Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-27-2008, 01:06 AM   #31
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,267
QuoteOriginally posted by lol101 Quote
A 55 f1.4 is a 55 f1.4... or would you agree if Pentax had priced the DA*200f2.8 as a 300f2.8?

Whatever happened to the "APS-C lenses are more compact and less pricey than FF ones" dogma?

The list price is outrageous, period. $400 would be a reasonable maximum price.
Well first the 55 is a DA*, the 50 is an FA, not an FA*.
Second, the DA*55 is advertised by Pentax as being ideal for portrait and soft DOF, check yourself if you don't beleive me.

If those are not describing a portrait lens which by pure hazard has the same FOV on APS-C as the old FA*85 on 35mm, well you may have missed something completely.

I do not say I, you, are anybody else should agree with how Pentax replaces FAs with FOV-equivalent DAs. But not wanting to ackknowledge what they do is shortsighted.

11-27-2008, 06:16 AM   #32
Veteran Member
lol101's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Garennes sur Eure France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 900
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Well first the 55 is a DA*, the 50 is an FA, not an FA*.
Second, the DA*55 is advertised by Pentax as being ideal for portrait and soft DOF, check yourself if you don't beleive me.

If those are not describing a portrait lens which by pure hazard has the same FOV on APS-C as the old FA*85 on 35mm, well you may have missed something completely.

I do not say I, you, are anybody else should agree with how Pentax replaces FAs with FOV-equivalent DAs. But not wanting to ackknowledge what they do is shortsighted.
I understand the FoV argument (although to really replace the 85f1.4, they should have made it a 55f1.0) but how is that a justification of the price?


Again, a 200f2.8 has the same FoV on APS-C as a 300 on FF: would you be OK to pay 3000$ for the DA* 200f2.8?

As for the "premium lens" argument... well, I need to see results from this lens that seriously outperforms the 50f1.4 from other makers before saying that the price is warranted.

Pentax DA* lenses are more and more expensive and the trend is apparently to continue this trend (60-250f4: 1350€, 55f1.4: 629€...) but I have yet to see any increase in performances from the previous DA* over their FA predecessors or competition.

Last edited by lol101; 11-27-2008 at 06:24 AM.
11-27-2008, 07:45 AM   #33
Veteran Member
ManuH's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,209
QuoteOriginally posted by lol101 Quote
Pentax DA* lenses are more and more expensive and the trend is apparently to continue this trend (60-250f4: 1350€, 55f1.4: 629€...) but I have yet to see any increase in performances from the previous DA* over their FA predecessors or competition.
I agree, one of the incentives of going with Pentax was the good glass at an affordable price. If this trend of premium prices continues I may loose my interest in the brand. Let's hope the street prices will be much better.

The 60-250/4 unless it's optically perfect is overpriced. Why would go with an f4 lens when 70-200/2.8 from competitors are available for much less? And it's also a strange focal length, a 90-375 eq. Not sure what use it can have. You can have the 55-300 which is f/4.5 up to about 200mm if I'm not mistaken. Priced similar to the 50-135 it would be much more interesting.

The DA*55/1.4 is a strange case. The FA50/1.4 is already very good but the real benchmark will be against the new Sigma 50/1.4. And this is not a lens Pentaxians really need as much as a DA30/1.4 or even a DA85/1.4. Strange decisions IMO.
11-27-2008, 10:13 AM   #34
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,794
QuoteOriginally posted by ManuH Quote

I agree, one of the incentives of going with Pentax was the good glass at an affordable price. If this trend of premium prices continues I may loose my interest in the brand. Let's hope the street prices will be much better.
Very true. However, pentax is never that cheap with telephoto lenses though... Like Fa* 300mm f2.8 or Fa* 600 f4 were priced a lot higher than the rest of the competition brands.


QuoteOriginally posted by ManuH Quote
The 60-250/4 unless it's optically perfect is overpriced. Why would go with an f4 lens when 70-200/2.8 from competitors are available for much less?
Maybe it is because of Hoya doing the marketing: starting high following by a plummeting dive...

At least Hoya has managed to churn out k20d quickly and replenish lens supply adequately for most countries...

QuoteOriginally posted by ManuH Quote
The DA*55/1.4 is a strange case. The FA50/1.4 is already very good but the real benchmark will be against the new Sigma 50/1.4. And this is not a lens Pentaxians really need as much as a DA30/1.4 or even a DA85/1.4. Strange decisions IMO.

For professionals, Fa 50mm f1.4 is good enough. For amateurs like most of us, we could be more critical since it is a hobby to dwell on. Some rendering characteristics are not appreciated by some of us. So the market for Da* 55 is targeted on the people who wanted improved characteristics of Fa 50 f1.4. The pricing is certainly quite ridiculous but I still could not resist the very idea how this lens would perform.


That sigma 50mm f1.4 is a fantastic lens optically but it has been dismissed by a lot of canikon users for its terrible autofocus. It is in deed a bulky large lens but it certainly has the best background bokeh among the modern 50mm lenses.

11-27-2008, 11:13 AM   #35
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, San Diego, Seattle
Posts: 456
The traditional 50mm design was not originally for portraiture, so there are some flaws with that design for this use. (although there have been jillions of really beautiful portrait images made with these lenses) Now with APS-C crop factor that focal length is now being applied to a different purpose and I'm glad Pentax has decided to step up and make a pro-caliber (I hope) portrait lens, and make it into this focal length. I believe Pentax will be the first to do that, as other's 50's even how pro or expensive they are weren't really designed for portrait use either.

It will be nice to have a lens that you can specifically take out on portrait assignments, and use it as a portrait lens was meant to be used, not to have to do be compromised by some of the limitations of the FA50 and the other designs. Also to step into a professional setting or a wedding and have nice quiet focusing. And to be able to head to the beach or wherever or snow and be completely sealed.

So I am hoping for something that renders like the 85, only in a shorter length. I don't think this lens was intended for a general purpose lens, and I'm not even sure how good it will be at infinity. But I applaud Pentax for giving the pro and serious amateur a lens like this.

I can't believe that people are actually upset or disgruntled by this. The FA50 is still a bargain and still available and still very very well suited for many things that the people who don't have much interest in the 55 would want the lens for anyway.

I don't see people complaining about the price of the FA31 (maybe when it came out). Everyone says it's worth it (don't know about the 55 yet) or they wish to be able to get it someday.....
11-29-2008, 11:34 AM   #36
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 843
QuoteOriginally posted by lol101 Quote
A 55 f1.4 is a 55 f1.4... or would you agree if Pentax had priced the DA*200f2.8 as a 300f2.8?
The 55 f/1.4 is not priced as the FA Star 85 f/1.4 was, if the current price figures holds then the 55 f/1.4 will be around 40% less than the 85 f/1.4 was sold for when the 85 was last available.

I don't find the price outrageous.
Sigma's new 50 f/1.4 is twice the price of the Pentax FA 50 f/1.4.
Yes, a Sigma - third party manufacturer - is twice the price than the lens from the original manufacturer! Now, that is what I would call outrageous...

And the Sigma doesn't even have weather sealing...

Now, the FA 50 f/1.4 uses an old, tried and tested tessar-design. It has been around since the late 70's and the development costs has been paid long long time ago. The 55 f/1.4 uses a new optical design. Of course Pentax asks for payment when they make new designs.
11-29-2008, 12:20 PM   #37
Veteran Member
awo425's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC, USA
Posts: 481
Correct me if I am wrong, but 99% of Pentax funboys who are in love with cropped APS-C sized sensors are explaining advantages of this format with chipper/smaller/better lenses. Is this DA*55/1.4 nonsense along with new Sigma 55mml are one of those chipper/smaller/better ones?
If it is, then I am off to Canon FF.
11-29-2008, 01:24 PM   #38
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,343
No, it's one of those more expensive/bigger/better lenses
But I guess, comparing with a typical lens with similar angle of view for FF (85mm f/1.4) it is cheaper, smaller and - I hope - at least as good. Well, it should be - regardless of the format, it' still a 55mm lens.

11-29-2008, 02:24 PM   #39
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,794
QuoteOriginally posted by awo425 Quote
Correct me if I am wrong, but 99% of Pentax funboys who are in love with cropped APS-C sized sensors are explaining advantages of this format with chipper/smaller/better lenses. Is this DA*55/1.4 nonsense along with new Sigma 55mml are one of those chipper/smaller/better ones?
If it is, then I am off to Canon FF.
No, you are not wrong.

A lot of pentax users like certain len rendering characteristics. These features may not be what some of consumers are after. So it is not one brand better than the other. It is about your own preference.

Very often, people buy the "best" recommended lenses while having an extremely high standards from this equipment. Dissapointment and anger were usually the result and lashing out anger here.

IMHO, buying lenses is like burning your cash away. If it provides some sort of entertainment, this is a bonus. If it is not a lens for you, do a bit of lens testing and exploration about the lens so you get to know the lens before you try to sell it hopefully with a small loss of value.

This whole process provides insight into the gear and the hobby as a whole. I have plenty of friends that love to measurebate and I appreciate that. There has to be some people doing the dirty work. I do the pixel peeping business and some personal unscientific testing on some of the lens characteristics that I value. This is a hobby.

FF is perfectly fine to go to but no need to share with us. I have tried out 2 FF cameras with canon and I think its advantages is rather limited to certain shooting situation like better narrow depth of field and more dynamic range with FF sensor. Funnily, all the canon FF guys called bokeh as unsharp elements or out of focus areas that either the camera or the lenses must be crap. Most of the FF users carry on that 24-105L as the "kit" lens and I hardly see great work from this type of people.

The great work is usually done by people who own a canon 300d or 350d with a kit lens. So go figure.

My brother's girlfriend wants to have a camera. She wants a Nikon D3 or Canon 5d MKII and she never did photography before. Not even with a point and shoot. So she sticks to the buzz word - Canon or Nikon are the pro brands and sticking to it. Money is no object and I think there will be disaster after she acquires one of these cameras as they do not produce top quality images for her!

Da* 55mm f1.4 is certainly dear and still I would love to know certain rendering characteristics before leaping onto its purchase. Or I could recommence my LBA again...
11-29-2008, 07:11 PM   #40
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40-55'-44" N / 73-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,102
QuoteOriginally posted by awo425 Quote
Correct me if I am wrong, but 99% of Pentax funboys who are in love with cropped APS-C sized sensors are explaining advantages of this format with chipper/smaller/better lenses. Is this DA*55/1.4 nonsense along with new Sigma 55mml are one of those chipper/smaller/better ones?
If it is, then I am off to Canon FF.
Perhaps I mis-understand as you didn't exactly write a very coherent paragraph. But from what I surmise, I can only respond, "lol... l8r then".
11-29-2008, 09:00 PM   #41
Senior Member
K100Dave's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 111
I for one, can not wait to see this marvel of a lens.
11-30-2008, 01:11 PM   #42
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: madison
Posts: 239
Some people need to calm down. I remember when the DA 35 macro limited first came out, its MSRP was somewhere around $600. But now you can buy a new one from ebay for a little more than $300. So I wouldn't worry too much about the 55*'s initial MSRP being too high. Meanwhile, the new sigma 50/1.4 lens goes for around $450 and is not weather sealed. I would expect the 55* to cost a little more than the sigma.
11-30-2008, 01:42 PM   #43
Veteran Member
Stratman's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: St Louis, Missouri U S A
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,464
QuoteOriginally posted by awo425 Quote
Correct me if I am wrong, but 99% of Pentax funboys who are in love with cropped APS-C sized sensors are explaining advantages of this format with chipper/smaller/better lenses. Is this DA*55/1.4 nonsense along with new Sigma 55mml are one of those chipper/smaller/better ones?
If it is, then I am off to Canon FF.
Enjoy your Canon, and spending big bucks for IS on every lens
11-30-2008, 11:33 PM   #44
Veteran Member
awo425's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC, USA
Posts: 481
QuoteOriginally posted by Stratman Quote
Enjoy your Canon, and spending big bucks for IS on every lens
Thanx, maybe I'll try it (IS), maybe not. I've never seen SR working effectively on long tele lenses though. That's for sure. Wasn't a problem for me though.
12-07-2008, 12:44 AM   #45
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Prince George, BC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,343
QuoteOriginally posted by lol101 Quote

<snip>
Pentax DA* lenses are more and more expensive and the trend is apparently to continue this trend (60-250f4: 1350, 55f1.4: 629...) but I have yet to see any increase in performances from the previous DA* over their FA predecessors or competition.
To the contrary, my DA*300 demolishes my old M* 300 which is no slouch.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
ebay, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:08 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top