[blende8]

DA55 - FA50: Updated results

---

Last edited by blende8; 02-27-2009 at 05:24 AM.

[JJJPhoto]

DA55 - FA50: my results

You are NOT alone in what you discovered. I'm actually in the middle of writing a review of the 55mm for an online publication and both the lab results and my experience after shooting with the lens for several weeks are not particularly positive.

I'm still an active Pentax user, although I also shoot with other cameras/lens, and I think Pentax makes the best primes in the business. However, last year's 300mm and this year's 55mm are the two worst Pentax primes I've used in many years.

They're NOT horrible lenses ... they just aren't as good as what I've seen from other Pentax lenses.

Out of curiosity, what body/bodies did you use the 55mm with ... I noticed different performance depending on the body.

[BBear]

DA55 - FA50: my results

good work put together. I only have two comments:

1. FA performance in the corner is not slightly worse, but a LOT worse @ f/1.4.
2. It seems like the biggest problem is focus speed. Real shame. If it were at least similar, one could justify the noiseless focus + weather sealing... but 3x slower???


Geeez... what is really going on??

[Alfisti]

Before i open the link, maybe I can guess?

- Sharper until f/2.8 then not a lot of difference

- Slightly worse OOF areas (less fringing in OOF areas but messier)

- GOBS more contrast until f/2.8

Let's see if i guessed it ......

[Alfisti]

Half right

So we're being offered a lens that is essentially identical to the old one except it's a little sharper when stopped down, much sharper at wide apertures and way more contrast at wide apertures.

They want $800CDN extra for these benifits. I don't think so.

Before i open the link, maybe I can guess?

- Sharper until f/2.8 then not a lot of difference

- Slightly worse OOF areas (less fringing in OOF areas but messier)

- GOBS more contrast until f/2.8

Let's see if i guessed it ......

[Urkeldaedalus]

So we're being offered a lens that is essentially identical to the old one except it's a little sharper when stopped down, much sharper at wide apertures and way more contrast at wide apertures.

They want $800CDN extra for these benifits. I don't think so.

I think this has been mentioned before, but the difference between the FA50 and the DA* 55 sounds a lot like the difference between the comparably priced the FA35 and the FA31, but plenty of people don't mind spending $600 more to buy the FA31.

For what? Yeah the FA31 is a little faster and has better bokeh. Is that worth all that extra money?

To some people, yes.

You even left out the weathersealing and the SDM of the DA*55, which the FA31 does not have over the FA35.

The FA50 is a very very good lens and an even better value, and since I own it I probably won't be getting the DA*55. But even though it is disappointing that the DA*55 would focus slower than the FA50, I don't understand the harsh criticism of the DA*55. If you don't want to pay extra for the useable f/1.4, the SDM, and the weathersealing -- then don't. It's that simple.

[blende8]

I tested the lens on the K10D and the K20D.
The presented results were all with the K20D.

Yes the lens is half right.
It is better optically, but very slow in AF speed.
For me personally this is very disappointing since I wanted to use the lens e.g. for indoor shooting of kids, where I always thought the FA50 to be a little slow. Take that! The FA slow! Right. It is still slightly to slow for kids.

Well ...

[roentarre]

Wieland, you just convinced me not to get this lens there. Knowing your methodology and obsessive nature to test lenses, this test you put up is enough for me to save my money for something else...

Thanks again for all the hard work!

[ll_coffee_lP]

As sad as I am to say it - I think I'll be passing on this as well. Might take a look at the new Sigma 50 1.4 though (it's a beast).

c[_]

[Nimrad]

Hmm, maybe I'll buy this lens. I would use it primarily for concert photos which don't really require fast auto-focus. I'd much rather want it to be sharp

[rparmar]

Does anyone else think it odd that the DA* is sharper in the corners? If it is optimised to be a portrait lens then we might want it to be less sharp there, so long as it has great bokeh. But in fact the out-of-focus areas looks identical with the FA50.

What's the point of this lens again?

(Now doubly glad I got a K 50/1.2 instead.)

Thanks for doing these tests.

[k100d]

nice work wieland, i like your tests way more than the photozone ones

[Duh_Vinci]

This lens I was waiting with great anticipation, sold few lenses to fund this * lens, but...

Unfortunately, I too will pass on it. Thank you for the tests and samples! Aside from small optical disappointments (to some degree, but more so at that price), slow AF (again, specially at that price), to me is simply unacceptable.

So for better or for worse, I placed an order for another lens, order confirmation reads:

"Sigma SI5014PE Normal 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Autofocus Lens for Pentax AF..."

One can only hope for a good performance, fast and accurate AF, right? Will see later next week.

Regards,
D

[dugrant153]

Unfortunately, I too will pass on it. Thank you for the tests and samples! Aside from small optical disappointments (to some degree, but more so at that price), slow AF (again, specially at that price), to me is simply unacceptable.

After seeing this review, I too am going to pass on this. [Thanks for doing this!!] I was partially considering this as I was thinking it would be a fantastic lens for my use and for what type of pics I take, but at it's current performance it seems pretty underwhelming, ESPECIALLY for the price. I'll take the FA50 F1.4.

My 50-135 is still the fastest SDM lens at the moment and is crazy awesome. DA40 Ltd being the fastest overall autofocusing lens I have (non-SDM though).

I would possibly consider this lens, but not at $799USD or so.

[Wheatfield]

So what your telling me is to hang on to my Nokton 58/1.4?