Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-09-2010, 06:09 PM   #31
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
once in a while, you'll see an FA35/2 costing from $300-$350.

04-09-2010, 06:21 PM   #32
Veteran Member
alohadave's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Quincy, MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,024
QuoteOriginally posted by raider Quote
My FA50/1.4 does not look that sharp in my k100D. I think there are some focus mismatch issue (either FF or BF). The same lens on my K-7 is great and tack sharp.

A friend has the sigma 50/1.4 and he mentioned that the lens is razor sharp even at f1.4. maybe u want to check that out.
Is it BF/FF, or is it that the DoF is so small that it's really easy to focus on the wrong spot and not realize it?
04-09-2010, 07:01 PM   #33
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,246
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
Yes, the Nokton makes the FA redundant...
I wish.

Sometimes having AF is really nice. Also, with a stock focussing screen you don't have much fun manually focusing below f/2.8 so in my book the Nokton is a great lens but doesn't make the FA redundant unless you only want to do MF and have tweaked your camera to support MF at f-ratios below f/2.8.
04-10-2010, 02:23 AM   #34
New Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Sweden
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19
Hi
I have previously had two copies of the FA 50 1.4 and both have been boring at f1.4-2.8.Now I bought an A 50 f1.4 which I perceive to be sharper and contrast richer.
Anyone with similar experiences?

04-10-2010, 02:49 AM   #35
New Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Sweden
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19
My daughter with the A 50 at f1.4
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-x  Photo 
04-10-2010, 03:37 AM   #36
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,696
This is an old one with the FA 50 at f/1.4 in difficult lighting conditions:


And this one at f/2:
04-10-2010, 04:31 AM   #37
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,404
I guess the thing about the FA 50 is that it isn't a "cheap" lens any more. Current US prices are about 370 dollars. That makes it more expensive than the DA 40 and only 100 less than the DA 35 and 70.

I got mine for 190 and for the build, etc it felt about right. I think currently it is priced about one hundred dollars too much, but then again, not certain why I am whining. I'm not even looking for one right now.
04-10-2010, 04:55 AM   #38
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,972
You make a good point Rondec, with respect to build.

What if the FA50 was called a limited, had an all metal construction, and cost $600? My guess is that everyone would be falling all over it. The mere fact that it is a budget lens lends itself to scrutiny.

How many people shoot landscapes at f/8-f/11 in good light, but wouldn't really consider using the kit lenses - just because it is a kit lens...?

c[_]

04-10-2010, 05:26 AM   #39
Nubi
Guest




I dropped mine about a month ago, and the thing went to heaven. Since then, I feel a bit crippled. I think it is a fine lens. It is just that focal length on APS-C makes it close to 85 in 135 mm format, but not quite. It is an odd focal length to learn, and I think it is a bit more tricky. I do need another to though. I think I am going with Zeiss.
04-10-2010, 07:13 AM   #40
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 346
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I guess the thing about the FA 50 is that it isn't a "cheap" lens any more. Current US prices are about 370 dollars. That makes it more expensive than the DA 40 and only 100 less than the DA 35 and 70.

I got mine for 190 and for the build, etc it felt about right. I think currently it is priced about one hundred dollars too much, but then again, not certain why I am whining. I'm not even looking for one right now.
Rondex,

Where are you seeing the DA 40 for less than $370 US? The cheapest I can from a reputable seller is $430.

I just found a 43/1.9 I can borrow for the weekend and I'm going to try it out again. I see that they're selling for about $550 in the marketplace, so it's not an insurmountable difference from $430 for the DA 40 that I was prepared to spend.
04-10-2010, 07:51 AM   #41
Veteran Member
joele's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,309
I hated the FA50/1.4 the first time I had it (back with k10d) though I was one of the few unimpressed back then (well against the grain)...

But having bought one again to use with the k7 I am enjoying it a lot.. Not sure if it is just focusing better with the k7, a better copy or I am just using it differently, but it wasn't well worth the price.. After borrowing Roentarre's Nocton 58 I will buy one of them too, but the FA50 still has its place for me and I won't sell it..
04-10-2010, 08:10 AM   #42
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,213
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
I may go against the grain, however I'd stand by the opinion that the FA 50/1.4 is indispensible. I very rarely shoot at f/1.4, but I have often shot at f/2.0 with absolutely stellar results. Perhaps not in terms of microcontrast, but the bokeh and control of DoF is excellent with the FA 50.

I find the 31 and 77 ltds are exquisite straight out of the camera, but with some PP work my FA 50 results can come quite close to what these FA ltds can produce. Having the FA ltds makes me wonder whether I should keep the FA 50, and indeed I use it a lot less now, but I've just been too pleased with it to let it go.

Might just leave it to the Mrs to use once she gets into photography.
I'm going to agree with Ash and Rense here and go against the grain. I find it strange that people can't get some very good images with the FA 50mm f1.4. I also suspect that the same people won't be all that much happier with the FA 30mm f2 either. I usually use it outside or inside without flash. I do find it doesn't work well with my K20d and Metz 48 for some reason. The only reason I'd sell it is to buy the FA 43mm ltd, and that is because I have the A 50mm f1.2.
04-10-2010, 08:14 AM   #43
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,213
QuoteOriginally posted by jct us101 Quote
Sadly I think the basic design around the lens was to get a foothold on Canon and Nikon with the f/1.8 lenses. Unfortunately though, the Pentax isn't sharp at it's wide open aperture like those lenses.
I don't really know what you mean by "the basic design around the lens was to get a foothold on Canon and Nikon with the f1.8" when Pentax has had an f1.4 lens in ever series they have produced beginning with the Super Tak until the DA and now they have the DA* 55mm f1.4.

Edit: Have you used an FA 50mm f1.4?
04-10-2010, 08:21 AM   #44
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,591
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
I don't really know what you mean by "the basic design around the lens was to get a foothold on Canon and Nikon with the f1.8" when Pentax has had an f1.4 lens in ever series they have produced beginning with the Super Tak until the DA and now they have the DA* 55mm f1.4.

Edit: Have you used an FA 50mm f1.4?
He's Baaaaaccckkkk!
04-10-2010, 08:33 AM   #45
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 346
Original Poster
It's not that I can't get good images with the FA50. But as I noted in the title of the post, I'm underwhelmed by the results. I admitted that this is likely because I'm comparing it against the FA43 and FA77, which were the two primes I had a few years back when I was using a K10D. The FA50 is perfectly adequate. It's just missing that "something special" that I noticed with the FA Limiteds. This isn't surprising, of course.

I came to this conclusion in part by comparing my current FA50 shots with my past FA43 and FA77 shots. The FA43 is my favorite lens in any mount, so the comparison is probably not fair. But there it is.
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!
fa, fa43, 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
For Sale - Sold: Pentax Lenses F2 50mm, F4 75-150mm, F1.7 50mm, F4 200mm, F2.5 135mm, F4.5 80-2 hangu Sold Items 10 03-27-2010 07:51 PM
Whats A Better Fast Prime? The Sigma 50mm Or Pentax FA 50MM? Or Another Option? Christopher M.W.T Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 20 10-01-2009 08:02 AM
For Sale - Sold: F 24-50mm 4, A 24-50mm 4, M 35mm 2, M 50mm 1.4, A 35-105mm 3.5, A 70-210mm 4 raybird Sold Items 7 08-29-2008 01:06 PM
For Sale - Sold: FS: 3 x 50mm f/2, 50mm f/1.7, 40mm pancake, 135mm, 70-210mm, FAJ 28-80mm igowerf Sold Items 12 10-13-2007 08:55 PM
Well a little underwhelmed by the K10D steffi Pentax DSLR Discussion 78 04-16-2007 05:18 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:23 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