The M and A series f/2 variants are probably the worst but even they have their fans, but considering the very small price difference to go with an f/1.7 instead, the f/2s are not worth it.

I would add my vote for the M 50mm f/1.4 for portraits. Stop down to f/2.4 or f/2.8 for sharp results in the in-focus area while maintaining a good background blur.

[kypfer]

Hard to go wrong with a 50. The special lens talked about alot is the helios for cheap.
Helios 44-2 58mm F/2 Lens Reviews - Russian and Zenitar Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database
There are many versions, i believe it is the 44-2 considered the most special followed by the 44-m.

The Helios-44 and it's variants is indeed a "different" lens and well regarded. Apart from the obvious necessity of needing an M42-PK adaptor, unless one is fortunate enough to find the almost fabled Helios-44K in PK mount, a couple of points to note.
i) : The early Helios-44-2 has a very narrow lens base, sufficiently slim to cause light leaks when used on an adaptor. Not a problem to work-around, but something to be aware of. Also the pre-set aperture mechanism is found a little confusing by some
ii) : I believe some of the later versions are "auto-aperture only". Again, not a major problem but something that will probably need to be "dealt with" unless only working wide-open.

The Helios-44M is indeed a good choice. A full-width base, so no light leaks and an A/M switch to control the aperture

Enjoy

[Ronald Oakes]

Personally , I love the SMC-K 55mm f1.8 for B&W photography. However for portraits its a bit too sharp at times.

[boriscleto]

Pentax didn't make a bad 50. I suggest you go for a 1.4 or 1.7

Outside of the three element designs like the Domiplan is there any such thing as a bad 50mm? The Riconar 55/2.2 might be another example of bad...

[pres589]

A truly bad 50? Probably not, no. Some might be not so great for OP's purpose but still a good lens; I would like to try an M 50 f4 Macro for general daylight walk-around use with film but f4 is going to make subject separation & challenging lighting a bit harder to deal with.


I have a couple Chinon 50's that might be good for this sort of thing, an f1.7 MC and an f1.9 SC. Both should do okay but Pentax's offerings are nicer. I think Ricoh managed to make a couple of dud 50's but they're probably not that bad and shooting with digital allows for some correction in post. I really should spend some time cleaning up the Chinons and put them through their paces at some point against the Pentax glass I have.

[ChrisPlatt]

Don't forget the highly regarded 50/2 XR Rikenon...

Chris

[Ronald Oakes]

Don't forget the highly regarded 50/2 XR Rikenon...

Chris

Actually the Ricoh Rikenon 50mm f2.0 (non-designated version) is also highly regarded. Glad to see another Ricoh fan !
https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/ricoh-rikenon-50mm-f-2.html