Originally posted by Mistral75
Hi Folks,
It is clearly a pity that the author of this review is a Pentax hater. In Mobile01, the reliability of a Pentax-related article would be better if written by another guy.
1) In this article, the author said, "Its magnification ratio is 0.18x, so the macro ability is alright"
==> Com'on, someone replied in the thread saying
Sigma 50mm f1.4 ART 0.18X
Nikon AFS 50mm f1.4 G 0.15X
Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 L USM 0.11X
Sony FE 50mm F1.4 ZA 0.15X
2) The author said, "According to MTF, central sharpness in F1.4 is OK, and corner sharpness needs to be improved"
==> I think it was out of focus in the photo. And, I think the author is the only one who feels the sharpness is merely OK
3) The author said, "The combo of K-1 ii and DFA*50 weighs almost 2 kg. It's a huge burden. PENTAXIANS COULDN'T HELP BUT HOPELESSLY STICK TO IT. IT CAN'T BE HELPED."
==> Logic????? Just a Pentax hater.
==> Taiwanese lesson: 愛到卡慘死 literally means "Love and die tragically". It is usually used to describe a woman married to a jerk.
4) The author said, "Corner is not sharp until F4"
==> DFA* is sharper than its competitors actually. But the author just ignored the fact.
5) Poor LoCA
==> Well, maybe at this point he is not totally wrong. In different reviews, DFA* demonstrates more LoCA but less in other reviews. The author should have tried other lenses in the same position.
6) The author said, "I thought its flare and ghost would be scarce, but they are obvious."
==> I think in such harsh scene, other lenses would show more flare and ghost.
7) The author appraised its starburst, vignette, and lack of cat-eye effect.
8) The author in conclusion said, "K-1 ii is TOOOO SLOOOOOOOW. Shooting pace would be bothered and interrupted severely."
==> Hello? Are you reviewing the camera?
9) The author complained about the high price
==> It's not a third party lens OK?
So, I think his review is similar to that by DPreview, both written by Pentax -haters.