Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

Mike Cash · 08-28-2009, 05:40 AM

I wouldn't buy anything....I'd reach in my bag and pull out the SMC Takumar 55/1.8 that's already in there and cost me a whopping ten bucks.

patrickt · 08-28-2009, 08:03 AM

I bought three primes some years ago that are my portrait lenses. I use my 50mm f/1.7 most often, my 35mm f/2 fairly often, and my 77mm occasionally.

regor · 08-28-2009, 09:38 AM

Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes

I am considering these 3 based on pricing reason.

1. Tamron 90mm f2.8
2. Sigma EX 70mm f2.8
3. DA70mm f2.4.

Now yes I am aware of the FA77 f1.8 and as much as I'd love to I can't yet justify the costs of the lense.

I already have DA40 and love it. The fast that the first two are 1:1 macro really interests me, however overall image quality and colour comes first.

I've got the DA70 and it is a fantastic lens, but don't take my words for it, look at images. Here's one of mine that I think shows it's characteristic rather well:

apemen · 08-28-2009, 10:13 AM

These are from my DA 70mm,
they are not human portraits : ), well, still can give some idea.
f/3.2

**Ahab** · 08-28-2009, 11:03 AM

Lowell, that is a great shot!

**Lowell Goudge** · 08-28-2009, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by Ahab

Lowell, that is a great shot!

Thanks

Not to be seen as Anti pentax, or anti limiteds, I am still waiting to hear what a 77 limited, or a jupiter 9 would have done differently or better.

I am not advocating that this is the absolute greatest lens ever, but I would love to know what paying about double for the 77 limited, or between 4 and 7 times to get one of the various Pentax 85mm F1.4 lenses gives you in addition.

I bought this because I absolutely gave up trying to get an SMC 85mm F1.8

**Ahab** · 08-28-2009, 11:07 AM

Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes

I am considering these 3 based on pricing reason.

1. Tamron 90mm f2.8
2. Sigma EX 70mm f2.8
3. DA70mm f2.4.

Now yes I am aware of the FA77 f1.8 and as much as I'd love to I can't yet justify the costs of the lense.

I already have DA40 and love it. The fast that the first two are 1:1 macro really interests me, however overall image quality and colour comes first.

Since price, image, and color comes first, you can't go wrong with the Tammy 90. Do a Google. Many believe it to be as good or better than any out there.

**rparmar** · 08-28-2009, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

I think you have made this comment previously. I would be curious to know exactly what you find lacking in the lens, or is it simply that there is no identifyable trait that makes it "unique".

Well, normally I do not post negative comments on photos. I try to be nice and reserve positive comments for those shots that jump out at me. Plus constructive ciriticism when I find I can offer any.

But now that you have called me on it, I will state that the image you post has no impact for me at all. If it is wide open I think it is good for sharpness, but if it is stopped down much, as I suspect it might be, then it is simply unimpressive. By which I mean that much much cheaper lenses could do as well.

You ask "what would the other lenses do differently?" Roger's cat photo has contrast, definition and sharpness plus a perfect sense of "rightness" that your shot lacks. I have seen these positive attributes of the DA70 time and again. The only reason I do not recommend it, is that for very little more on the used market you can get the significant speed increase the FA77 offers.

Perhaps your shot is not an optimal example. But it is the one you put forward and the only one I can critique. Perhaps too, the rather "muzzy" look suits the subject in this case. In the meantime I am still waiting for a crisp incisive image from this lens that shows it is worth the money.

**rparmar** · 08-28-2009, 07:00 PM

Actually, maybe it's not the sharpness that is lacking so much, but that magical dust called "micro-contrast". I am never sure if what I mean by that term agrees with the accepted definition. But it's like there is a haze over the whole image, even the bits with sharpness.

Mechan1k · 08-28-2009, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by Mike Cash

I wouldn't buy anything....I'd reach in my bag and pull out the SMC Takumar 55/1.8 that's already in there and cost me a whopping ten bucks.

Couldn't have said it better myself.
Although I bought my Tamron 90mm Macro a while ago for macro work ... the thing is I keep using it more for portraiture than anything else ... and it's my go-to lens if i want to get THAT shot.

Here's a couple from the other day I took of my little man ... these are just a straight conversion to jpeg from raw.

GLXLR · 08-28-2009, 09:58 PM

Originally posted by attack11

how many do you see faking shallow dof with plugins? there's no denying the wider the better for portraits. f1.2 / f1.4 lenses are ideal for the job.

Not really. If you can get close enough it really doesn't matter. The 70-135mm range is real great for portraits.

**Digitalis** · 08-29-2009, 05:56 AM

Originally posted by attack11

how many do you see faking shallow dof with plugins? there's no denying the wider the better for portraits. f1.2 / f1.4 lenses are ideal for the job.

If that is really the case, then the Leica 50mm f/1.0 noctilux should be the portrait photographers weapon of choice. I own a noctliux and believe me; There are sharper 50mm lenses out there. And the bokeh is treacherous at such a fast apertures it's very easy to get extremely ugly as well as beautiful bokeh with the former being more common than the latter. There are limits as to how fast a lens should be for portraits. I say the Ideal is f/2 for DOF reasons and for optimal resolution.

get the DA70mm and enjoy it ...I know a lot of people who own it and enjoy it too.

(I have also been testing the 50mm f/0.95 version of the noctilux against the f/1.0 version and the only difference between the two is an aspherical lens element and 5 thousand dollars)

vinceloc · 08-30-2009, 02:25 AM

Originally posted by Mike Cash

I wouldn't buy anything....I'd reach in my bag and pull out the SMC Takumar 55/1.8 that's already in there and cost me a whopping ten bucks.

Don't have the Tak, but my k55/1.8 does pretty well as a poor man's DA*55/1.4

@1.8 ISO400

BRunner · 08-30-2009, 06:31 AM

Tammy 90 is my favorite portrait glass. Razor sharp - sometimes too much. I use it stopped down between f3.5-5.6. The DOF at f3.5 is so-so with this focal length. The first image is taken at f4 and one eye is out of focus already. Otherwise creamy bokeh with superb contrast and micro-contrast and very well controlled CAs. I have only one complain - it is too big. I´d like this lens in DA70 size :-)

But one image is better than 1000 words, so here are two samples. After clicking you get full 6MPx image to check the sharpness.

**rparmar** · 08-30-2009, 08:20 AM

Originally posted by Mechan1k

Couldn't have said it better myself.
Although I bought my Tamron 90mm Macro a while ago for macro work ... the thing is I keep using it more for portraiture than anything else

I want that lens.

Originally posted by vinceloc

Don't have the Tak, but my k55/1.8 does pretty well as a poor man's DA*55/1.4

I want that lens too. Amazing shot, BTW.

Threads like this are great for LBA!

08-29-2009, 05:56 AM	#42
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by attack11 how many do you see faking shallow dof with plugins? there's no denying the wider the better for portraits. f1.2 / f1.4 lenses are ideal for the job. If that is really the case, then the Leica 50mm f/1.0 noctilux should be the portrait photographers weapon of choice. I own a noctliux and believe me; There are sharper 50mm lenses out there. And the bokeh is treacherous at such a fast apertures it's very easy to get *extremely ugly* as well as beautiful bokeh with the former being more common than the latter. There are limits as to how fast a lens should be for portraits. I say the Ideal is f/2 for DOF reasons and for optimal resolution. get the DA70mm and enjoy it ...I know a lot of people who own it and enjoy it too. (I have also been testing the 50mm f/0.95 version of the noctilux against the f/1.0 version and the only difference between the two is an aspherical lens element and 5 thousand dollars) Last edited by Digitalis; 08-29-2009 at 06:05 AM.

08-30-2009, 06:31 AM	#44
BRunner Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Czech Republic Posts: 27	Tammy 90 is my favorite portrait glass. Razor sharp - sometimes too much. I use it stopped down between f3.5-5.6. The DOF at f3.5 is so-so with this focal length. The first image is taken at f4 and one eye is out of focus already. Otherwise creamy bokeh with superb contrast and micro-contrast and very well controlled CAs. I have only one complain - it is too big. I´d like this lens in DA70 size :-) But one image is better than 1000 words, so here are two samples. After clicking you get full 6MPx image to check the sharpness. Last edited by BRunner; 08-30-2009 at 06:44 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Which prime lenses would work well?	Vantage-Point	Photographic Technique	9	11-08-2010 12:38 PM
Looking for a new portrait prime	lunelson	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	06-03-2009 05:05 PM
First try at portrait work...	bwield	Post Your Photos!	6	07-07-2008 08:44 AM
Does this self-portrait work?	libbe	Photo Critique	3	02-04-2008 01:08 PM
What are you using for portrait work?	GLThorne	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	26	04-09-2007 03:27 PM

08-28-2009, 05:40 AM	#31
Mike Cash Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,950	I wouldn't buy anything....I'd reach in my bag and pull out the SMC Takumar 55/1.8 that's already in there and cost me a whopping ten bucks.

08-28-2009, 08:03 AM	#32
patrickt Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Oaxaca, Mexico Posts: 247	I bought three primes some years ago that are my portrait lenses. I use my 50mm f/1.7 most often, my 35mm f/2 fairly often, and my 77mm occasionally.

08-28-2009, 09:38 AM	#33
regor Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Victoria, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 356	Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes I am considering these 3 based on pricing reason. 1. Tamron 90mm f2.8 2. Sigma EX 70mm f2.8 3. DA70mm f2.4. Now yes I am aware of the FA77 f1.8 and as much as I'd love to I can't yet justify the costs of the lense. I already have DA40 and love it. The fast that the first two are 1:1 macro really interests me, however overall image quality and colour comes first. I've got the DA70 and it is a fantastic lens, but don't take my words for it, look at images. Here's one of mine that I think shows it's characteristic rather well:

08-28-2009, 10:13 AM	#34
apemen Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Ankara, TURKEY Posts: 181	These are from my DA 70mm, they are not human portraits : ), well, still can give some idea. f/3.2

08-28-2009, 11:03 AM	#35
Ahab Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Arnold, Md. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 762	Lowell, that is a great shot!

08-28-2009, 11:06 AM	#36
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,892	Originally posted by Ahab Lowell, that is a great shot! Thanks Not to be seen as Anti pentax, or anti limiteds, I am still waiting to hear what a 77 limited, or a jupiter 9 would have done differently or better. I am not advocating that this is the absolute greatest lens ever, but I would love to know what paying about double for the 77 limited, or between 4 and 7 times to get one of the various Pentax 85mm F1.4 lenses gives you in addition. I bought this because I absolutely gave up trying to get an SMC 85mm F1.8

08-28-2009, 11:07 AM	#37
Ahab Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Arnold, Md. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 762	Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes I am considering these 3 based on pricing reason. 1. Tamron 90mm f2.8 2. Sigma EX 70mm f2.8 3. DA70mm f2.4. Now yes I am aware of the FA77 f1.8 and as much as I'd love to I can't yet justify the costs of the lense. I already have DA40 and love it. The fast that the first two are 1:1 macro really interests me, however overall image quality and colour comes first. Since price, image, and color comes first, you can't go wrong with the Tammy 90. Do a Google. Many believe it to be as good or better than any out there.

08-28-2009, 06:55 PM	#38
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,823	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge I think you have made this comment previously. I would be curious to know exactly what you find lacking in the lens, or is it simply that there is no identifyable trait that makes it "unique". Well, normally I do not post negative comments on photos. I try to be nice and reserve positive comments for those shots that jump out at me. Plus constructive ciriticism when I find I can offer any. But now that you have called me on it, I will state that the image you post has no impact for me at all. If it is wide open I think it is good for sharpness, but if it is stopped down much, as I suspect it might be, then it is simply unimpressive. By which I mean that much much cheaper lenses could do as well. You ask "what would the other lenses do differently?" Roger's cat photo has contrast, definition and sharpness plus a perfect sense of "rightness" that your shot lacks. I have seen these positive attributes of the DA70 time and again. The only reason I do not recommend it, is that for very little more on the used market you can get the significant speed increase the FA77 offers. Perhaps your shot is not an optimal example. But it is the one you put forward and the only one I can critique. Perhaps too, the rather "muzzy" look suits the subject in this case. In the meantime I am still waiting for a crisp incisive image from this lens that shows it is worth the money.

08-28-2009, 07:00 PM	#39
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,823	Actually, maybe it's not the sharpness that is lacking so much, but that magical dust called "micro-contrast". I am never sure if what I mean by that term agrees with the accepted definition. But it's like there is a haze over the whole image, even the bits with sharpness.

08-28-2009, 09:39 PM	#40
Mechan1k Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 2,891	Originally posted by Mike Cash I wouldn't buy anything....I'd reach in my bag and pull out the SMC Takumar 55/1.8 that's already in there and cost me a whopping ten bucks. Couldn't have said it better myself. Although I bought my Tamron 90mm Macro a while ago for macro work ... the thing is I keep using it more for portraiture than anything else ... and it's my go-to lens if i want to get THAT shot. Here's a couple from the other day I took of my little man ... these are just a straight conversion to jpeg from raw.

08-28-2009, 09:58 PM	#41
GLXLR Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Sugar Land, TX Photos: Gallery Posts: 684	Originally posted by attack11 how many do you see faking shallow dof with plugins? there's no denying the wider the better for portraits. f1.2 / f1.4 lenses are ideal for the job. Not really. If you can get close enough it really doesn't matter. The 70-135mm range is real great for portraits.

08-30-2009, 02:25 AM	#43
vinceloc Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 367	Originally posted by Mike Cash I wouldn't buy anything....I'd reach in my bag and pull out the SMC Takumar 55/1.8 that's already in there and cost me a whopping ten bucks. Don't have the Tak, but my k55/1.8 does pretty well as a poor man's DA*55/1.4 @1.8 ISO400

08-30-2009, 08:20 AM	#45
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,823	Originally posted by Mechan1k Couldn't have said it better myself. Although I bought my Tamron 90mm Macro a while ago for macro work ... the thing is I keep using it more for portraiture than anything else I want that lens. Originally posted by vinceloc Don't have the Tak, but my k55/1.8 does pretty well as a poor man's DA*55/1.4 I want that lens too. Amazing shot, BTW. Threads like this are great for LBA!

Which Prime Would You Buy For Portrait Work?

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!