Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

ogl · 11-24-2009, 04:30 AM

Pentax SMC DA* 55mm f/1.4 SDM - Review / Test Report

Not bad...But, it seems to me FA50 is not worse at all. DA*55 is just better in terms of Chromatic Aberrations

Attached Images

Last edited by ogl; 11-24-2009 at 04:59 AM.

**Ash** · 11-24-2009, 04:42 AM

There's MTF data, and then there's real life image results.
Remember the DA 16-45 vs DA* 16-50 comparisons? Similar issues.
I'd reserve judgement until comparative real world shots are shown - I'm sure there's more to the 55 than just WR and SDM...

ogl · 11-24-2009, 04:50 AM

Originally posted by Ash

There's MTF data, and then there's real life image results.
Remember the DA 16-45 vs DA* 16-50 comparisons? Similar issues.
I'd reserve judgement until comparative real world shots are shown - I'm sure there's more to the 55 than just WR and SDM...

I know FA50 very good. I had it for 1 year. I've seen a lot of DA*55 samples.
If we talk about IQ of two fixed lenses, I can't say that DA*55 is better.
As for f/1.4, it is no good. For example, Voigtlander Nokton 58/1.4, Nikkor AF-S 50/1.4 G and Sigma 50/1.4 have better resolution wide-opened.

DA16-50/2.8 and 16-45/4 are no good examples. Different pictures. Different optical design.

WEATHER SEALING is not part of IQ.

I think FA50 is still VERY GOOD lens. Small, light and fast.

ogl · 11-24-2009, 05:10 AM

DA*55:
Very minor degree of barrel distortions (0.6%)
Virtually no vignetting.
Very good (and even) resolution figures from f/2.8

Lateral chromatic aberrations range from excellent to good, depending on aperture
Bokeh is "quite impressive except for the bokeh fringing"
Very high build quality.
Higher ( than FA50) contrast wide-opened.

Last edited by ogl; 11-24-2009 at 06:46 AM.

Wheatfield · 11-24-2009, 07:24 AM

I just compared an FA50 directly to a DA55 prior to selling the 50. There is just no comparison of the two lenses until somewhere around f/4, where the FA pretty much catches up.

dugrant153 · 11-24-2009, 09:21 AM

I have to agree with Wheatfield.

I've taken some amazingly sharp photos with the DA*55 F1.4 in low light where the FA50 would generally have this cloudy soft look. Maybe it was my copies of the FA50, but then add to that the build quality and the SDM (although I manual focus so no a biggie for me) and the weather sealing (I did a whole photowalk in the rain with this lens without having to put a bag over my camera) and suddenly it starts to add up.

**robbiec** · 11-24-2009, 09:51 AM

Seems to me that people are extolling the virtues of their own lenses. The DA* 55 vs FA50 will go on and on

Just taking the raw numbers into account then it seems that the DA* 55 has a wider operational range and seems to get sharper faster. As to the value question? if its a quality piece and it seems to be then it will repay you with better images more often. Its the old saying, he/she knows the cost of everything but the value of nothing!

Regards,
R

11-24-2009, 04:30 AM	#1
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	*DA55 at photozone.de.** Pentax SMC DA* 55mm f/1.4 SDM - Review / Test Report Not bad...But, it seems to me FA50 is not worse at all. DA55 is just better in terms of Chromatic Aberrations Attached Images Last edited by ogl; 11-24-2009 at 04:59 AM.*

11-24-2009, 04:50 AM	#3
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ash There's MTF data, and then there's real life image results. Remember the DA 16-45 vs DA* 16-50 comparisons? Similar issues. I'd reserve judgement until comparative real world shots are shown - I'm sure there's more to the 55 than just WR and SDM... I know FA50 very good. I had it for 1 year. I've seen a lot of DA55 samples. If we talk about IQ of two fixed lenses, I can't say that DA55 is better. As for f/1.4, it is no good. For example, Voigtlander Nokton 58/1.4, Nikkor AF-S 50/1.4 G and Sigma 50/1.4 have better resolution wide-opened. DA16-50/2.8 and 16-45/4 are no good examples. Different pictures. Different optical design. WEATHER SEALING is not part of IQ. I think FA50 is still VERY GOOD lens. Small, light and fast. Last edited by ogl; 11-24-2009 at 05:00 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DA 15mm at photozone	Andi Lo	Pentax News and Rumors	33	10-23-2009 02:22 AM
DA 17-70 versus DA 16-45 on photozone	rparmar	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	12-16-2008 11:50 AM
Photozone 55-300	k100d	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	09-30-2008 07:37 PM
DA35/2.8 at photozone.de	ogl	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	73	08-27-2008 12:06 AM
More Photozone reviews!	feronovak	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	05-04-2007 05:26 PM

11-24-2009, 04:42 AM	#2
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	There's MTF data, and then there's real life image results. Remember the DA 16-45 vs DA* 16-50 comparisons? Similar issues. I'd reserve judgement until comparative real world shots are shown - I'm sure there's more to the 55 than just WR and SDM...

11-24-2009, 05:10 AM	#4
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	DA55: Very minor degree of barrel distortions (0.6%) Virtually no vignetting. Very good (and even) resolution figures from f/2.8 Lateral chromatic aberrations range from excellent to good, depending on aperture Bokeh is "quite impressive except for the bokeh fringing" Very high build quality. Higher ( than FA50) contrast wide-opened. Last edited by ogl; 11-24-2009 at 06:46 AM.*

11-24-2009, 07:24 AM	#5
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,987	I just compared an FA50 directly to a DA55 prior to selling the 50. There is just no comparison of the two lenses until somewhere around f/4, where the FA pretty much catches up.

11-24-2009, 09:21 AM	#6
dugrant153 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,059	I have to agree with Wheatfield. I've taken some amazingly sharp photos with the DA*55 F1.4 in low light where the FA50 would generally have this cloudy soft look. Maybe it was my copies of the FA50, but then add to that the build quality and the SDM (although I manual focus so no a biggie for me) and the weather sealing (I did a whole photowalk in the rain with this lens without having to put a bag over my camera) and suddenly it starts to add up.

11-24-2009, 09:51 AM	#7
robbiec Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Cork Photos: Albums Posts: 1,882	Seems to me that people are extolling the virtues of their own lenses. The DA* 55 vs FA50 will go on and on Just taking the raw numbers into account then it seems that the DA* 55 has a wider operational range and seems to get sharper faster. As to the value question? if its a quality piece and it seems to be then it will repay you with better images more often. Its the old saying, he/she knows the cost of everything but the value of nothing! Regards, R

DA*55 at photozone.de.

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!