[fuent104]

M135 f3.5

---

Last edited by fuent104; 12-02-2011 at 12:10 AM. Reason: Incorrect text

[fuent104]

M28 f2.8

[repaap]

Great shots Fluent104. Love your portrait shots too. M135 is lying on my drawer, now I have to get it out from there...

[baro-nite]

Here are 2 more shot with my 50... addicting and frustrating at the same time!!! Going to using this for the next week or two to see if I can get the hang of it..

Wait till you pick up a 1.4 ... or 1.2! As you say, addicting and frustrating. I really recommend picking up an M 50/1.4 if you come across one for a good price. Just different enough from the 1.7 that I can justify keeping both.

[paulh]

Wait till you pick up a 1.4 ... or 1.2! As you say, addicting and frustrating. I really recommend picking up an M 50/1.4 if you come across one for a good price. Just different enough from the 1.7 that I can justify keeping both.

Edward & Fuent - great work!
I've got a few 50's - M and A 50/1.7, and a K55/1.8. Is the 1.4 different enough from these to justify it? (I can guess the answer )

These were taken near the lakeshore under some brilliant morning light. Some blown highlights from the glare, but got some insane colors & bokeh. I did boost contrast a bit since the originals were fairly washed out. Not sure what the orange band running thru both shots is. K100D + M50/1.7 (xposted)

[eddie1960]

Edward & Fluent - great work!
I've got a few 50's - M and A 50/1.7, and a K55/1.8. Is the 1.4 different enough from these to justify it? (I can guess the answer )

These were taken near the lakeshore under some brilliant morning light. Some blown highlights from the glare, but got some insane colors & bokeh. I did boost contrast a bit since the originals were fairly washed out. Not sure what the orange band running thru both shots is. K100D + M50/1.7 (xposted)

I have the Tak 50 1.4 (and K55 2, tak 55 1.8, m 50 1.7x2, and a few others) The 1.4 is definitely different enough to warrant owning. I'm considering the FA version to add to the 50 collection ( and I want a 1.2 but they are so expensive )

[Designosophy]

In the 50s, I have an M f/1.4, FA f/1.7 and a Sears 50 f/1.7. There is a difference, and I still intend to get the FA 50 f/1.4 one of these days. Not sure if I want that or the A 50 f/1.2 more, and then there's the DA* 55 f/1.4...

[repaap]

I have the Tak 50 1.4 (and K55 2, tak 55 1.8, m 50 1.7x2, and a few others) The 1.4 is definitely different enough to warrant owning. I'm considering the FA version to add to the 50 collection ( and I want a 1.2 but they are so expensive )

Damn! I have only M 50/1.4. It is great, but now I have to buy more 50's to ask my self to justify it...wait! Seriously I'm thiking to buy takumar vers. Of 1.4 just because I like my M so much and taks. Maybe even 55/1.8...they seem to be individuals. Dunno about 1.7, but lust after 1.2 is also there. Too bad they cost too much to buy just for fun.

[eddie1960]

Damn! I have only M 50/1.4. It is great, but now I have to buy more 50's to ask my self to justify it...wait! Seriously I'm thiking to buy takumar vers. Of 1.4 just because I like my M so much and taks. Maybe even 55/1.8...they seem to be individuals. Dunno about 1.7, but lust after 1.2 is also there. Too bad they cost too much to buy just for fun.

I have shot a lot with the m50 1.7 but primarily in situations where i want a quick change between lenses (ie no adapter)
if that isn't the case then it's the taks either the 50 or the 55 (both are in my bag today along with a lentar 21 3.8 m42 - so the quick change option is there)

[baro-nite]

I've got a few 50's - M and A 50/1.7, and a K55/1.8. Is the 1.4 different enough from these to justify it? (I can guess the answer )

Your guess is correct

I recently picked up the K55/1.8 and I'm keeping it too. The slightly longer FL gives a meaningfully different perspective for portraits, and my impression based on a few shots is that the bokeh & overall rendering has a somewhat different flavor than the M50s.

The M50/1.7 is reputed to have better corner sharpness, while the M50/1.4 has better center sharpness. And no question, the half-stop difference from 1.7 to 1.4 is also significant, particularly for getting that really thin DOF for close subjects.

M50/1.4 remains my favorite of the three, but then I've shot with it the most by far.

[Pa. Patriot]

Here is a shot from a few years ago with my M50 1.7 mounted to my trusty K10D.
I'll dig up more later, just haven't kept up with uploading to my photo site in the last few years, been too busy.
It's the only Pentax-M I have at the moment, but now that I have recovered from purchassing the K-5 and a couple new zooms I am on the hunt for M, F and A primes. Actually just PM'd another member about purchasing a M28 2.8

[fuent104]

Great shots Fluent104. Love your portrait shots too. M135 is lying on my drawer, now I have to get it out from there...

Thanks! The portraits are all from the sets of short films for which I was doing the lighting. The 135 is an interesting, quirky lens. I find it slightly difficult to balance when I'm not using a tripod and the subject is far away. For closer shots, though, I don't usually have a problem.

[fuent104]

M15 f3.5

[fuent104]

Pretty nice, I've shot a couple of Taiwanese bands last year. My Skin Against Your Skin (MSAYS) and The White Eyes. both put on pretty frantic good shows.

MSAYS M50 f1.7 @ 1.7

I love this photo.

[eddie1960]

Thanks Fuent104