Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-12-2010, 11:53 AM   #16
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
When I tested it wasn;'t even close. The 50/2 might be better than the kit lens at f/5.6, and of course provides the f/2 - f/5.6 range the kit lens lacks at 50mm, but the 50/1.7 absolutely blows the 50/2 away between f/2 and f/4 for not much more money at all. In my mind, it's a no-brainer decision. Keep your 50/2 if you have it already, but if you're trying to decide if the 1/7 is worth the extra $10-$20 it might cost, the answer is yes, absolutely, it's probaby the biggest difference $20 will ever get you.

02-12-2010, 12:03 PM   #17
Veteran Member
yeatzee's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Temecula
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,675
You shouldn't have to much trouble finding an M 50mm F/1.7 in good condition for under $40 even with the price increases. Its pretty incredible bang for the buck. I love mine
02-12-2010, 12:28 PM   #18
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: İzmir - Turkey
Posts: 22
Sharpness

The sharpness of M50/2 may be good when stopped down, but not wide open.
02-12-2010, 04:28 PM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 381
Original Poster
Yeah, thanks. I have the f1.7 already and was wondering whether the f2 will beat it when both are stopped down at f8. The MTF according to the charts show the f2 lens is better than the f1.7, when both are at f4.

02-12-2010, 09:58 PM   #20
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
My eyes tell me the opposite.
02-13-2010, 06:22 AM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 381
Original Poster
OK thanks for the input. It sounds like I should stick with the M1.7 and save a few pennies. I am having trouble getting hold of a 35mm prime at the moment, under a budget of 40 quid (USD 65). Maybe the money not spent on the M 50 f2 could go towards the 35mm.

Marc, thats a really beautiful photo on your blog of the icy forest setting.
02-13-2010, 09:34 AM   #22
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
I'll give the M50/2 a 3rd try and hope something better this time around. for what it's worth, the metering can really be a pain.
02-13-2010, 10:42 AM   #23
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by hoojammyflip Quote
Marc, thats a really beautiful photo on your blog of the icy forest setting.
Thanks! That was shot with the M28/2.8, btw, and is actually cropped a little because I stupidly got a bit of the corner of the roof of a building in the shot. So it's not too far from a 35mm FOV.

02-13-2010, 10:54 PM   #24
Veteran Member
yeatzee's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Temecula
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,675
i think every pentaxian should own an M 50mm F/1.7. i dont think we realize how fortunate we are to have such great lenses so cheap.

Some friends and I were really bored yesterday and decided to do some very un-official tests regarding our 50mm lenses.

My k200d w/ M 50mm F/1.7

vs.

Canon 50d w/ canon EOS 50mm F/1.4 and 50mm F/1.8

vs.

Nikon D40 w/ nikon's nicest 50mm F/1.4 (G?)

We did a few different test subjects to check bokeh and sharpness and the results were as follows:

Wide open the F/1.4 nikon nifty fifty beat the F/1.4 canon in sharpness.

We than did the same test with the canon and nikon 1.4's stopped down to F/1.8 and the pentax wideopen at F/1.7.....

And wouldn't you know it, the unanimous decision was that the pentax was the sharpest!

And lets consider prices (yes I know they bought theirs new and they could have gotten them cheaper... :ugh:

Pentax - cost me $30
Nikon - something like $480 new right?
Canon - $100 and like $350 new right?

now im not saying pentax is always better and I don't consider myself a fanboy (if I had the money I'd run canon for the MPE-65 and D700 for lowlight/studio stuff and pentax for everything else).... my point is simply that we have great lenses that cost very little To quote a nikon buddy, "you are very lucky to have lenses like that."

*Awaits people that are going to take this the wrong way*
02-14-2010, 12:13 AM   #25
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
ok, finally made the third test. the M50/2 results were rather much better this time as compared to the previous 2 tests I made with it before.

when shot under MFD, the 50/1.7 at f2 is sharper than the M50/2. at smaller apertures, the resolution gap between the 2 lenses seems to close down pretty good as well and appears that the M50/2 have very slightly equalizes or at some instances better at f4 with differences aren't really that noticeable even when cropped. you need to look extensively inorder to point out the differences. honestly, a much better result than I expected.

but here's the dealbreaker, once we go out farther or shot near close to infinity, the M50/2 loses out convincingly even at small apertures at f4. a complete turn-around from or when shot up-close (MFD). it is soft and resolution suffers. thus, making the lens truly short-handed.

because of this, my verdict for the lens would still remain the same at 6/10.

Last edited by Pentaxor; 02-14-2010 at 12:28 AM.
02-14-2010, 12:27 AM   #26
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
People often assume or outright claim that the M 50 f/2 is not very sharp, and that's always puzzled me - it is actually a very sharp lens. But the A/M/F/FA 50 1.7 is sharper in my experience.
it is very sharp when it reaches it's sweet spot at f8. though when I recently did a much better test, at MFD, the M50/2 did very and was good at f2.8 and better at f4 (almost as good as the 50/1.7) and great at f5.6.

it did however show it's chink in it's armor at f2 and when shot at close to infinity at higher apertures. it only regains it's optimal sharpness at f8.

I'd say people would be better off with a 1.4 or 1.7. the 50/f2 however is a good starter lens for beginners. but for people who are critical with IQ, they may find this lens underperforming.

if there was an F2 50mm lens worth considering, it would be the K55/2 or Tak versions, if it does have the same resolution of that of the Tak or K55/1.8.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Charts for Auto-Focus Check acknowledged by Pentax. ebooks4pentax Pentax DSLR Discussion 34 07-27-2015 06:05 AM
MTF chart garyk Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 05-27-2010 06:27 AM
Question Adding Tables & charts to lens reviews Lowell Goudge Site Suggestions and Help 5 02-09-2009 05:38 PM
My experiences with checking FF/BF using Yvon Bourque's focus charts Christine Tham Pentax DSLR Discussion 0 11-17-2008 04:47 PM
MTF jucarbi Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 05-14-2008 09:56 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:49 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top