[aurele]

Quicker focus, sharper and better suited for K-1's brilliant sensor? 55 1.4 is ok, but useless for many pros

A faster motor would already be a great step up The lens is decent otherwise. But i can understand we don't need the same level of quality

[normhead]

At least while releasing this "pro" lens they through in a DA* 11-18 for us ordinary mortals.

[sculptor666]

in 15 years, the new 50 will still be relevant... the 55 maybe not so much.

[pres589]

Maybe this is the wrong thread to discuss, but wouldn't the longer amount of distance between minimum focus and infinity focus of the DA*55 be better for background blurring versatility vs. the focusing demarcation on the D-FA 50 1.4?

kenspo, are "pro's" shooting Pentax really turning up their nose at results they've had with the DA*55 / K-1 combination? I seriously like the shots I've seen shared here with that lens and camera.

[kenspo]

kenspo, are "pro's" shooting Pentax really turning up their nose at results they've had with the DA*55 / K-1 combination? I seriously like the shots I've seen shared here with that lens and camera.

Its not a bad lense, but this new 50 will be very much better. I never use my 55 anymore, cause its mostly useless in my line of work. But you can get good pics with any lense.

[pres589]

I wish I was good enough to have a *55, let alone feeling like it was holding me back. DA 50 1.8 is all I need these days!

[Na Horuk]

Maybe this is the wrong thread to discuss, but wouldn't the longer amount of distance between minimum focus and infinity focus of the DA*55 be better for background blurring versatility vs. the focusing demarcation on the D-FA 50 1.4?

A while ago some portrait photographer made a whole blog post that 50mm are not for portraits, but 55 is ok for portraits (55 minimum, up to 135mm). He cited things like working distance, size of bokeh blur, distortion characteristics.. the other element is that 55mm and 58mm lenses are usually optimized for portraiture, while regular 50mm lenses are optimized to be "everything" lenses. The one optimized for portraiture should be better in terms of rendering skin tones, bokeh,.. (but it might have weaknesses for some other things; it might not be great for astrophoto or macro or whatever)
So I'm not sure this new DFA* 50mm f1.4 will be perfect for portraiture, but it will definitely be super sharp and highly corrected (we can assume this due to its big size)

[MrNPhoto]

I'll stick up for the DA* 55 - I find it a wonderful lens to work with (on K-3) esp. for closer photography. It's a really comfortable lens to use when working a room, doesn't intimidate like the FA* 85, and I love it's look. I'll look to the DFA* 50 to replace the FA 50, which I use mostly for more distant subjects, and at smaller apertures.

[RGlasel]

SDM lenses which are Tamron rebadged lenses have a ring motor (USD in Tamron's jargon). All other SDM lenses have a micromotor or, rather, had: until this one. All DC lenses also have a micromotor. Don't look for much logic in there.

The logic is that Ricoh has the SDM trademark and they don't see negative effects from the "SDM" auto focus motors produced more than 5 years ago. USM, USD, SWM and HSM are all taken.

[ffking]

The finish of the casing is smoother, the lettering is now engraved, the depth-of-field scale is an actual one and, last but not least, the piece of black tape is gone!

not to mention having glass in it - it looks like a real production model specimen, even if it isn't (?)

---------- Post added 25-10-17 at 11:05 AM ----------

The DoF scale is steeper.

should make for quicker AF

[D1N0]

I expected an autumn announcement. Now how about the K-3 II successor that Nokishita missed

[Belnan]

I expected an autumn announcement. Now how about the K-3 II successor that Nokishita missed

Glad to see this lens finally being released. If they release a K-3 III(?) they may start to generate some buzz. Its all about the buzzzz.

[Scintilla]

should make for quicker AF

But at the expense of manual focus precision, one would expect.

I'm curious, why would I buy the 50 1.4 instead of the 55 1.4? After all, a longer lens with the same aperture gives you more control of DoF? What do you suppose is the reason they made this so big?

Is there some thing going on in the market where people think given a smaller lens and a bigger lens, people should always buy the bigger one? This looks like the Sigmatization of Pentax.

Perhaps one of the conscious compromises in the design is lower astigmatism at the cost of greater Sigmatism?

[mee]

But at the expense of manual focus precision, one would expect.


Perhaps one of the conscious compromises in the design is lower astigmatism at the cost of greater Sigmatism?

I'd like to see more Sigmatism for K mount for sure!

[awscreo]

Let's see how much it is, hope I'll be able to save enough by the time it's released)