A 50mm F1.4 or FA 50mm F1.4?

matam · 05-01-2010, 03:25 AM

My M F1.4 is already sharp @ f1.4, at f2 it gain something in both sharpness (when pixel peeping) and contrast ( the same should happens to the 1.7 when you step it down), ideally the lens is at it's best between f4/5.6 but i can't see great differences other than DOF past f2.8.
To me it doesn't have sense to buy an f1.4 lens if you don't plan to use it wide open!
Let me know, if needed i can post a couple of test pic between f1.4 and f4.

matam · 05-01-2010, 03:32 AM

one more thing, the f1.7 version have 6 aperture blade and the out of focus part of the image looks better with the f1.4/1.2 version of the lens thanks to the 8 aperture blade (when stepping down the "hole" in the aperture ring is more cricular, and so you'll have smoother transition between what's in focus and what not).

poogeek · 05-01-2010, 04:01 AM

Originally posted by matam

one more thing, the f1.7 version have 6 aperture blade and the out of focus part of the image looks better with the f1.4/1.2 version of the lens thanks to the 8 aperture blade (when stepping down the "hole" in the aperture ring is more cricular, and so you'll have smoother transition between what's in focus and what not).

thank you very much i appreciate your time answering my questions... do you have flicker? i would love to see you photos

matam · 05-01-2010, 04:50 AM

I opened an account on flickr and post some picture but then i forgot how to log-in and since i used false data i can't retrieve the account information and so i don't use it.
Anyway here's a "tasty" test of the nifty fifty @ f1.4, judge by yourself if it's sharp enough.

Full Picture:

100% Crop:

It's not one of the best shoot, but the cake tasted great!

ll_coffee_lP · 05-01-2010, 07:08 AM

OP...I didn't read all the responses, but $370 for the FA is very expensive.

If you are wanting an AF f/1.4 then just keep an eye on the marketplace here, where FA50's typically sell for $250. Alternatively, you can get one off of ebay for about $300.

Good luck.

c[_]

**Clinton** · 05-01-2010, 07:13 AM

If your choice is A or FA and you're new to this, you'll do better with the FA. At 1.4, your depth of field is so limited that having the camera assist you with your focusing will be immensely helpful, even if you just touch up the focus afterward.

Spring for the extra cash and get the autofocus.

Danny Delcambre · 05-01-2010, 08:06 AM

I bought my new Pentax FA 50mm f1.4. I love it than my Pentax M 50mm f2. That M 50mm f2 work too much but that is very good. My FA 50mm is better because of AF. I bought it for $359 from Adorama one week ago.. Smile.

Marc Sabatella · 05-01-2010, 08:54 AM

The difference between f/1.7 [EDIT: originally I had a typo] and f/1.4 is negligible. No way would I buy an A50/1.4 when the price is so close to that of the FA50/1.4, and so much higher than the price of the A50/1.7. In my mind, the choices you should be considering are the FA50/1.4 for AF, or A50/1.7 for much lower price. You can get lower price still by giving up autoexposure (the "M" versions), or by giving up some optical quality (the f/2) versions, but that's probably not worth it for most people.

tokyoso · 05-01-2010, 08:59 AM

don't forget the super tak 55 1.8 or smc tak 55.. often listed for $10 untouched.

Blue · 05-01-2010, 09:09 AM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

The difference between f/1. and f/1.4 is negligible. No way would I buy an A50/1.4 when the price is so close to that of the FA50/1.4, and so much higher than the price of the A50/1.7. In my mind, the choices you should be considering are the FA50/1.4 for AF, or A50/1.7 for much lower price. You can get lower price still by giving up autoexposure (the "M" versions), or by giving up some optical quality (the f/2) versions, but that's probably not worth it for most people.

I don't understand your logic hear by making a statement like "the difference between f1 and f1.4 is negligible" in comparing an FA f1.4 and A f1.7 or any of the mentioned lenses for that matter. The difference between f1 and f1.4 is a full stop! I also don't think the A f1.4 at $190 is any more overpriced than the FA f1.4 is at $370 (1 is ~ $20 overpriced and the other ~$100 over priced imho). An A 50mm f1.2 sold for $450 last in the past week in the market place. $370 puts the price range to where I would suck it up and buy a new FA 43mm f1.9 ltd before I would pay someone $370 for the FA 50 f1.4. The DA 40mm f2.8 ltd is in fact $339 shipped, NEW.

Edit: The difference between f1.4 & f1.7 is half a stop.

Blue · 05-01-2010, 09:27 AM

Originally posted by poogeek

the DA40 limited is priced at $500 in our country.... i think il just buy the A... my problem now is will i really you F1.4 or end up using F2? cause other say its sharp at F2 upwards... if thats the case should i just buy the A 50mm 1.7?

That definitely changes things regarding price given the DA 40mm ltd can be bought from New York for $339 USD.

Pentaxor · 05-01-2010, 10:53 AM

for a used copy, I believe it's way too high. about double the price. if the OP can find other sellers, I would suggest he does. this is no more than trying to rip-off someone. $190 for A version and $370 for FA is not worth it.

**Just1MoreDave** · 05-01-2010, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by Blue

I don't understand your logic hear by making a statement like "the difference between f1 and f1.4 is negligible" in comparing an FA f1.4 and A f1.7 or any of the mentioned lenses for that matter. The difference between f1 and f1.4 is a full stop!

There's just a tiny chance that Marc made a typo, rather than an irrelevant reference to a nonexistant lens and a big math error.

Quote:

I also don't think the A f1.4 at $190 is any more overpriced than the FA f1.4 is at $370 (1 is ~ $20 overpriced and the other ~$100 over priced imho). An A 50mm f1.2 sold for $450 last in the past week in the market place. $370 puts the price range to where I would suck it up and buy a new FA 43mm f1.9 ltd before I would pay someone $370 for the FA 50 f1.4. The DA 40mm f2.8 ltd is in fact $339 shipped, NEW.

Edit: The difference between f1.4 & f1.7 is half a stop.

US prices are not too helpful for the OP, who is in the Phillipines.

Blue · 05-01-2010, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by Just1MoreDave

There's just a tiny chance that Marc made a typo, rather than an irrelevant reference to a nonexistant lens and a big math error.

US prices are not too helpful for the OP, who is in the Phillipines.

Even if he meant f1.2 and f1.4, its still a half a stop. There are f1 lenses out there, but Pentax doesn't make them nor can I afford to even mention their name. And if you go back and look at my post about 2 posts before yours, I acknowledged that U.S. prices were moot.

Originally posted by matam

one more thing, the f1.7 version have 6 aperture blade and the out of focus part of the image looks better with the f1.4/1.2 version of the lens thanks to the 8 aperture blade (when stepping down the "hole" in the aperture ring is more cricular, and so you'll have smoother transition between what's in focus and what not).

I missed this earlier. The K 50mm f1.2 has 8 blades and the A f1.2 has 9 blades.

**Just1MoreDave** · 05-01-2010, 02:44 PM

Originally posted by Blue

Even if he meant f1.2 and f1.4, its still a have a stop. There are f1 lenses out there, but Pentax doesn't make them nor can I afford to even mention their name.

I figure he meant 1.7, got the decimal in there and everything.

I also think he's right, it's irrelevant. Instead of an A50/1.4 wide open, you could get away with shooting an A50/1.7 wide open and a half-stop underexposed and bumping exposure up in PP, unless you were at a really high ISO and noise got out of control, or had subject movement. At low ISO, the A50/1.7 might actually take a better image. It's well-known for better sharpness, contrast and flatter field than the f1.4 lenses. The larger DOF covers focus errors too. It's pretty easy to lose that half-stop paper superiority of the A50/1.4 in ordinary shots.

05-01-2010, 08:54 AM	#23
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	The difference between f/1.7 [EDIT: originally I had a typo] and f/1.4 is negligible. No way would I buy an A50/1.4 when the price is so close to that of the FA50/1.4, and so much higher than the price of the A50/1.7. In my mind, the choices you should be considering are the FA50/1.4 for AF, or A50/1.7 for much lower price. You can get lower price still by giving up autoexposure (the "M" versions), or by giving up some optical quality (the f/2) versions, but that's probably not worth it for most people. Last edited by Marc Sabatella; 05-01-2010 at 07:53 PM.

05-01-2010, 09:09 AM	#25
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella The difference between f/1. and f/1.4 is negligible. No way would I buy an A50/1.4 when the price is so close to that of the FA50/1.4, and so much higher than the price of the A50/1.7. In my mind, the choices you should be considering are the FA50/1.4 for AF, or A50/1.7 for much lower price. You can get lower price still by giving up autoexposure (the "M" versions), or by giving up some optical quality (the f/2) versions, but that's probably not worth it for most people. I don't understand your logic hear by making a statement like "the difference between f1 and f1.4 is negligible" in comparing an FA f1.4 and A f1.7 or any of the mentioned lenses for that matter. The difference between f1 and f1.4 is a full stop! I also don't think the A f1.4 at $190 is any more overpriced than the FA f1.4 is at $370 (1 is ~ $20 overpriced and the other ~$100 over priced imho). An A 50mm f1.2 sold for $450 last in the past week in the market place. $370 puts the price range to where I would suck it up and buy a new FA 43mm f1.9 ltd before I would pay someone $370 for the FA 50 f1.4. The DA 40mm f2.8 ltd is in fact $339 shipped, NEW. Edit: The difference between f1.4 & f1.7 is half a stop. Last edited by Blue; 05-01-2010 at 09:24 AM.

05-01-2010, 02:23 PM	#29
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Just1MoreDave There's just a tiny chance that Marc made a typo, rather than an irrelevant reference to a nonexistant lens and a big math error. US prices are not too helpful for the OP, who is in the Phillipines. Even if he meant f1.2 and f1.4, its still a half a stop. There are f1 lenses out there, but Pentax doesn't make them nor can I afford to even mention their name. And if you go back and look at my post about 2 posts before yours, I acknowledged that U.S. prices were moot. Originally posted by matam one more thing, the f1.7 version have 6 aperture blade and the out of focus part of the image looks better with the f1.4/1.2 version of the lens thanks to the 8 aperture blade (when stepping down the "hole" in the aperture ring is more cricular, and so you'll have smoother transition between what's in focus and what not). I missed this earlier. The K 50mm f1.2 has 8 blades and the A f1.2 has 9 blades. Last edited by Blue; 05-01-2010 at 02:40 PM.

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
For Sale - Sold: Previous listings on ebay - A 50mm f1.4, A 24-50mm f4, A 70-210 f4 Macro	raybird	Sold Items	0	04-14-2009 08:31 AM
Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX Macro vs Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 - Brick Wall test	eva2000	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	12-13-2008 11:47 PM
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

05-01-2010, 03:25 AM	#16
matam Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Berlin Posts: 112	My M F1.4 is already sharp @ f1.4, at f2 it gain something in both sharpness (when pixel peeping) and contrast ( the same should happens to the 1.7 when you step it down), ideally the lens is at it's best between f4/5.6 but i can't see great differences other than DOF past f2.8. To me it doesn't have sense to buy an f1.4 lens if you don't plan to use it wide open! Let me know, if needed i can post a couple of test pic between f1.4 and f4.

05-01-2010, 03:32 AM	#17
matam Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Berlin Posts: 112	one more thing, the f1.7 version have 6 aperture blade and the out of focus part of the image looks better with the f1.4/1.2 version of the lens thanks to the 8 aperture blade (when stepping down the "hole" in the aperture ring is more cricular, and so you'll have smoother transition between what's in focus and what not).

05-01-2010, 04:01 AM	#18
poogeek Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: pampanga Photos: Gallery Posts: 74 Original Poster	Originally posted by matam one more thing, the f1.7 version have 6 aperture blade and the out of focus part of the image looks better with the f1.4/1.2 version of the lens thanks to the 8 aperture blade (when stepping down the "hole" in the aperture ring is more cricular, and so you'll have smoother transition between what's in focus and what not). thank you very much i appreciate your time answering my questions... do you have flicker? i would love to see you photos

05-01-2010, 04:50 AM	#19
matam Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Berlin Posts: 112	I opened an account on flickr and post some picture but then i forgot how to log-in and since i used false data i can't retrieve the account information and so i don't use it. Anyway here's a "tasty" test of the nifty fifty @ f1.4, judge by yourself if it's sharp enough. Full Picture: 100% Crop: It's not one of the best shoot, but the cake tasted great!

05-01-2010, 07:08 AM	#20
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	OP...I didn't read all the responses, but $370 for the FA is very expensive. If you are wanting an AF f/1.4 then just keep an eye on the marketplace here, where FA50's typically sell for $250. Alternatively, you can get one off of ebay for about $300. Good luck. c[_]

05-01-2010, 07:13 AM	#21
Clinton Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,910	If your choice is A or FA and you're new to this, you'll do better with the FA. At 1.4, your depth of field is so limited that having the camera assist you with your focusing will be immensely helpful, even if you just touch up the focus afterward. Spring for the extra cash and get the autofocus.

05-01-2010, 08:06 AM	#22
Danny Delcambre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 550	I bought my new Pentax FA 50mm f1.4. I love it than my Pentax M 50mm f2. That M 50mm f2 work too much but that is very good. My FA 50mm is better because of AF. I bought it for $359 from Adorama one week ago.. Smile.

05-01-2010, 08:59 AM	#24
tokyoso Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Tokyo Photos: Albums Posts: 723	don't forget the super tak 55 1.8 or smc tak 55.. often listed for $10 untouched.

05-01-2010, 09:27 AM	#26
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by poogeek the DA40 limited is priced at $500 in our country.... i think il just buy the A... my problem now is will i really you F1.4 or end up using F2? cause other say its sharp at F2 upwards... if thats the case should i just buy the A 50mm 1.7? That definitely changes things regarding price given the DA 40mm ltd can be bought from New York for $339 USD.

05-01-2010, 10:53 AM	#27
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	for a used copy, I believe it's way too high. about double the price. if the OP can find other sellers, I would suggest he does. this is no more than trying to rip-off someone. $190 for A version and $370 for FA is not worth it.

05-01-2010, 02:21 PM	#28
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	Originally posted by Blue I don't understand your logic hear by making a statement like "the difference between f1 and f1.4 is negligible" in comparing an FA f1.4 and A f1.7 or any of the mentioned lenses for that matter. The difference between f1 and f1.4 is a full stop! There's just a tiny chance that Marc made a typo, rather than an irrelevant reference to a nonexistant lens and a big math error. Quote: I also don't think the A f1.4 at $190 is any more overpriced than the FA f1.4 is at $370 (1 is ~ $20 overpriced and the other ~$100 over priced imho). An A 50mm f1.2 sold for $450 last in the past week in the market place. $370 puts the price range to where I would suck it up and buy a new FA 43mm f1.9 ltd before I would pay someone $370 for the FA 50 f1.4. The DA 40mm f2.8 ltd is in fact $339 shipped, NEW. Edit: The difference between f1.4 & f1.7 is half a stop. US prices are not too helpful for the OP, who is in the Phillipines.

05-01-2010, 02:44 PM	#30
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	Originally posted by Blue Even if he meant f1.2 and f1.4, its still a have a stop. There are f1 lenses out there, but Pentax doesn't make them nor can I afford to even mention their name. I figure he meant 1.7, got the decimal in there and everything. I also think he's right, it's irrelevant. Instead of an A50/1.4 wide open, you could get away with shooting an A50/1.7 wide open and a half-stop underexposed and bumping exposure up in PP, unless you were at a really high ISO and noise got out of control, or had subject movement. At low ISO, the A50/1.7 might actually take a better image. It's well-known for better sharpness, contrast and flatter field than the f1.4 lenses. The larger DOF covers focus errors too. It's pretty easy to lose that half-stop paper superiority of the A50/1.4 in ordinary shots.