DA*55mm f/1.4mm is here!

thibs · 02-11-2009, 11:19 PM

Originally posted by awo425

not sure how good Pentax DA*55 will be, but according to quite a few users on one of the Nikon forums, Sigma 50MM F1.4 EX DG HSM is better in there opinion than new Nikon 50 mm G lens. I was very surprised to here that.

and am I. I will scrap what I read about this sigma 50mm and more about it. A cheap DA 35/1.4 or 1.8 would be a nice addition.

kathyk · 02-11-2009, 11:37 PM

Best price I have seen for the DA*55/1.4 is at Adorama, $729 shipped.

21790 Pentax SMCP-DA* 55mm f/1.4 SDM Auto Focus Lens for use with Pentax Digital SLR Cameras.

I am really looking forward to seeing many photos from this lens on the forums!

vinzer · 02-12-2009, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

That does look perfectly fine on 24x36. I wish they would have made it a standard 50mm now instead of 55mm since it can do both. Even if Pentax doesn't plan on making a FF DSLR they really need to clarify which lenses work and which ones don't for the benefit of film users if no other reason. Digging through forum threads isn't exactly the way most people like to find their info.

While that most certainly is a welcome move on Pentax's part (I know I'd appreciate that), I don't see them doing so. For one, they'd rather we be buying and shooting their digital SLRs already. Their marketing would extend only to say that the ~24 million lenses made for the K-mount will work on the new DSLRs.

zntgrg · 02-12-2009, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

That does look perfectly fine on 24x36. I wish they would have made it a standard 50mm now instead of 55mm since it can do both. Even if Pentax doesn't plan on making a FF DSLR they really need to clarify which lenses work and which ones don't for the benefit of film users if no other reason. Digging through forum threads isn't exactly the way most people like to find their info.

55/1.8 was Spotmatic's standard lens, so it's really back to the roots

Adrian Owerko · 02-12-2009, 07:50 PM

This lens needs to be in the $600 usd park for me.. AUD $1000.. Damm I hate waiting lol..

ll_coffee_lP · 02-13-2009, 04:47 AM

Originally posted by zntgrg

55/1.8 was Spotmatic's standard lens, so it's really back to the roots

Except that it's being used on a crop sensor and acts more like a 82.5mm lens (i.e. 85mm in film).

c[_]

fejker · 02-13-2009, 04:56 AM

Actually it acts the same as a 55mm f/1.4 lens on film with 1.5 of the picture thrown away.

It's the same as a 55mm lens on film regarding flattening the frame. Or in this case of focal length, distorting it.

Just imagine taking a picture at 55mm on film and cutting out a 1.5 crop ... it's as simple as that.

That's why the DOF is different from a 85mm f/1.4 lens on film and hence the new DA* 55mm f/1.4 DOES NOT act like a 85mm f/1.4 on film. Far from it.

roentarre · 02-13-2009, 05:08 AM

Originally posted by fejker

That's why the DOF is different from a 85mm f/1.4 lens on film and hence the new DA* 55mm f/1.4 DOES NOT act like a 85mm f/1.4 on film. Far from it.

Da* 55mm f1.4 better not performs like 85mm f1.4, exhibiting purple fringeing in such an impeccable fashion.

I really want to see a good 85mm f1.4 image where the depth of field really helps with the composition and mood...

Bokeh is not all that great on 85mm f1.4 and bokeh is often a feature to compliment a theme...

Let's wait til Da* 55mm f1.4 released first and see how it goes with some unscientific testing comparison...

TKH · 02-13-2009, 06:34 AM

Originally posted by roentarre

Let's wait til Da* 55mm f1.4 released first and see how it goes with some unscientific testing comparison...

Unscientific sounds good, I will try it.

I just received a mail from my dealer. The DA*55 is in stock. I pic it up on tuesday morning and will report on tuesday evening.

Rainer

Ratmagiclady · 02-13-2009, 09:44 AM

It'll be a while before I could lay hands to one, but I do have some high hopes for this one. The 85 is my favorite lens on film, and a 55 is closer to this than a 50.

If it *does* work on full-frame, that's great, too, (though I'd need to get a film body that can work without an aperture ring) ... I like things a little tighter, in that range, anyway.

zntgrg · 02-13-2009, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by fejker

That's why the DOF is different from a 85mm f/1.4 lens on film and hence the new DA* 55mm f/1.4 DOES NOT act like a 85mm f/1.4 on film. Far from it.

Not really. The optical scheme is lot more complicated than the usual 50mm, is tuned for portrait mode, it's really a "truncated 85". It's the goal of the lens.

jay · 02-18-2009, 01:20 AM

Originally posted by zntgrg

Not really. The optical scheme is lot more complicated than the usual 50mm, is tuned for portrait mode, it's really a "truncated 85". It's the goal of the lens.

Please explain to me what a "Truncated 85" is, because this doesn't make any sense to me. Yes, I've seen the lens diagram, but I don't see how

An equivalent 85/1.4 would probably be something more like a 55/1.2, wouldn't it?

thibs · 02-18-2009, 01:29 AM

Originally posted by jay

An equivalent 85/1.4 would probably be something more like a 55/1.2, wouldn't it?

Is your suggestion *that* different than a 55/1.4 ?

jay · 02-18-2009, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by thibs

Is your suggestion *that* different than a 55/1.4 ?

It was actually an honest question.

If you take a 35mm film camera and put an 85mm lens on it, and frame your portrait, then -- without moving, switch to a digital body with a 55mm f/1.4, the perspective hasn't changed; I know that's true.

But has the depth of field? I know that if you put an 85mm lens on a digital camera, and switch to a full-frame camera, the digital camera will have less depth of field.

But, to maintain the "look" do we need to maintain the relative aperture?

85mm f/1.4 ==> 85/1.4 = 60mm aperture
50mm f/1.4 ==> 50/1.4 = 36mm aperture

Yes, I know that only simple lenses (say, a single lens element) has an aperture that's the size of the focal length / f-stop. But does the concept still apply? In other words, do we really need a 55mm f/0.92 to simulate the appearance of an 85/1.4?

thibs · 02-18-2009, 02:01 AM

Originally posted by jay

It was actually an honest question.

If you take a 35mm film camera and put an 85mm lens on it, and frame your portrait, then -- without moving, switch to a digital body with a 55mm f/1.4, the perspective hasn't changed; I know that's true.

But has the depth of field? I know that if you put an 85mm lens on a digital camera, and switch to a full-frame camera, the digital camera will have less depth of field.

But, to maintain the "look" do we need to maintain the relative aperture?

85mm f/1.4 ==> 85/1.4 = 60mm aperture
50mm f/1.4 ==> 50/1.4 = 36mm aperture

Yes, I know that only simple lenses (say, a single lens element) has an aperture that's the size of the focal length / f-stop. But does the concept still apply? In other words, do we really need a 55mm f/0.92 to simulate the appearance of an 85/1.4?

Sorry, I'm used to usual sarcasm on this kind of topic

Yes indeed you're right. But manufacturers do not do this. Pentax keeps aperture as the 35mm lenses (so a little more DOF than the 35mm lenses but FOV is the same). Olympus takes it into a account but barely to Pentax levels (as far as DOF is concerned).

So yes there's a little bit less DOF control on APS-C and 4:3 systems. As the deficit is about half a stop to a full stop, I still fail to see the absolute need for Full frame (except special purpose of course, but in general), speaking about DOF: not pixels/Iso etc.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: K20D - DBG Grip - DA18-55mm WR - 18-55mm DAL	VaughnA	Sold Items	7	03-13-2010 05:40 PM
Is this lens going to be better or the same than my A50 f1.4mm??	dragonfly	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	03-01-2010 12:32 PM
DA 18-55mm AL II vs DAL 18-55mm (kit lens) vs DA 18-55mm WR	rustynail925	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	01-08-2010 02:06 PM
Fuji Fujinon 1:1.8 55mm vs. Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 1:1.8 55mm	carpents	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	06-27-2007 05:25 PM

02-11-2009, 11:19 PM	#46
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by awo425 not sure how good Pentax DA*55 will be, but according to quite a few users on one of the Nikon forums, Sigma 50MM F1.4 EX DG HSM is better in there opinion than new Nikon 50 mm G lens. I was very surprised to here that. and am I. I will scrap what I read about this sigma 50mm and more about it. A cheap DA 35/1.4 or 1.8 would be a nice addition.

02-11-2009, 11:37 PM	#47
kathyk Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Michigan/USA Posts: 173	Best price I have seen for the DA55/1.4 is at Adorama, $729 shipped. 21790 Pentax SMCP-DA 55mm f/1.4 SDM Auto Focus Lens for use with Pentax Digital SLR Cameras. I am really looking forward to seeing many photos from this lens on the forums!

02-12-2009, 09:05 AM	#48
vinzer Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Philippines Posts: 1,399	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II That does look perfectly fine on 24x36. I wish they would have made it a standard 50mm now instead of 55mm since it can do both. Even if Pentax doesn't plan on making a FF DSLR they really need to clarify which lenses work and which ones don't for the benefit of film users if no other reason. Digging through forum threads isn't exactly the way most people like to find their info. While that most certainly is a welcome move on Pentax's part (I know I'd appreciate that), I don't see them doing so. For one, they'd rather we be buying and shooting their digital SLRs already. Their marketing would extend only to say that the ~24 million lenses made for the K-mount will work on the new DSLRs.

02-12-2009, 01:13 PM	#49
zntgrg Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Verona, Italy Posts: 202	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II That does look perfectly fine on 24x36. I wish they would have made it a standard 50mm now instead of 55mm since it can do both. Even if Pentax doesn't plan on making a FF DSLR they really need to clarify which lenses work and which ones don't for the benefit of film users if no other reason. Digging through forum threads isn't exactly the way most people like to find their info. 55/1.8 was Spotmatic's standard lens, so it's really back to the roots

02-12-2009, 07:50 PM	#50
Adrian Owerko Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: South Australia Posts: 435	This lens needs to be in the $600 usd park for me.. AUD $1000.. Damm I hate waiting lol..

02-13-2009, 04:47 AM	#51
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	Originally posted by zntgrg 55/1.8 was Spotmatic's standard lens, so it's really back to the roots Except that it's being used on a crop sensor and acts more like a 82.5mm lens (i.e. 85mm in film). c[_]

02-13-2009, 04:56 AM	#52
fejker Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Slovenia Photos: Gallery Posts: 258	Actually it acts the same as a 55mm f/1.4 lens on film with 1.5 of the picture thrown away. It's the same as a 55mm lens on film regarding flattening the frame. Or in this case of focal length, distorting it. Just imagine taking a picture at 55mm on film and cutting out a 1.5 crop ... it's as simple as that. That's why the DOF is different from a 85mm f/1.4 lens on film and hence the new DA* 55mm f/1.4 DOES NOT act like a 85mm f/1.4 on film. Far from it.

02-13-2009, 05:08 AM	#53
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783	Originally posted by fejker That's why the DOF is different from a 85mm f/1.4 lens on film and hence the new DA* 55mm f/1.4 DOES NOT act like a 85mm f/1.4 on film. Far from it. Da* 55mm f1.4 better not performs like 85mm f1.4, exhibiting purple fringeing in such an impeccable fashion. I really want to see a good 85mm f1.4 image where the depth of field really helps with the composition and mood... Bokeh is not all that great on 85mm f1.4 and bokeh is often a feature to compliment a theme... Let's wait til Da* 55mm f1.4 released first and see how it goes with some unscientific testing comparison...

02-13-2009, 06:34 AM	#54
TKH Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Germany Posts: 371	Originally posted by roentarre Let's wait til Da* 55mm f1.4 released first and see how it goes with some unscientific testing comparison... Unscientific sounds good, I will try it. I just received a mail from my dealer. The DA*55 is in stock. I pic it up on tuesday morning and will report on tuesday evening. Rainer

02-13-2009, 09:44 AM	#55
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	It'll be a while before I could lay hands to one, but I do have some high hopes for this one. The 85 is my favorite lens on film, and a 55 is closer to this than a 50. If it does work on full-frame, that's great, too, (though I'd need to get a film body that can work without an aperture ring) ... I like things a little tighter, in that range, anyway.

02-13-2009, 12:15 PM	#56
zntgrg Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Verona, Italy Posts: 202	Originally posted by fejker That's why the DOF is different from a 85mm f/1.4 lens on film and hence the new DA* 55mm f/1.4 DOES NOT act like a 85mm f/1.4 on film. Far from it. Not really. The optical scheme is lot more complicated than the usual 50mm, is tuned for portrait mode, it's really a "truncated 85". It's the goal of the lens.

02-18-2009, 01:20 AM	#57
jay Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA Posts: 65	Originally posted by zntgrg Not really. The optical scheme is lot more complicated than the usual 50mm, is tuned for portrait mode, it's really a "truncated 85". It's the goal of the lens. Please explain to me what a "Truncated 85" is, because this doesn't make any sense to me. Yes, I've seen the lens diagram, but I don't see how An equivalent 85/1.4 would probably be something more like a 55/1.2, wouldn't it?

02-18-2009, 01:29 AM	#58
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by jay An equivalent 85/1.4 would probably be something more like a 55/1.2, wouldn't it? Is your suggestion that different than a 55/1.4 ?

02-18-2009, 01:48 AM	#59
jay Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA Posts: 65	Originally posted by thibs Is your suggestion that different than a 55/1.4 ? It was actually an honest question. If you take a 35mm film camera and put an 85mm lens on it, and frame your portrait, then -- without moving, switch to a digital body with a 55mm f/1.4, the perspective hasn't changed; I know that's true. But has the depth of field? I know that if you put an 85mm lens on a digital camera, and switch to a full-frame camera, the digital camera will have less depth of field. But, to maintain the "look" do we need to maintain the relative aperture? 85mm f/1.4 ==> 85/1.4 = 60mm aperture 50mm f/1.4 ==> 50/1.4 = 36mm aperture Yes, I know that only simple lenses (say, a single lens element) has an aperture that's the size of the focal length / f-stop. But does the concept still apply? In other words, do we really need a 55mm f/0.92 to simulate the appearance of an 85/1.4?

02-18-2009, 02:01 AM	#60
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by jay It was actually an honest question. If you take a 35mm film camera and put an 85mm lens on it, and frame your portrait, then -- without moving, switch to a digital body with a 55mm f/1.4, the perspective hasn't changed; I know that's true. But has the depth of field? I know that if you put an 85mm lens on a digital camera, and switch to a full-frame camera, the digital camera will have less depth of field. But, to maintain the "look" do we need to maintain the relative aperture? 85mm f/1.4 ==> 85/1.4 = 60mm aperture 50mm f/1.4 ==> 50/1.4 = 36mm aperture Yes, I know that only simple lenses (say, a single lens element) has an aperture that's the size of the focal length / f-stop. But does the concept still apply? In other words, do we really need a 55mm f/0.92 to simulate the appearance of an 85/1.4? Sorry, I'm used to usual sarcasm on this kind of topic Yes indeed you're right. But manufacturers do not do this. Pentax keeps aperture as the 35mm lenses (so a little more DOF than the 35mm lenses but FOV is the same). Olympus takes it into a account but barely to Pentax levels (as far as DOF is concerned). So yes there's a little bit less DOF control on APS-C and 4:3 systems. As the deficit is about half a stop to a full stop, I still fail to see the absolute need for Full frame (except special purpose of course, but in general), speaking about DOF: not pixels/Iso etc.