[BigMackCam]

Of course, so when my K-1 sensor needs repairing or replacing I could go and get one from a Nikon D810 seeing they are the same!Yore not close.2.

You're closer to troll that you ever have been and that's something to say.
Anything to bring to the table other than this? Really?

Of course, says a judgemental judge.

Come on, fellas... Knock it off, eh?

[monochrome]

I guess we can always hope that the tide will turn. The fact is, I don't think the notion of having an independent so-called "objective" review site associated with a store like Amazon is a good idea. Cameras gear, especially lenses, have to be judged in terms of the images they produce, and the images themselves can only be judged aesthetically, which means "subjectively." The tendency with these review sites — not just DPR — is for them to be dominated by nerds who worship technology like it's some kind of religion and who believe that only what can be measured is fully real or significant. Now the fact is, people with that kind of mentality are never going to give Pentax a fair shake. Pentax has never been about worshipping technology for its own sake or producing lenses that only achieve numerical goals but are otherwise without merit. If you go over to the pentax.com site or their lens catalog, they're constantly reiterating this message that technological and numerical goals must be balanced by sensory and aesthetic goals. "PENTAX engineers are always working toward the realization of images that are rich in detail and gradation; achieving this goal often means valuing sensory evaluations over numerical evaluations." "Realizing the ideal imaging concept included extremely detailed activities, because PENTAX places as much importance on the human perception of beauty as the company does in numerical evaluations." "In the age of advanced technologies, PENTAX still places great importance on human sensibilities, something that is in complete opposition to much of today’s technological advancement. For PENTAX, this is the primary source for attaining exceptional image quality. Achieving this goal requires a large number of actual images capturing different types of subjects, and taken in varying photographic conditions. Among the PENTAX engineers are a group of photo enthusiasts specializing in such fields as portraiture, landscape and astronomical photography. Every weekend, they take test models out into the field, and shoot photographs without attracting people’s attention to the models that are still under development. In fact, this has become routine work for them." This is not, as some skeptics might suggest, a cynical marketing ploy. Jun Hirakawa pretty much indicated a similar outlook in his white paper on the FA 77 published nearly twenty years ago. Pentax cameras and lenses manifest a specific philosophy that essentially challenges the views that tend to prevail at places like DPR. Now while the reviewers at DPR may not consciously understand or know what Pentax's philosophy is, this very lack of knowledge makes it impossible for them to appreciate a lens like the DFA* 50. They can only judge the lens on its technical merits. They are blind to the lens' non-measurable excellences — to its bokeh, its rendering, its transitions from object to background, from in focus to out of focus, its ability to portray a sense of depth, etc. etc. Since these things can't be measured, they don't exist for the DPR reviewers. This is one of the many challenges Pentax is facing — that they find themselves in opposition to this nihilistic scientism/positivism that prevails within the reviewer community.

Great post on the topic. The ‘Consumer Reports’ desire to score and rank everything by some agreed set of objective criteria is deeply embedded in our western, acquisitive culture. Let them do their thing. I don’t need their judgement to help me decide on anything. If I overpay or buy something that disappoints I just sell it and move on.

I get annoyed when retailers don’t keep their promises.

[Mallee Boy]

Lowes or Onkaparinga?

---------- Post added 08-13-18 at 10:53 PM ----------



Well, maybe?...He showed an Older model Nikon with a Sigma lens compared to a Pentax with a Pentax lens.

It will be interesting to see that Nik camera with the Tokina Opera lens on it?

Doubt too many people would have got the Lowes or Onkaparinga quip, Clackers.

But it is actually very apt....a Lowes product would serve a purpose, do a job but not be expected to last all that long....whereas my Onkaparinga Pure Wool blanket is still going strong after 50 years.

[Zygonyx]

I guess we can always hope that the tide will turn. The fact is, I don't think the notion of having an independent so-called "objective" review site associated with a store like Amazon is a good idea. Cameras gear, especially lenses, have to be judged in terms of the images they produce, and the images themselves can only be judged aesthetically, which means "subjectively." The tendency with these review sites — not just DPR — is for them to be dominated by nerds who worship technology like it's some kind of religion and who believe that only what can be measured is fully real or significant. Now the fact is, people with that kind of mentality are never going to give Pentax a fair shake. Pentax has never been about worshipping technology for its own sake or producing lenses that only achieve numerical goals but are otherwise without merit. If you go over to the pentax.com site or their lens catalog, they're constantly reiterating this message that technological and numerical goals must be balanced by sensory and aesthetic goals. "PENTAX engineers are always working toward the realization of images that are rich in detail and gradation; achieving this goal often means valuing sensory evaluations over numerical evaluations." "Realizing the ideal imaging concept included extremely detailed activities, because PENTAX places as much importance on the human perception of beauty as the company does in numerical evaluations." "In the age of advanced technologies, PENTAX still places great importance on human sensibilities, something that is in complete opposition to much of today’s technological advancement. For PENTAX, this is the primary source for attaining exceptional image quality. Achieving this goal requires a large number of actual images capturing different types of subjects, and taken in varying photographic conditions. Among the PENTAX engineers are a group of photo enthusiasts specializing in such fields as portraiture, landscape and astronomical photography. Every weekend, they take test models out into the field, and shoot photographs without attracting people’s attention to the models that are still under development. In fact, this has become routine work for them." This is not, as some skeptics might suggest, a cynical marketing ploy. Jun Hirakawa pretty much indicated a similar outlook in his white paper on the FA 77 published nearly twenty years ago. Pentax cameras and lenses manifest a specific philosophy that essentially challenges the views that tend to prevail at places like DPR. Now while the reviewers at DPR may not consciously understand or know what Pentax's philosophy is, this very lack of knowledge makes it impossible for them to appreciate a lens like the DFA* 50. They can only judge the lens on its technical merits. They are blind to the lens' non-measurable excellences — to its bokeh, its rendering, its transitions from object to background, from in focus to out of focus, its ability to portray a sense of depth, etc. etc. Since these things can't be measured, they don't exist for the DPR reviewers. This is one of the many challenges Pentax is facing — that they find themselves in opposition to this nihilistic scientism/positivism that prevails within the reviewer community.

In one word Greg : Pentax is technerd-incompatible.

[Mark Ransom]

But I use my DA *55 on full frame all of the time...

Nice picture, I had to look hard to see the vignetting in the corners.

[clackers]

Nice picture, I had to look hard to see the vignetting in the corners.

[Shrugs shoulders]

The DA*55 would have been about Jun Hirakawa's last design for Pentax, and vignettes less than the FA50 and the the FA31, according to Photozone.

[Mark Ransom]

What do you want to bet that when the Tokina version is reviewed, it will get nothing but glowing praise? And it will get reviewed, it's too big a deal for Canon and Nikon owners to be ignored.

[Mark Ransom]

[Shrugs shoulders]

The DA*55 would have been about Jun Hirakawa's last design for Pentax, and vignettes less than the FA50 and the the FA31, according to Photozone.

Sorry if that came across wrong, it really was meant to be praise. I think both lens and photographer did a great job.

[SSGGeezer]

What do you want to bet that when the Tokina version is reviewed, it will get nothing but glowing praise? And it will get reviewed, it's too big a deal for Canon and Nikon owners to be ignored.

I would bet a six pack from a local brewer that your guess is right on the money! They will make it out to be the best thing since beer was invented since it means sales to their parent org.


It will be an amazing lens unless Tokina really screws up badly, and if they want to continue to collaborate I suspect that they are going to make this one a good one.

[ffking]

Tokina are very quiet at the moment - and running out of August daily. Time for the overture to start at least, I'd say.

[thibs]

Nice picture, I had to look hard to see the vignetting in the corners.

IMO it would be less pretty without the vignetting.

[clackers]

IMO it would be less pretty without the vignetting.

And of course, if you don't like the vignetting of lenses like the FA31 Ltd or Samyang 14mm or Zeiss 25mm, remove it with the sliders in Lightroom.

[Rondec]

Sorry if that came across wrong, it really was meant to be praise. I think both lens and photographer did a great job.

Thank you. I'm pretty pleased with the DA *55's performance on the K-1, but I don't use it much wider than f2 because the vignetting is quite a bit (I think the FA 50 is actually worse though).

[Sandy Hancock]

As clackers has been saying, the optical vignetting of the DA*55 is not too bad on the K-1.

In certain circumstances though (most obvious at infinity focus and stopped down), it displays solid physical vignetting in the extreme corners, and removing the hood doesn't fix it. The FA31 and FA50 do not have that problem. A minimal crop removes it of course, but it does demonstrate why the DA*55 is not an officially designated full frame lens, while the DA*200 and DA*300 are.

None of that (or its slight softness wide open, or its slower AF motor) will stop me from enjoying the DA*55 as a lightweight option to the DFA*50 on the K-1.

[Scorpio71GR]

First off, DPReview is full of fan boys and hacks. I have not read a single review in years. They are bought and paid for.

Anyone who says the DA*55 does not work on the K-1 in FF mode has never properly used it.



I'm excited and thrilled to see new FF primes finally coming out. I will be more excited when the new DFA* 85 comes out.