[mecrox]

There’s an interesting article on petapixel about shooting landscapes for a week in New Zealand using only a 50mm lens. OK it’s petapixel but the guy is right in what he says (he loved the experience). This focal length has a versatility which I hope gets stressed. Bokeh monstering is fun but only one aspect of it all. F11 is also where it’s at.

[jhaji]

I have never understood why anyone would consider the solstice to be the beginning of summer. I would have thought it was, by definition, the *height* of summer.

But I digress. I look forward to the release of the DFA*50, whenever it may be.

I have never understood why anyone would consider the solstice to be the beginning of summer. I would have thought it was, by definition, the *height* of summer.

Beats the shit out of me too. It should actually be the mid point of summer. All downhill from there.

[nzondlo]

Yes, pretty milky rendering. Has some kind of glow wide open. Far cry from Sigma 50mm ART or Milvus 50/1.4.

I thought the ones posted of the cats in the original article were much sharper. But unfortunately we can't see them anymore.

[MJKoski]

Is that photo of the girl even taken with the new 50mm lens? Asahi man said that this new lens should be better than the 50mm ART. Looks like Nikkor 50/1.4G performance.

[normhead]

Is that photo of the girl even taken with the new 50mm lens? Asahi man said that this new lens should be better than the 50mm ART. Looks like Nikkor 50/1.4G performance.

Is your purpose in life to kill any little bit of joy anyone might have about anything?

There is always something better, to compare anything to.
There is always something worse to compare everything to.

When I get a decent lens, and I can't find what ti's good for, I feel like I failed as a photographer. I know others will like the lens, and it's not about the lens, it's about my lack of use for it.

If I buy this lens, I will find out what its strengths are, what it's good for and where people should use it. I will find out why I like it better than the Sigma 50 art, and I will find out why it's better (and worse) that the Nikon 50 1.4 $G.

If I couldn't do that, I wouldn't call myself a photographer.

That there are people who make these kinds of determinations without ever having a copy of the lens, without doing any kind of real comparison, just makes them ignorable. I shouldn't have peeked.

As soon as some new development happens, you start telling people it's not good, and your judgement is extremely suspect.

The simple fact is almost everything in glass of this quality is about trade offs. If it isn't good at this one thing. It's good at something else. MJKloski only knows what's (according to his extremely negative opinion) is bad about things.

The above post being a case in point.

I gotta ask MJKloski, is your goal in life to make sure everyone else thinks as little of their Pentax gear as you do?

[ffking]

Pentax have always gone for less microcontrast in their lenses than Nikon, which tends to make the lenses look less sharp at a more superficial level - having said which, some of the samples were not perfectly focused either...

[grahame]

Looks like Nikkor 50/1.4G performance.

Not sure if you take Nikkor 50 G as a standard for an excellent 50, or a bad sample. But to judge a lens' performance, you can say it is a good one from a good sample photos, but can not say the lens is necessary a bad one from one not so good photo. photographer's error can only make the image not as sharp, but can not accidentally make a sharp image from a soft lens.

[Gianclaudio]

MJKloski only knows what's (according to his extremely negative opinion) bad about things.

The above post being a case in point.

I gotta ask MJKloski, is your goal in life to make sure everyone else thinks as little of their Pentax gear as you do?

Can we ask the same to Ogl , which just as well seems to be unimpressed with everything Pentax does lately as the Kp, K-1ii, 50mm 1.4 , etc; and just keep repeating the same things over and over?

Thanks

[pres589]

There's a useful ignore function that only seems to fail when I get email notifications with a reply to them. So, overall, it's fairly effective at cutting a bit of noise out of the signal.

[Rondec]

It's a bit early to make broad statements about this lens either way. It feels like there is a bit of hyperbole on both sides, attacking and building it up.

[biz-engineer]

It is hard to just from downsized images posted on the web. Can anyone send me that lens? and I'd tell you how it performs.

[clackers]

It is hard to just from downsized images posted on the web. Can anyone send me that lens? and I'd tell you how it performs.

(Laughs)

Ricoh have probably confiscated the one they gave the guy who breached his NDA with that 'review', you can have his copy, Biz.

He won't see a pay cheque for his testing.

[Pål Jensen]

The days of the classic compact Pentax primes are gone. Sharpness obsession has killed them. This is the way lenses are being made In the digital age, where people are viewing their photos with an electron microscope. It is what consumers what and it takes a lot glass to correct all those issues.

APS is for those who want compact...

[ogl]

Can we ask the same to Ogl , which just as well seems to be unimpressed with everything Pentax does lately as the Kp, K-1ii, 50mm 1.4 , etc; and just keep repeating the same things over and over?

Thanks

Untrue. I've just saw the photos from flickr of this lens in this thread. Everybody could see any focus problems and no sharpness wide opened. What is it? JPEG settings of K-1II or such post processing - I don't know. It's hard to make any conclusion based on another's photos without any info.

As for KP and K-1II - nor negative, neither unimpressive comments. I don't care the both cameras and I can afford to express my opinion about Pentax gear very rare. The most of my posts are photos.

[biz-engineer]

He won't see a pay cheque for his testing.

I offer to test the lens free of charge.