[house]

I want to know just how it performs!

The only known samples those shown in that CP+ video right?

[gatorguy]

It's not far off the 77mm on FF, and a very useful distance for both portraits and landscape. I have several 50s and 55s too, but I don't have an APS-C camera (yet; here's waiting). But I also have 85mm/90mm and it's one of my most frequently used focal lengths.
That is true for FF, it was true for 645 (135/150mm).
But the secret agenda is, of course, that I might go FF with the K-1 III as well. Whether I'll be able to hold on to the K-3 III is uncertain. I can't find my lottery ticket.

I have the D FA*50 and absolutely love the images it produces. For me they are noticeably cleaner and with better color than other lensI own in that range. But....

I don't find myself using it as much as I would have expected. Just like with the DA*200, which I consider one of the finest lenses Pentax makes, something about the range and what I typically shoot makes them not as convenient out in the field. I end up with a 70-200 for the better adaptability, or a 55 for the weight more often than not.

Perhaps what I really should do is use the D FA50 for a single-in challenge and really see where it can fit within my style. It's far too great a lens to remain in my case as much as it does.

As for the 16-50 I just don't see that as a lens that would interest me right now. I have that wide-angle range pretty well covered and TBH I tend to shoot more from 35 up.

[reh321]

I have the D FA*50 and absolutely love the images it produces. For me they are noticeably cleaner and with better color than other lensI own in that range. But....

I don't find myself using it as much as I would have expected. Just like with the DA*200, which I consider one of the finest lenses Pentax makes, something about the range and what I typically shoot makes them not as convenient out in the field. I end up with a 70-200 for the better adaptability, or a 55 for the weight more often than not.

Perhaps what I really should do is use the D FA50 for a single-in challenge and really see where it can fit within my style. It's far too great a lens to remain in my case as much as it does.

As for the 16-50 I just don't see that as a lens that would interest me right now. I have that wide-angle range pretty well covered and TBH I tend to shoot more from 35 up.

"Back in the day", cameras were kitted with a 50mm lens, but my style in recent years has gravitated to a wider view - still within the DA* 16-50mm's range - all I have to do is to afford it.

[robbiec]

My current DA*16-50 is sitting nervously on the shelf. It needn't worry as I can't sell it on because I converted it to screwdrive and it will be my daughter's first zoom. I am interested in this because I it will match the look and feel of my DFA*s and I'm OCD about stuff like that. It's probably better than the original optically too

[reh321]

My current DA*16-50 is sitting nervously on the shelf. It needn't worry as I can't sell it on because I converted it to screwdrive and it will be my daughter's first zoom. I am interested in this because I it will match the look and feel of my DFA*s and I'm OCD about stuff like that. It's probably better than the original optically too

It will certainly be better than any screw-drive lens - the "PLM" is a fantastic motor for those lenses that it can fit!!

[robbiec]

It will certainly be better than any screw-drive lens - the "PLM" is a fantastic motor for those lenses that it can fit!!

I've never tried a PLM lens. I've a couple of old SDM based lens (DA*'s std zooms) and that motor hinders both. SDM also heavily influenced my perception of the DA*55/1.4, a lens I really wanted to like (I think I've had 3 copies over the years) but AF was always too slow. The DC based SDM lens that I have are flyers though, no complaints there. I've really only seen positive reports on PLM so a 16-50 with PLM should be nippy at least.

[STARHUNTER94]

The only known samples those shown in that CP+ video right?

I think so. I like the breakdown type reviews that go over each part

[house]

Are PLM motors analogous to the linear motors other brands are using? Do we know if Pentax ever use dual motors? Seems a common thing these days.

[reh321]

I've never tried a PLM lens. I've a couple of old SDM based lens (DA*'s std zooms) and that motor hinders both. SDM also heavily influenced my perception of the DA*55/1.4, a lens I really wanted to like (I think I've had 3 copies over the years) but AF was always too slow. The DC based SDM lens that I have are flyers though, no complaints there. I've really only seen positive reports on PLM so a 16-50 with PLM should be nippy at least.

The 55-300mm PLM focuses so quickly and quietly - I sometimes have to switch from far to near back to far to see that it is actually working.

added: Many Pentax users do seem to have been poisoned against in-lens motors by that old SDM system, but in-lens motors do work much better than the screw-drive system does.
In 1995 I switched to Canon because of their EF/usm system, and in 20 years I was never let down by it {I can't say as much about their Rebel bodies, however}.

[taktoon]

I even like plastic fantastic 50 1.8 more on K-1 more than on K-70. Full Frame Fifty

[Mistral75]

Are PLM motors analogous to the linear motors other brands are using? (...)

Yes. PLM = Pulse Linear Motor.

[Smolk]

I have the D FA*50 and absolutely love the images it produces. For me they are noticeably cleaner and with better color than other lensI own in that range. But....

I don't find myself using it as much as I would have expected. Just like with the DA*200, which I consider one of the finest lenses Pentax makes, something about the range and what I typically shoot makes them not as convenient out in the field. I end up with a 70-200 for the better adaptability, or a 55 for the weight more often than not.

Perhaps what I really should do is use the D FA50 for a single-in challenge and really see where it can fit within my style. It's far too great a lens to remain in my case as much as it does.

As for the 16-50 I just don't see that as a lens that would interest me right now. I have that wide-angle range pretty well covered and TBH I tend to shoot more from 35 up.

Does this apply to APS-C or FF?
Sometimes a focal length can be great and yet it just doesn't work. I have that with anything beyond 100mm FF equivalent. But situations can change. I also used to have that with Ultra-Wide lenses, say 21mm FF equivalent. But since moving home to a metropolitan city, that changed.

[robjmitchell]

I’m looking forward to seeing how the new optics in the PLM version perform, aside from the needing to convert to screwdrive, my 16-50 copy is a decent lens with nice rendering and colours. Its only the propensity to flare that really annoys me. But I have the 21ltd for those conditions when needed.

[repaap]

I have still SDM working with mine DA*. As others have said, it is not free from problems like Flare and distortion. From what I have seen, this new is not very much bigger. Let’s see!

[Belcik]

I am not sure if noticed, this was the first time i have seen on this tread, that tread photo was animated...lenses are moving


Отправлено с моего iPhone используя Tapatalk