[Voe]

I would get the f/1.2 instead of f/1.4 first for the bokeh difference because of the shorter DoF and second for the better low light ability.


Zeiss Planar 50mm f/1.4 @ f/1.4




Pentax K 50mm f/1.2 @ f/1.2



For me it's better to "cry" once when I buy the Pentax f/1.2 but then smile every time I take a photo with it.

[Winnie]

Thank goodness comparison shots of the same image!

After I got my Pentax (2 months ago), and joined this site, I too wanted to be part of the "1.2" club. I was asking about fast 50's before I even knew what the hell they were!
But I think if you ARE like me, you'll be more than happy with buying cheaper lenses for now. I have a Super Tak M42 1.4 that I'm DYING to try (Waiting for the adapter to come in the mail). That cost me $40.
I got a 80-200 zoom for $11, and 28 2.8 for free (from a gracious member of this site), and I'm loving the experimenting.
If the time comes when I'll think "Gee that shot would have been better if it were 1.2...well then...

Here is a shot I took HOLDING the lens to the body, LOL, just so I could see if I'll like it. ...while I wait...for the stinking adapter....from the mail.

[Blue]

just an update. a brand new and used FA50/1.4 sells for about $250-$350 bucks while a used Cosina 1.2 and K 1.2 costs around the same price. from this, we could see no real difference in price except that the 1.2's are manual focus. the "A" version though cost a bit more selling for about 400-500 bucks which is $50-150 bucks more. although some "A" versions are selling for around $350 and under if you were/are able to luck on them. some months ago there were hordes of them selling for $200 bucks which is cheaper than the FA50/1.4. this would mean that given the price between the two lenses, the 1.2's pricing ain't that really expensive but just as affordable as the FA 1.4's and it's the choice of the person which lens to choose.

fwiw, there are other manual K/M/A lenses with varying focal lengths that are priced the same or a lot more expensive than the 1.2's and their auto-focus equivalent counterparts.

This morning, Amazon, BH and Adorama have the FA 50mm f1.4 listed at $359.95 shipped. Pentax imaging is out of stock (Pentax USA). The guy that had all of those K and A f1.2 was an fluke. His average price on the k version was $216 and the A version was $285 ($195-350) and they weren't new. He had about 40 A and 20 K as well as the Minolta md version. A couple of people got lucky and got an A on a K1000 body from him for $100 early on. It is unusual for someone to turn up with 60+ f1.2 Pentax lenses.

The difference for me between my Cosina 1.2 vs my FA 50 1.4... is that my cosina is sharp at 1.2 (when you get focus right) but my FA 50 is not sharp until 2 or 2.8.

But the Mf 50/1.4 or even 55-1.8 are really good lenses, and if money does not sit in buckets at the side of your bed, then they will work fine.

[Pentaxor]

This morning, Amazon, BH and Adorama have the FA 50mm f1.4 listed at $359.95 shipped. Pentax imaging is out of stock (Pentax USA). The guy that had all of those K and A f1.2 was an fluke. His average price on the k version was $216 and the A version was $285 ($195-350) and they weren't new. He had about 40 A and 20 K as well as the Minolta md version. A couple of people got lucky and got an A on a K1000 body from him for $100 early on. It is unusual for someone to turn up with 60+ f1.2 Pentax lenses.

yeah definitely luck. but anyway, as I said, a used 1.2 doesn't really sell for an additional $300 more as compared to a brand new or used FA50/1.4. the K's and Cosina's being sold just about the same price as the FA50/1.4 (you can check price references and K/Cosina owners how much they got their copy). only the "A" is slighter higher but basing on today's pricing, it doesn't cost you $300 more than the FA50/1.4, unless you are looking at those being sold at EvilBay for 600 brand new and the limited silver edition which costs a lot more. I think there was also a gold copy which costs a fortune. but if you are going to look for the used regular black, they sell for 400-500 which is approx. 50-150 additional. not a lot as compared to other legacy lenses which are beyond $600.

[Mechan1k]

I unfortuantely missed out on that glut of f/1.2 lenses.
I can't believe he had that many of them ... wonder how he came across so many of them.

I have my eye on a few of them at the moment ... but financials are prohibiting it though ... maybe later when I start back at a 2nd job again ... and the wife goes back to work after maternity leave finishes.

[Blue]

yeah definitely luck. but anyway, as I said, a used 1.2 doesn't really sell for $300 more as compared to a brand new or used FA50/1.4. the K's and Cosina's are selling just about the same as the FA (you can check price references and K/Cosina owners how much they got their copy). only the "A" is slighter higher but basing on today's pricing, it doesn't $300, unless you are looking at those being sold at EvilBay for 600 brand new and the limited silver edition which costs a lot. I think there was also a gold copy which costs a fortune. but if you are going to look for the used regular black, they sell for 400-500 which is approx. 50-150 additional. not a lot as compared to other legacy lenses which are beyond $600.

I really don't know how many people are actually paying $359 for a new FA 50mm. I bought mine new at $199 and was fortunate to get a japanese made one which has more to do with the collector in me. However, I would not pay more than 250 for a new FA 50mm. As a matter of fact, right now I'd go with a DA 40m ltd even though its slow at 339.95 shipped over the FA that is $20 higher. I track the price on certain lenses and the k and A f1.2 are on that "watch" list. So I'm not really disagreeing with you. I originally said:

Yes. The A f1.4 will cost you about $140 whereas the f1.2 will hit you for $300-400.

That said, a 200-300 difference isn't much of a stretch as several A f1.2 have recently gone for $480-$500. Here is a current ad in the market place btw for an FA.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/86209-sale-pe...mm-f3-5-a.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/86406-sale-fa-50mm-f1-4-a.html

---

Last edited by Blue; 01-10-2010 at 12:50 PM.

[Pentaxor]

The difference for me between my Cosina 1.2 vs my FA 50 1.4... is that my cosina is sharp at 1.2 (when you get focus right) but my FA 50 is not sharp until 2 or 2.8.

But the Mf 50/1.4 or even 55-1.8 are really good lenses, and if money does not sit in buckets at the side of your bed, then they will work fine.

Gus, are you using a hood? it actually helps. softness does occur often especially if you don't nail focus. as I mentioned earlier, the lens could be quite tricky but the smooth focusing mechanism seems to nullify that hindrance.

also I find my copy display a soft-sharp images at wide openings (not really a bad thing but a unique rendering). I find it soft compared to my other 50, but that is probably because I'm comparing it against the FA50/1.7

as compared against the M50/2, you can forget about it. the M50/2 got smoked.

[Ash]

I have my eye on a few of them at the moment ... but financials are prohibiting it though ... maybe later when I start back at a 2nd job again ... and the wife goes back to work after maternity leave finishes.

but before the kids start asking you for every toy under the sun.

Hope you get one soon to at least have a fling with it...

[Pentaxor]

I really don't know how many people are actually paying $359 for a new FA 50mm. I bought mine new at $199 and was fortunate to get a japanese made one which has more to do with the collector in me. However, I would not pay more than 250 for a new FA 50mm. As a matter of fact, right now I'd go with a DA 40m ltd even though its slow at 339.95 shipped over the FA that is $20 higher. I track the price on certain lenses and the k and A f1.2 are on that "watch" list. So I'm not really disagreeing with you. I originally said:

That said, a 200-300 difference isn't much of a stretch as several A f1.2 have recently gone for $480-$500. Here is a current ad in the market place btw for an FA.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/86209-sale-pe...mm-f3-5-a.html

I might definitely consider a DA40 due to:

1.> I got too many 50's, making it redundant. and a 40mm would fit in just fine.
2.> f2.8 speed is not an issue since I have other lenses that could do the job
3.> it is so compact and cute.

btw, the FA50/1.4 appears costly nowadays. I'd say you're lucky to get one for $200 which is made in Japan.

it's funny though since the DA40 was sold for $300 and the FA50/1.4 for $200 last March. what an irony. IMO, if the FA501.4 would sell for $350, price-wise it would be much better or make sense to buy a 1.2. instead, that is of course if you don't mind shooting manual or able to use the 1.2 without any real difficulty.

[Jimfear]

I have been looking for an inexpensive f1.2 lens without much luck, so I bought a manual f1.4 lens on ebay.

Those two don't usually mix very well. You'll have to be lucky to find a cheap 1.2.

just wondering if there is any big difference between an f1.2 and f1.4 lens.

Both yes and no. You do get a brighter viewfinder which is always nice, and you do get a little less DOF however hardly enough to justify the price, you also get some more flare and halos which is not that nice. Thinking reasonably I'd ditch the 1.2 in a heartbeat, but still I don't regret buying it. The difference between 1.4 and 1.2 is enough for me to keep the lens.

Is there enough of a difference between the two to justify me saving my money up for the f1.2 in case I run across one, or would it be better to just get another f1.4 that supports autofocus?

If you want autofocus get the FA 1.4. If you want an expensive toy that does everything a 1.4 does plus a little extra, buy a 1.2.

[Pentaxor]

If you want autofocus get the FA 1.4. If you want an expensive toy that does everything a 1.4 does plus a little extra, buy a 1.2.

I believe this would be the best comparison between the two lenses. with the prices not that far-off between the 2 lenses nowadays, it has more become of a comparison between AF capability versus 1.2 rendering.

When a new member asks a question like that it doesn't hurt to question their reasoning. A lot of good advice is given on this forum but at the same time, much of it is over the head of the person receiving it.
We see it a lot with people coming up from a P&S "I've got the K* with the kit lens and want to know what other lenses to get". The universal response is usually "You need to get yourself a fast fifty" without any thought as to the skill level of the person asking the question. Sometimes I think better advice would be "Read the manual and post some pictures for us to look at". It may not be an answer that's appreciated but it's probably sounder than throwing out a bunch of lens suggestions. Helping someone take pictures is not lens dependent in the majority of cases (apart from the necessity of having a lens on the camera).

Gary, I got my A 50/1.2 for USD 350 from Adorama. I think it was either spring 2008 or spring 2009 - I don't remember exactly and it feels as if I always had it.

It is true that there are AF f1.4 lenses out there and that precise focusing at 1.2 is a pain in lower behind. Here is my own example. In K10D Katz Eye f.s. that I myself installed seemed to have hit the bulls eye. Not so with K-7. I asked Pentax Israel to install it for me and they did. Only later I realized that I had consistent misfocus issue (I think it is back focus, because whenever I focused somewhere, actually it was focused closer to me). Brought camera to Pentax Israel for repairs only to be told that 0.3 (mm?) adjustment is needed and that for that I'd have to send my camera to Germany which is something they don't recommend. Bummer...

On the positive side, I had a shoot of my younger daughter this weekend. I said to myself - I can do it, and fixed the aperture at 1.2 none the less. It took time and trial and errors, but few images came out right and boy, this lens can be sharp wide open. There is very small soft effect (like in halos) but I can still count every hair in my 1 years old eye brows...

I kind of prefer my A 50/1.2 to any other normal lens, and I had quite a few (FA 50/1.7, M 50/2.0, M 50/1.4, FA 50/1.4, FA 43/1.9 spring to mind). Can I live without it? Probably so. Can I live with it. Oh yes! Have I figured it out fully? Bloody unlikely! Will I keep shooting with it? You bet! Do I recommend it to others? It surely is worth the try.

[wallyb]

When a new member asks a question like that it doesn't hurt to question their reasoning. A lot of good advice is given on this forum but at the same time, much of it is over the head of the person receiving it.
We see it a lot with people coming up from a P&S "I've got the K* with the kit lens and want to know what other lenses to get". The universal response is usually "You need to get yourself a fast fifty" without any thought as to the skill level of the person asking the question. Sometimes I think better advice would be "Read the manual and post some pictures for us to look at". It may not be an answer that's appreciated but it's probably sounder than throwing out a bunch of lens suggestions. Helping someone take pictures is not lens dependent in the majority of cases (apart from the necessity of having a lens on the camera).

I couldn't agree more Gary. Great post.

(This isn't to say I agree or disagree with any of the stuff posted in this thread -- I haven't even read half of it I just know good advice when I see it).

[Boris]

When a new member asks a question like that it doesn't hurt to question their reasoning. A lot of good advice is given on this forum but at the same time, much of it is over the head of the person receiving it.
We see it a lot with people coming up from a P&S "I've got the K* with the kit lens and want to know what other lenses to get". The universal response is usually "You need to get yourself a fast fifty" without any thought as to the skill level of the person asking the question. Sometimes I think better advice would be "Read the manual and post some pictures for us to look at". It may not be an answer that's appreciated but it's probably sounder than throwing out a bunch of lens suggestions. Helping someone take pictures is not lens dependent in the majority of cases (apart from the necessity of having a lens on the camera).

That's exactly right, sir. Though other answers to the question you posed are also valid... I'd rather we even started with the counter-question such as "What kind of pictures do you take/like taking?" And only later "Can you please show us some of them?" Though I thought the thread was about something different...