Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-22-2013, 05:22 PM   #46
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,010
If Samyang begins to make AF lenses, I would expect to see the prices much higher than their MF glass.

07-10-2013, 02:50 AM   #47
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
What I don't understand is, if people really are willing to pay that much for such insanely fast lenses, why don't manufacturers find them more interesting to produce? If you look around in flickr there's lots and lots of users.
07-10-2013, 02:58 AM   #48
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,330
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
What I don't understand is, if people really are willing to pay that much for such insanely fast lenses, why don't manufacturers find them more interesting to produce?
Its probably like a luxury race car. A lot of people dream of one, but even if they can afford it, very few actually decide to get it.
f1.0 doesn't have very many uses - its main use is to astonish people on the internet

Last edited by Na Horuk; 07-10-2013 at 03:07 AM.
07-10-2013, 03:26 AM   #49
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Its probably like a luxury race car. A lot of people dream of one, but even if they can afford it, very few actually decide to get it.
f1.0 doesn't have very many uses - its main use is to astonish people on the internet
I would insta-buy a DFA 50mm 1.2, just because I'm still so astonished myself with the A 50mm 1.2.

07-10-2013, 04:39 AM   #50
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
What I don't understand is, if people really are willing to pay that much for such insanely fast lenses, why don't manufacturers find them more interesting to produce? If you look around in flickr there's lots and lots of users.
They didn't sell. Neither did the 200/1.8.
07-10-2013, 04:58 AM   #51
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 24
This looks awesome!
I'd still prefer a 55 f1.2, because of our cropped sensors, 55 kind of fills in the portrait segment coming in at 82mm f1.9 equivalent - but the auto aperture that this boasts over my Porst version would be worth it.
07-10-2013, 05:13 AM   #52
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
QuoteOriginally posted by TimKierath Quote
This looks awesome!
I'd still prefer a 55 f1.2, because of our cropped sensors, 55 kind of fills in the portrait segment coming in at 82mm f1.9 equivalent - but the auto aperture that this boasts over my Porst version would be worth it.
I have the Porst version too. The Porst is actually a bit sharper then the Pentax, imho. Then again, the colours and bokeh better with the Pentax version.
07-12-2013, 02:39 PM   #53
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Its probably like a luxury race car. A lot of people dream of one, but even if they can afford it, very few actually decide to get it.
f1.0 doesn't have very many uses - its main use is to astonish people on the internet
On what basis do you make that claim? Because you see no use for a 50/1.0 ??

I'm a narrow DOF fan. I'd buy a f/1.0 lens with a K mount if a] one existed and b] I could afford it. And no I have no interest in atonishing anyone anywhere least of all the Internet. Are you not judging others by your own personality?

07-12-2013, 03:14 PM   #54
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Madison, Wis., USA
Posts: 1,510
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Looks interesting. Will be at least as cheap as current Pentax 50mm offerings and Samyang has a name for releasing lenses that are very sharp wide open.

The biggest problem is that manual focus at f1.2 is pretty hard. I own the DA *55 and can't really see switching to a lens like this, unless they would decide to start releasing lenses with auto focus...
And a focus point that's quite small and crisply defined. Otherwise .....
07-12-2013, 03:27 PM   #55
Pentaxian
carrrlangas's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Cottbus (Berlin)
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,738
QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
I'm a narrow DOF fan. I'd buy a f/1.0 lens with a K mount if a] one existed and b] I could afford it.
DoF changes very little between f/1 and f/2... Try it yourself: Online Depth of Field Plotter
There other far more important qualities like out of focus blur and resultant shutter speed...
07-12-2013, 03:33 PM - 1 Like   #56
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
They didn't sell. Neither did the 200/1.8.
They sold in limited quantities.

People should realize why these lenses were developed in the first place.

It was to produce softer images, especially of portraits. There was a lot of reaction about how fine grain film made features standout (like zits) that were unwanted, so softer images could be done with fast glass making it possible to both utilize fine grain 100-400 ISO film and flatter the portrait. The same issue is occurring with HD and super-fine cinematography. Of course digital makes it easier with Photoshop vs. airbrush.

The reality is most people could not afford such a lens. And it would have AF difficulties.

Last edited by Aristophanes; 07-12-2013 at 07:27 PM.
07-12-2013, 06:37 PM   #57
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by carrrlangas Quote
DoF changes "very little" between f/1 and f/2... Try it yourself: Online Depth of Field Plotter
There other far more important qualities like out of focus blur and resultant shutter speed...
I already have a DOF calculator bookmarked thanks Online Depth of Field Calculator Comes in very useful for certain situations.

I'm still a fan of narrow DOF and as you can see from my signature I have several wide primes including an A 50/1.2 and others wider than f/2.0.so I'm not sure of your point? What you deem "very little" might be of more importance to others. That is the beauty of a subjective pursuit like photography.

I've seen examples of images taken through f/1,0 and I'd still buy one for k-mount if it existed and I could afford it. Couldn't care less what the DOF calculator says as in real life there's a nice difference.

Photography by numbers doesn't excite me.
07-12-2013, 06:54 PM   #58
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,586
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
People should realize why these lenses were developed in the first place.
It was to produce softer images, especially of portraits.
Indeed. There are very few (maybe none) lenses in that category that are sharp wide open - eg look at the Canon 50 f1.2 resolution charts on lenstip.com. You'd only buy a lens like that for a very specific purpose.
Attached Images
 
07-12-2013, 08:02 PM   #59
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Indeed. There are very few (maybe none) lenses in that category that are sharp wide open - eg look at the Canon 50 f1.2 resolution charts on lenstip.com. You'd only buy a lens like that for a very specific purpose.
Yes...soft wide open. From the Lenstip review on FF:

"The conclusions which can be drawn for the frame centre are, in fact, identical as in the case of 50D results. The images we got by f/1.2 and f/1.4 are “soft” and the good level of focus we reach only after stopping down the lens to near f/1.8."

Here's the modern Tamron 90:



From f/2.8 to f/11 it never strays below 30 lpmm. The 50/1.2 starts a notch above 20 and gets as sharp only about the same as the Tamron.

You have to remember sharp glass was a problem for a lot of film shots, especially portraits. Of course a huge aperture is going to be centre sharp on such a massive and extreme bell curve with huge variation between edge and absolute centre. It's almost impossible not to get that with such a large iris aimed at 135. Newer, digital-ready versions may be designed more for absolute centre sharpness, but their edge sharpness (and vignetting) is average to below.

Would you rather a less extreme curve as aperture increase and less variation between edge and centre with a lens at f/2.8 starting point or all the variability and "softness" of the 1.2?

Heck! For $700 LESS one can get almost equivalent results with less drama between edge:centre from our very own FA43mm:



Hold on. From f/1.9 to 5.6 the FA 43 edges the Canon all the way with less edge:centre gap. The 43 allows for more creative framing at even resolution. And the lenstip review says the Canon only really gets decent at f/1.8. OK. At f/1.9 the FA43 is ahead and stay there.

So for a few inches less DOF (43 vs. 50 taken into account) the price per inch less of DOF is extraordinary. Because that's all you really get out of an f/1.2. That and a much lighter wallet. The COC of the 50/1.2 wide open at 10 ft. is 0.03 on FF while on APS-C the FA43/1.9 wide open at the same 10 ft. 0.02. Yet the FA43 objectively will have greater resolution both at centre and especially at edge.

These 1.2's just aren't a value for all but a tiny niche of shots. They never sold well, they have quirks and aberrations, all of which summarizes why they are so rare, and why the cost and arm and a leg.
07-12-2013, 11:14 PM   #60
Pentaxian
carrrlangas's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Cottbus (Berlin)
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,738
QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
I already have a DOF calculator bookmarked thanks Online Depth of Field Calculator Comes in very useful for certain situations.
Congratulations. The one I mentioned allows you to plot and compare different f-stops and let you set the CoC. You are welcome

QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
I'm still a fan of narrow DOF and as you can see from my signature I have several wide primes including an A 50/1.2 and others wider than f/2.0.so I'm not sure of your point? What you deem "very little" might be of more importance to others. That is the beauty of a subjective pursuit like photography.
My point is that no matter how much a fan of thin DoF you are, if you already have a 50/1.2, a 50/1.0 won´t make a big difference, look at the plot. I agree there´s certainly an application for it. I have no idea what subjective persuit is and don´t think anyone would like to persue something subjectively.

QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
I've seen examples of images taken through f/1,0 and I'd still buy one for k-mount if it existed and I could afford it. Couldn't care less what the DOF calculator says as in real life there's a nice difference.
Great, but why "real life" would be different? If you take the proper parameters into account, it should be similar. As I said before, there certainly are differences, just no so much in DoF.

QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
Photography by numbers doesn't excite me.
It doesn´t have to. But photographc equipment is full of them and understanding what they mean can be useful.
Attached Images
 
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!
50mm, af, art, f1.2, f1.4, focus, front, lens, light, otus, pentax news, pentax rumors, purchase, samyang, screen, sigma, steve, stop, zeiss
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trip to Africa in 2014 - what lens/camera? audiodoc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 71 02-22-2013 09:41 PM
Portait lens - Pentax 50mm f1.2 (K version) or Samyang 85mm f1.4 Damon Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 01-21-2013 01:35 AM
Rikenon 50 f1.7 (P/K) vs Super Takumar 50 f1.4 (M42), which is better? fanofcc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 09-15-2012 11:58 AM
Samyang 24mm f1.4 kevinschoenmakers Pentax News and Rumors 46 08-19-2011 08:23 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:37 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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