Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Great portrait lens combo with 77mm ltd?
Pentax K 50mm F/1.2 2631.71%
FA 43mm Limited F/1.9 4554.88%
Other 1113.41%
Voters: 82. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-06-2009, 02:13 PM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 115
Poll: K 50mm F/1.2 or FA 43mm Limited F/1.9?

I was looking to buy another portrait lens beside my 77mm ltd. They appear to be in pretty much same price in the street market now and I hears someone sell their 50mm F/1.2 to buy 43mm others doing opposite way!
I dont really often shot in low light environment and sharpness/bokeh is my #1 criteria to pick a lens. Lenses I have now is 12-24mm, 31mm, 77mm, fa 100mm macro, F* 300mm.

Thank you for your thought

02-06-2009, 02:25 PM   #2
Veteran Member
vizjerei's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,418
I don't know about the 43mm as I have the 35, 50 then 77 so for me it is not really worth it to go get a 43. 50/1.2 is sharp, and bokeh is like butter.
02-06-2009, 02:26 PM   #3
Veteran Member
pasipasi's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Oulu
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 533
I'd take the 43mm, but maybe mostly because I only use the M (or K) lenses on film bodies, A or newer on digital. I'd love to have the A50/1.2 though.
02-06-2009, 03:27 PM   #4
Veteran Member
Miserere's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,994
I don't see these lenses as being competitors in any way if you're looking at them for portraiture.

For portraits it has to be the K 50/1.2. I had one and it's a fantastic lens. I only sold it when I bought the A version.

02-06-2009, 04:06 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
at 1.2 it is pretty difficult to focus and rather heavy for 50mm and if you're not going to use the 1.2 much, then it's not worth it imo. the fa43 is nice and compact and really useful for walkaround use. as well w/ the K, the metering will not be as reliable as an A.

i sold my A50 1.2 and still have the FA43.
02-06-2009, 04:06 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
if you're interested in the 1.2, i compiled a bunch of stuff about it in my article
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/27090-pentax-5...on-photos.html
02-06-2009, 04:11 PM   #7
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,476
If you want a 1.2, you'll know it. For portraits, forget about it. Even if you *have* a 1.2, (And I do, for my film Canons,) you should never shoot *at* 1.2 except under very precisely-controlled conditions or when it's absolutely the only way to get the shot. Especially on crop, DOF is so wafer-thin, you just won't get sharpness on living subjects that way, not souch as you'd need to worry about the lens.

I have mine cause it focuses very easily in the field, ...most 1.2s are damn soft wide open. Exceptions are things so expensive that if you can afford it, you know exactly why.

You only use that lens speed in the field when you just can't handhold it stoped down. Even to f2 or so.

Especially under controlled conditions, choose the lens that works best where you will actually be shooting. In general, speed better than f2 should be a focus aid and a fallback. Shoot stopped down more, anyway.

My 1.2, I use to nail focus when it's otherwise hard to see, and I try to get off that wide stop if at all possible. Not a case where narrower DOF is necessariloy better. Unless you know precisely what you're about.

if you want to do portraits under controlled conditions, 1.8 will do you.

Or, if you have to ask, you don't need a 1.2. A 1.4 is often a better all-around lens, and most digital bodoes can't show you the difference anyway.
02-06-2009, 05:55 PM   #8
mer
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Greece
Posts: 237
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
If you want a 1.2, you'll know it. For portraits, forget about it. Even if you *have* a 1.2, (And I do, for my film Canons,) you should never shoot *at* 1.2 except under very precisely-controlled conditions or when it's absolutely the only way to get the shot. Especially on crop, DOF is so wafer-thin, you just won't get sharpness on living subjects that way, not souch as you'd need to worry about the lens.

I have mine cause it focuses very easily in the field, ...most 1.2s are damn soft wide open. Exceptions are things so expensive that if you can afford it, you know exactly why.

You only use that lens speed in the field when you just can't handhold it stoped down. Even to f2 or so.

Especially under controlled conditions, choose the lens that works best where you will actually be shooting. In general, speed better than f2 should be a focus aid and a fallback. Shoot stopped down more, anyway.

My 1.2, I use to nail focus when it's otherwise hard to see, and I try to get off that wide stop if at all possible. Not a case where narrower DOF is necessariloy better. Unless you know precisely what you're about.

if you want to do portraits under controlled conditions, 1.8 will do you.

Or, if you have to ask, you don't need a 1.2. A 1.4 is often a better all-around lens, and most digital bodoes can't show you the difference anyway.
I disagree that you don't shoot portraits at F/1.2. All those canon 85mm F/1.2 owners must be idiots buying a 1500$+ lens when most of them use it ,mostly, for portraits and not for available light shooting . When shooting portraits you don't need absolute sharpness , this will show skin blemishes etc. Also you are wrong that on crop the dof is thinner , it is the other way around. A f/1.2 lens in crop format ( 1.5x ) has an equilavent depth of field of F/2.1 in 35mm format at any given focal length, if my quick calculations are correct. F/1.2s even under quite bad conditions will give a nice soft glow which most of the times enhances a portrait. If you are using controlled conditions , it is even better to use a longer focal length to really blur the background ( due to the narrower angle of view / poster-like ) . But even if you are using controlled conditions and require specific DOF , you may still need F/1.2 . Also F/1.2 has enough dof to shoot a portait and include most of the face characteristics . And why most digital bodies can't show you the difference between a F/1.4 and a F/1.2 and why a F/1.4 is overall a better all-around lens , just because of size , ( it is proven that the pentax F/1.2 beats the F/1.4 at F/1.4 , at least with two samples I have seen ) ?

We do agree though on the -if you are asking if you need a f/1.2 then you probably don't need- . Sorry for my bad english

Kostas from Athens,Greece


Last edited by mer; 02-06-2009 at 06:18 PM.
02-06-2009, 07:18 PM   #9
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,972
Save yourself some cash and p/u the FA50 1.4, or 1.7.

c[_]
02-06-2009, 07:24 PM   #10
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
The FA 43mm is my pick because it is the more versatile lens from a practical perspective.

- First off, the field of view is wider and you'll have a better separation in focal length to your FA 77mm than the 50mm.

- AF allows much quicker shooting and the wider FOV makes shooting subjects like street candids easier. That's a big plus AF has over focusing manually.

- The FA 43mm is small and much lighter than the 50mm f/1.2. Better portability and a smaller lens allows unobtrusive shooting, again a big plus in my book.

- The 50mm f/1.2 like most f/1.2 lenses have a trade-off in optical performance, showing better performance at wider apertures. Stopped down, most lenses would show better outright sharpness than the f/1.2. So it depends on your subject matter and the typical apertures you shoot.

- The K 50mm is an old lens. That practically means shooting only in manual mode. As good as it is, I want a lens that allows me to shoot in every exposure mode. If the lens had an A setting on the aperture ring that would be ideal, unfortunately a K lens doesn't. If you really want such a wide aperture, the FA 50mm f/1.4 would be my pick.
02-06-2009, 10:37 PM   #11
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,794
Between the two, I go for Fa 43mm ltd. The autofocus ability is always a bonus for doing outdoor protrait. This lens pops skin texture and colour much better. 50mm f1.2 makes manual focusing rather difficult but copes with high dynamic range setting better.
02-06-2009, 11:01 PM   #12
Junior Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Photos: Albums
Posts: 36
helios 44 58/f2.0

an astonishingly good lens and the cost is negligible - you might pay more for a good filter.

certainly worth a look if not a try.

Leonard
02-07-2009, 12:04 AM   #13
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,247
A50/1.2, fa135/2.8
02-07-2009, 06:12 AM   #14
Junior Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Soual, France
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 37
Well, I would go for a longer focal lenght, 43 mm is too short for me, i'm quite pleased of my Tamron 90mm, but it's way to sharp for portrait and need some computer work, also it's very refexions sensitive, he needs a good hood.
But what about a good quality Zoom ?
Most of the portraits I doo, especially in concerts are made with a 35/105 f2,8 MF Tamron and a 70/210 f3,5.
Very contrasty and sharp.
My next will be a Sigma 50/150 HSM f2,8 as to be more reactive, especially with kids.

Having such a focal lenght is great not to be too "intrusive" to the subject. Many people feel uneasy with a sticky fotografer around, and you see the difference ...

Best regards,

Thomas
02-07-2009, 07:01 AM   #15
Junior Member
carpediem007's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Eilat, Israel
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 46
I just love my K 50/1.2

I just love my K 50/1.2 and use it @1.2 regularly...

Just one example: Shallow

Best...
Michael
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
43mm, 50mm, 77mm, f/1.2, fa, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA 31mm limited, FA 43mm limited, 40mm F2.8 Sheridan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 07-28-2010 12:30 PM
For Sale - Sold: FA 43mm Limited (black) for DA* 16-50mm (US/CAN) MikeH Sold Items 2 07-14-2010 05:05 AM
For Sale - Sold: FA limited 43mm/f1.9 (black), FA limited 77mm/f1.8 (silver), FA 28-105mm/f3.2- chemxaj Sold Items 24 10-16-2008 11:17 AM
For Sale - Sold: smc Pentax-FA 77mm Limited & 43mm Limited MikeH Sold Items 2 02-13-2007 06:03 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:00 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top