DA*55mm vs. FA43mm

ll_coffee_lP · 02-19-2009, 05:35 PM

Originally posted by David Whiteley

That would be ll_coffee_lP

So, if DA*55 does outperform Sigma 70... is that good or bad for my odds of getting your 77 Ltd?

It's gonna be free, right? Value pulverized by jittery, CA-ridden but nevertheless top-notch DA*55? I might give up my stuck-aperture K135 in exchange...

I'm actually not looking for the 55 to outperform the Sigma 70. I'm more familiar with how the 77ltd and the Sigma 70 render images and am actually looking for a look that is dissimilar from the 70 and more similar to the 77ltd.

c[_]

ll_coffee_lP · 02-19-2009, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by huqedato

This DA55 doesn't impress me at all so far. Let's hope I'm wrong.

Could you upload please some full samples - preferably raws at various apertures - on a file server?
With resizes and crops we cannot have the entire picture.

Thanks!

Ummm...how about you find and test a lens for yourself? These kind folks are taking the time to show us the results of their new toys and answer lots of questions for us already.

c[_]

mazdamazda · 02-19-2009, 05:42 PM

Interesting... how would it stack up against the DA 70mm Limited (since am targetting this lens for my next purchase)?

jake123 · 02-19-2009, 05:58 PM

After seeing all the images I think the DA* 55mm is definitely sharp and contrasty wide open, but its bokeh is very disappointing.

The Sigma 50mm would be my choice at a lower price with much smoother bokeh.

Alfisti · 02-19-2009, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by brucestrange

If I was the OP, that request would be a surefire way to get me to tell people to f off.

Damn Right

**GaryM** · 02-19-2009, 07:55 PM

Originally posted by jake123

After seeing all the images I think the DA* 55mm is definitely sharp and contrasty wide open, but its bokeh is very disappointing.

The Sigma 50mm would be my choice at a lower price with much smoother bokeh.

Unless you compare the same subject shot under the same conditions with the same camera, you can't make that conclusion. Good or bad bokeh can be the result of a lot of variables.

Alfisti · 02-19-2009, 08:11 PM

Originally posted by GaryM

Unless you compare the same subject shot under the same conditions with the same camera, you can't make that conclusion. Good or bad bokeh can be the result of a lot of variables.

True, but you may as well not post any stand alone images at all then, we figure the lens can actually take pictures

dkittle · 02-19-2009, 08:19 PM

Ok, I don't wanna put the lens down...

Here is a comparison with the Sigma 70mm Macro and the 77mm ltd

**You will be able to click on the image and get a full-sized version in about an hour from the time this is posted (the fullsize images are taking a LONG time to upload to my server).

Here a random shot from dinner, some bread. The OOF highlight just above the bread is a glint from my wife's wine glass.

A simple scene which I though would give fairly good bokeh.
Focused on the vase using a left of center focus point - I did not recompose.
Imported into lightroom and then exported to jpeg - 'standard screen' sharpening on the small images, no sharpening on the large.

55mm f/1.4

55mm f/1.7

77ltd f/1.8

55mm f/2.8

70mm f/2.8

lbam · 02-19-2009, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by Alfisti

True, but you may as well not post any stand alone images at all then, we figure the lens can actually take pictures

Err.. not quite.. he's talking about everything being as equal as possible EXCEPT two different lenses..

Alfisti · 02-19-2009, 08:27 PM

Originally posted by lbam

Err.. not quite.. he's talking about everything being as equal as possible EXCEPT two different lenses..

I know, and that is great if you can do it but Don is just posting a few images to give us an idea of rendering and the like and as soonas you do that well you're going to get opinions.

dkittle · 02-19-2009, 08:34 PM

Ok, the composition is only loosely similar in what I just posted (I just guessed at how far back to lean with the 70mm and the 77mm mounted), but it's something at least.

Look, analyze, critique and take it for what it's worth.

I'm less happy now that I'm reminded what the 77mm is like. But I still like the lens for it's speed (1.4), dreamier rendering, weather proofing, quicksift (I have a Katz Eye) and SDM (silent) motor.

The real test for me will be the studio. The 77mm is very prone to hunting, about as bad as the 16-50mm in my view. The 31mm is king with being able to nail focus in the studio. I'm hoping the 55mm is as good as the 31mm and that will make it worth the price in my eyes.

Alfisti · 02-19-2009, 08:38 PM

The 16-50 is as bad as the 77???? You gotta be $hitting me surely?

ll_coffee_lP · 02-19-2009, 08:54 PM

dkittle....thank you very much for your efforts! Very much appreciated

I love the 70's rendering of course (my fave lens)
The 77 and the 55 are very close overall, but I do still see more of the 3D'ness in the 77. I think for me the 55 really shows that it is blistering sharp (2.8 for sure) and has great contrast and colour.

It looks like a fabulous lens. I can't wait to try one out in person.

c[_]

farfisa · 02-19-2009, 10:01 PM

Hey Don,

Thanks for the side-by-side. Full sized pics? You're spoiling us!
This lens definitely has a lot going for it. I'm proud that the 77 held its own though (and maybe that's just me making something out of nothing).

Oh, and I think the 55mm-28 thumbnail is pointing to the 77 1.8 full size pic (I know, somebody will check tomorrow after you fix it and say 'what's that guy always talking about wrong pics for? it's fine!')

One thing I've learned from all this is that you never really know what you can do with a lens until you get it in your hands and start shooting what you like to shoot!

Thanks again!

Originally posted by dkittle

Ok, the composition is only loosely similar in what I just posted (I just guessed at how far back to lean with the 70mm and the 77mm mounted), but it's something at least.

Look, analyze, critique and take it for what it's worth.

I'm less happy now that I'm reminded what the 77mm is like. But I still like the lens for it's speed (1.4), dreamier rendering, weather proofing, quicksift (I have a Katz Eye) and SDM (silent) motor.

The real test for me will be the studio. The 77mm is very prone to hunting, about as bad as the 16-50mm in my view. The 31mm is king with being able to nail focus in the studio. I'm hoping the 55mm is as good as the 31mm and that will make it worth the price in my eyes.

k100d · 02-19-2009, 10:19 PM

Originally posted by farfisa

Oh, and I think the 55mm-28 thumbnail is pointing to the 77 1.8 full size pic (I know, somebody will check tomorrow after you fix it and say 'what's that guy always talking about wrong pics for? it's fine!')

the exif says 55 2.8

02-19-2009, 08:19 PM	#143
dkittle Inactive Account Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Toronto, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 429	Comparison to Sigma 70mm and 77ltd Ok, I don't wanna put the lens down... Here is a comparison with the Sigma 70mm Macro and the 77mm ltd *You will be able to click on the image and get a full-sized version in about an hour from the time this is posted (the fullsize images are taking a LONG time to upload to my server). Here a random shot from dinner, some bread. The OOF highlight just above the bread is a glint from my wife's wine glass. A simple scene which I though would give fairly good bokeh. Focused on the vase using a left of center focus point - I did not recompose. Imported into lightroom and then exported to jpeg - 'standard screen' sharpening on the small images, no sharpening on the large. 55mm f/1.4 55mm f/1.7 77ltd f/1.8 55mm f/2.8 70mm f/2.8 Last edited by dkittle; 02-20-2009 at 05:14 AM. Reason: Gotta finish the damn post...*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FA43mm too soft?	rparmar	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	33	05-22-2010 02:16 PM
To those who own the FA50mm 1.4 and the FA43mm 1.9	rustynail925	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	31	05-20-2010 05:16 AM
Replacement for FA43mm Ltd ?	Frogfish	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	04-22-2010 07:52 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax FA43mm/1.9 Ltd.	heatherslightbox	Sold Items	3	07-30-2009 07:17 AM

02-19-2009, 05:35 PM	#136
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	Originally posted by David Whiteley That would be ll_coffee_lP So, if DA55 does* outperform Sigma 70... is that good or bad for my odds of getting your 77 Ltd? It's gonna be free, right? Value pulverized by jittery, CA-ridden but nevertheless top-notch DA*55? I might give up my stuck-aperture K135 in exchange... I'm actually not looking for the 55 to outperform the Sigma 70. I'm more familiar with how the 77ltd and the Sigma 70 render images and am actually looking for a look that is dissimilar from the 70 and more similar to the 77ltd. c[_]

02-19-2009, 05:38 PM	#137
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	Originally posted by huqedato This DA55 doesn't impress me at all so far. Let's hope I'm wrong. Could you upload please some full samples - preferably raws at various apertures - on a file server? With resizes and crops we cannot have the entire picture. Thanks! Ummm...how about you find and test a lens for yourself? These kind folks are taking the time to show us the results of their new toys and answer lots of questions for us already. c[_]

02-19-2009, 05:42 PM	#138
mazdamazda Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Philippines Posts: 63	Interesting... how would it stack up against the DA 70mm Limited (since am targetting this lens for my next purchase)?

02-19-2009, 05:58 PM	#139
jake123 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada Posts: 130	After seeing all the images I think the DA* 55mm is definitely sharp and contrasty wide open, but its bokeh is very disappointing. The Sigma 50mm would be my choice at a lower price with much smoother bokeh.

02-19-2009, 07:17 PM	#140
Alfisti Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toronto (for now) Posts: 1,748	Originally posted by brucestrange If I was the OP, that request would be a surefire way to get me to tell people to f off. Damn Right

02-19-2009, 07:55 PM	#141
GaryM Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Montclair, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 426	Originally posted by jake123 After seeing all the images I think the DA* 55mm is definitely sharp and contrasty wide open, but its bokeh is very disappointing. The Sigma 50mm would be my choice at a lower price with much smoother bokeh. Unless you compare the same subject shot under the same conditions with the same camera, you can't make that conclusion. Good or bad bokeh can be the result of a lot of variables.

02-19-2009, 08:11 PM	#142
Alfisti Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toronto (for now) Posts: 1,748	Originally posted by GaryM Unless you compare the same subject shot under the same conditions with the same camera, you can't make that conclusion. Good or bad bokeh can be the result of a lot of variables. True, but you may as well not post any stand alone images at all then, we figure the lens can actually take pictures

02-19-2009, 08:20 PM	#144
lbam Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 442	Originally posted by Alfisti True, but you may as well not post any stand alone images at all then, we figure the lens can actually take pictures Err.. not quite.. he's talking about everything being as equal as possible EXCEPT two different lenses..

02-19-2009, 08:27 PM	#145
Alfisti Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toronto (for now) Posts: 1,748	Originally posted by lbam Err.. not quite.. he's talking about everything being as equal as possible EXCEPT two different lenses.. I know, and that is great if you can do it but Don is just posting a few images to give us an idea of rendering and the like and as soonas you do that well you're going to get opinions.

02-19-2009, 08:34 PM	#146
dkittle Inactive Account Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Toronto, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 429	Ok, the composition is only loosely similar in what I just posted (I just guessed at how far back to lean with the 70mm and the 77mm mounted), but it's something at least. Look, analyze, critique and take it for what it's worth. I'm less happy now that I'm reminded what the 77mm is like. But I still like the lens for it's speed (1.4), dreamier rendering, weather proofing, quicksift (I have a Katz Eye) and SDM (silent) motor. The real test for me will be the studio. The 77mm is very prone to hunting, about as bad as the 16-50mm in my view. The 31mm is king with being able to nail focus in the studio. I'm hoping the 55mm is as good as the 31mm and that will make it worth the price in my eyes.

02-19-2009, 08:38 PM	#147
Alfisti Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toronto (for now) Posts: 1,748	The 16-50 is as bad as the 77???? You gotta be $hitting me surely?

02-19-2009, 08:54 PM	#148
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	dkittle....thank you very much for your efforts! Very much appreciated I love the 70's rendering of course (my fave lens) The 77 and the 55 are very close overall, but I do still see more of the 3D'ness in the 77. I think for me the 55 really shows that it is blistering sharp (2.8 for sure) and has great contrast and colour. It looks like a fabulous lens. I can't wait to try one out in person. c[_]

02-19-2009, 10:01 PM	#149
farfisa Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Toronto, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,274	Hey Don, Thanks for the side-by-side. Full sized pics? You're spoiling us! This lens definitely has a lot going for it. I'm proud that the 77 held its own though (and maybe that's just me making something out of nothing). Oh, and I think the 55mm-28 thumbnail is pointing to the 77 1.8 full size pic (I know, somebody will check tomorrow after you fix it and say 'what's that guy always talking about wrong pics for? it's fine!') One thing I've learned from all this is that you never really know what you can do with a lens until you get it in your hands and start shooting what you like to shoot! Thanks again! Originally posted by dkittle Ok, the composition is only loosely similar in what I just posted (I just guessed at how far back to lean with the 70mm and the 77mm mounted), but it's something at least. Look, analyze, critique and take it for what it's worth. I'm less happy now that I'm reminded what the 77mm is like. But I still like the lens for it's speed (1.4), dreamier rendering, weather proofing, quicksift (I have a Katz Eye) and SDM (silent) motor. The real test for me will be the studio. The 77mm is very prone to hunting, about as bad as the 16-50mm in my view. The 31mm is king with being able to nail focus in the studio. I'm hoping the 55mm is as good as the 31mm and that will make it worth the price in my eyes.

02-19-2009, 10:19 PM	#150
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	Originally posted by farfisa Oh, and I think the 55mm-28 thumbnail is pointing to the 77 1.8 full size pic (I know, somebody will check tomorrow after you fix it and say 'what's that guy always talking about wrong pics for? it's fine!') the exif says 55 2.8