DA* 55mm F1.4 review on dpreview

K-9 · 08-08-2009, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

This say more about the users of Pentax cameras than it does about the DA*55/1.4.
Unfortunately, it doesn't say very much good about the majority of them.

It says a lot about the 55. It says the majority of Pentax users do not feel it's worth $400 over and above the FA. How is saving $400 to put towards other gear not a good thing?

thibs · 08-08-2009, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by K-9

It says a lot about the 55. It says the majority of Pentax users do not feel it's worth $400 over and above the FA. How is saving $400 to put towards other gear not a good thing?

It means all those did not try the lens. You reasoning is non sense IMO.

Wheatfield · 08-08-2009, 09:59 AM

Originally posted by K-9

It says a lot about the 55. It says the majority of Pentax users do not feel it's worth $400 over and above the FA. How is saving $400 to put towards other gear not a good thing?

It says nothing about the lens, but as you say, it says a lot about the majority of users, a majority that I suspect have not used the lens.
The lens costs what it costs, and people who have one are the people who have the knowledge to say anything about the lens and it's values. If you feel that what it offers is worth the price of admission, buy it. If you don't feel what it offers is worthwhile, then don't.
It's a pretty simple concept to grasp if you put your mind to it.

What I really don't get is the perpetual bitching and whining that goes on in relation to the fact that in order to make available a fast 50ish mm lens that is actually sharp wide open, Pentax has to charge real money for it. What I really don't get is the pissing and moaning that is going on because all of a sudden Pentax (via their corporate owners, I suspect) woke up to the fact that in order to stay in business they have to sell stuff at a profit.
If they had figured this out a decade ago, I suspect they would still be their own masters rather than Hoya's bitch.
Of course, they would never have been all things to everyone cheap, but that has turned out to be more liability than advantage anyway.

vinzer · 08-08-2009, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by dugrant153

I think that we should only read reviews with a grain of salt. Go and try the lens out for yourself and see if you like it.
I read all the reviews of the DA*55 before buying the lens, but when I went to the store to try it out... oh man... all the reviews went out the window and I realized that this was a real gem of a lens.

So I bought one.

I agree. I understand reviews try to help potential buyers and I salute reviewers who take pains to do rigorous testing and all for their reviews, but I'd rather use them as quick guides on the gotchas I should be aware of regarding the product, then verify it if it's true or false (for me) when I try it in-store. The key thing here is that reviewers have their own preferences, and some things that they see as severely negative may not hold true for someone else who might not see that negative as such.

**Rondec** · 08-08-2009, 10:25 AM

Once you include money in your review, you immediately add a high layer of subjectivety. The premier lenses will always command a premium price. Is Canon's 50 f1.2 really worth 800 dollars more than its 50 f1.4? Each person will answer that differently.

You can ask the question differently. If the kit lens is really pretty sharp at f5.6 and you can't tell the difference between it and the FA 50 there, why would you waste money on the prime and not save that money for something more useful?

Differences in lenses are often small, but you can pay large amounts of money for those differences.

K-9 · 08-08-2009, 10:57 AM

Originally posted by thibs

It means all those did not try the lens. You reasoning is non sense IMO.

No, the reasoning is sound. The DA 55mm costs 260% more than the FA 50mm. There isn't a person in this forum who can prove the lens is 260% sharper. Sorry, but no one has to try the lens to draw their own conclusion that a similar focal length lens at a 260% higher price is not worth it.

nostatic · 08-08-2009, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

It says nothing about the lens, but as you say, it says a lot about the majority of users, a majority that I suspect have not used the lens.

wait, you mean people give opinions that aren't based in actual experience?!?

Heresy.

nostatic · 08-08-2009, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by K-9

No, the reasoning is sound. The DA 55mm costs 260% more than the FA 50mm. There isn't a person in this forum who can prove the lens is 260% sharper. Sorry, but no one has to try the lens to draw their own conclusion that a similar focal length lens at a 260% higher price is not worth it.

Sorry, but that just isn't true for everyone. *You* might have a linear relationship between performance and cost, but the reality is that there is a well accepted "law of diminishing returns" and some people are willing to pay more to get some extra degree of performance.

In this case, the 55* is weather sealed, the FA 50 isn't. That right there is a deal-maker for some. Whether it is worth the extra money for that feature or other iq issues is up to the individual, not a "universal" conclusion.

Alphonse · 08-08-2009, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

It says nothing about the lens, but as you say, it says a lot about the majority of users, a majority that I suspect have not used the lens.
The lens costs what it costs, and people who have one are the people who have the knowledge to say anything about the lens and it's values. If you feel that what it offers is worth the price of admission, buy it. If you don't feel what it offers is worthwhile, then don't.
It's a pretty simple concept to grasp if you put your mind to it.

What I really don't get is the perpetual bitching and whining that goes on in relation to the fact that in order to make available a fast 50ish mm lens that is actually sharp wide open, Pentax has to charge real money for it. What I really don't get is the pissing and moaning that is going on because all of a sudden Pentax (via their corporate owners, I suspect) woke up to the fact that in order to stay in business they have to sell stuff at a profit.
If they had figured this out a decade ago, I suspect they would still be their own masters rather than Hoya's bitch.
Of course, they would never have been all things to everyone cheap, but that has turned out to be more liability than advantage anyway.

Woa, what a violence! How I should describe a man who wants only read what he wants read and hear what he wants only hear? Hitler!!!

Now seriously, when we saw a such answer, I understand why several people get a favorable ear around Rice High.

Besides, if Pentax really want to make huge profit without considering about their proconsumers, maybe there will be less people in this forum or there are only several users who hasn't used Pentax gears in order to talk diapers of their babies .

Maybe you will be one of these few Leica users who could kindly receive after a so long time a new user of these cams

Alphonse · 08-08-2009, 11:42 AM

According to all of the reviews on this thread, we have no choice but to pay and tell one single opinion : you have to be happy with your stuff and don't tell something if you're not happy

Alphonse · 08-08-2009, 11:46 AM

To K-9

Don't struggle in vain against wheatfield; he is a fanatic, no a fundamentalist Pentax.

I should say it's a good thing because I love Pentax brand but here it is too agressive and I don't like these kind of person.

nostatic · 08-08-2009, 11:54 AM

Originally posted by Alphonse

According to all of the reviews on this thread, we have no choice but to pay and tell one single opinion : you have to be happy with your stuff and don't tell something if you're not happy

Who is saying that?

I think one point that is coming out is that "reviews" are often flawed, and people can tend to voice an opinion that is not based on first-hand experience.

You have extremes on both ends - fanbois who insist that Pentax is the best, and detractors who complain about most everything Pentax does (even though they don't own/use much/any Pentax gear). In the middle are those that actually try to sift through opinions and share their own experiences, good and bad.

**Pål Jensen** · 08-08-2009, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by K-9

It says a lot about the 55. It says the majority of Pentax users do not feel it's worth $400 over and above the FA. How is saving $400 to put towards other gear not a good thing?

The same whine was targeted towards the A* 85/1.4, A* 135/1.8, A* 200/4 Macro, FA* 200/4 Macro etc....Now they a worth more used than when brand new....

Wheatfield · 08-08-2009, 12:51 PM

Originally posted by Alphonse

Woa, what a violence! How I should describe a man who wants only read what he wants read and hear what he wants only hear? Hitler!!!
.......

\Godwin's law folks.

nostatic · 08-08-2009, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

\Godwin's law folks.

Yeah, and look what happened when they bought him a GS...

YouTube - When Hitler got a BMW-GS

(warning - naughty words in the subtitles)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax K-x review on Dpreview	emr	Pentax News and Rumors	61	04-08-2010 10:14 AM
DPReview K-7 Review..	Eruditass	Pentax News and Rumors	48	04-05-2010 05:07 AM
Pentax DA* 55mm F1.4 lens review in dpreview.com	gawan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	31	08-01-2009 12:57 PM
K200D review on DPREVIEW is out	ogl	Pentax News and Rumors	6	09-04-2008 03:48 AM
K200D review up on dpreview!	jsherman999	Pentax DSLR Discussion	27	09-03-2008 06:49 PM

08-08-2009, 09:02 AM	#106
K-9 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,971	Originally posted by Wheatfield This say more about the users of Pentax cameras than it does about the DA*55/1.4. Unfortunately, it doesn't say very much good about the majority of them. It says a lot about the 55. It says the majority of Pentax users do not feel it's worth $400 over and above the FA. How is saving $400 to put towards other gear not a good thing?

08-08-2009, 09:28 AM	#107
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by K-9 It says a lot about the 55. It says the majority of Pentax users do not feel it's worth $400 over and above the FA. How is saving $400 to put towards other gear not a good thing? It means all those did not try the lens. You reasoning is non sense IMO.

08-08-2009, 09:59 AM	#108
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,986	Originally posted by K-9 It says a lot about the 55. It says the majority of Pentax users do not feel it's worth $400 over and above the FA. How is saving $400 to put towards other gear not a good thing? It says nothing about the lens, but as you say, it says a lot about the majority of users, a majority that I suspect have not used the lens. The lens costs what it costs, and people who have one are the people who have the knowledge to say anything about the lens and it's values. If you feel that what it offers is worth the price of admission, buy it. If you don't feel what it offers is worthwhile, then don't. It's a pretty simple concept to grasp if you put your mind to it. What I really don't get is the perpetual bitching and whining that goes on in relation to the fact that in order to make available a fast 50ish mm lens that is actually sharp wide open, Pentax has to charge real money for it. What I really don't get is the pissing and moaning that is going on because all of a sudden Pentax (via their corporate owners, I suspect) woke up to the fact that in order to stay in business they have to sell stuff at a profit. If they had figured this out a decade ago, I suspect they would still be their own masters rather than Hoya's bitch. Of course, they would never have been all things to everyone cheap, but that has turned out to be more liability than advantage anyway.

08-08-2009, 10:14 AM	#109
vinzer Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Philippines Posts: 1,399	Originally posted by dugrant153 I think that we should only read reviews with a grain of salt. Go and try the lens out for yourself and see if you like it. I read all the reviews of the DA*55 before buying the lens, but when I went to the store to try it out... oh man... all the reviews went out the window and I realized that this was a real gem of a lens. So I bought one. I agree. I understand reviews try to help potential buyers and I salute reviewers who take pains to do rigorous testing and all for their reviews, but I'd rather use them as quick guides on the gotchas I should be aware of regarding the product, then verify it if it's true or false (for me) when I try it in-store. The key thing here is that reviewers have their own preferences, and some things that they see as severely negative may not hold true for someone else who might not see that negative as such.

08-08-2009, 10:25 AM	#110
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Once you include money in your review, you immediately add a high layer of subjectivety. The premier lenses will always command a premium price. Is Canon's 50 f1.2 really worth 800 dollars more than its 50 f1.4? Each person will answer that differently. You can ask the question differently. If the kit lens is really pretty sharp at f5.6 and you can't tell the difference between it and the FA 50 there, why would you waste money on the prime and not save that money for something more useful? Differences in lenses are often small, but you can pay large amounts of money for those differences.

08-08-2009, 10:57 AM	#111
K-9 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,971	Originally posted by thibs It means all those did not try the lens. You reasoning is non sense IMO. No, the reasoning is sound. The DA 55mm costs 260% more than the FA 50mm. There isn't a person in this forum who can prove the lens is 260% sharper. Sorry, but no one has to try the lens to draw their own conclusion that a similar focal length lens at a 260% higher price is not worth it.

08-08-2009, 11:05 AM	#112
nostatic Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: socal Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,575	Originally posted by Wheatfield It says nothing about the lens, but as you say, it says a lot about the majority of users, a majority that I suspect have not used the lens. wait, you mean people give opinions that aren't based in actual experience?!? Heresy.

08-08-2009, 11:08 AM	#113
nostatic Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: socal Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,575	Originally posted by K-9 No, the reasoning is sound. The DA 55mm costs 260% more than the FA 50mm. There isn't a person in this forum who can prove the lens is 260% sharper. Sorry, but no one has to try the lens to draw their own conclusion that a similar focal length lens at a 260% higher price is not worth it. Sorry, but that just isn't true for everyone. You might have a linear relationship between performance and cost, but the reality is that there is a well accepted "law of diminishing returns" and some people are willing to pay more to get some extra degree of performance. In this case, the 55* is weather sealed, the FA 50 isn't. That right there is a deal-maker for some. Whether it is worth the extra money for that feature or other iq issues is up to the individual, not a "universal" conclusion.

08-08-2009, 11:37 AM	#114
Alphonse New Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Brie Comte Robert, France Posts: 13	Originally posted by Wheatfield It says nothing about the lens, but as you say, it says a lot about the majority of users, a majority that I suspect have not used the lens. The lens costs what it costs, and people who have one are the people who have the knowledge to say anything about the lens and it's values. If you feel that what it offers is worth the price of admission, buy it. If you don't feel what it offers is worthwhile, then don't. It's a pretty simple concept to grasp if you put your mind to it. What I really don't get is the perpetual bitching and whining that goes on in relation to the fact that in order to make available a fast 50ish mm lens that is actually sharp wide open, Pentax has to charge real money for it. What I really don't get is the pissing and moaning that is going on because all of a sudden Pentax (via their corporate owners, I suspect) woke up to the fact that in order to stay in business they have to sell stuff at a profit. If they had figured this out a decade ago, I suspect they would still be their own masters rather than Hoya's bitch. Of course, they would never have been all things to everyone cheap, but that has turned out to be more liability than advantage anyway. Woa, what a violence! How I should describe a man who wants only read what he wants read and hear what he wants only hear? Hitler!!! Now seriously, when we saw a such answer, I understand why several people get a favorable ear around Rice High. Besides, if Pentax really want to make huge profit without considering about their proconsumers, maybe there will be less people in this forum or there are only several users who hasn't used Pentax gears in order to talk diapers of their babies . Maybe you will be one of these few Leica users who could kindly receive after a so long time a new user of these cams

08-08-2009, 11:42 AM	#115
Alphonse New Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Brie Comte Robert, France Posts: 13	According to all of the reviews on this thread, we have no choice but to pay and tell one single opinion : you have to be happy with your stuff and don't tell something if you're not happy

08-08-2009, 11:46 AM	#116
Alphonse New Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Brie Comte Robert, France Posts: 13	To K-9 Don't struggle in vain against wheatfield; he is a fanatic, no a fundamentalist Pentax. I should say it's a good thing because I love Pentax brand but here it is too agressive and I don't like these kind of person.

08-08-2009, 11:54 AM	#117
nostatic Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: socal Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,575	Originally posted by Alphonse According to all of the reviews on this thread, we have no choice but to pay and tell one single opinion : you have to be happy with your stuff and don't tell something if you're not happy Who is saying that? I think one point that is coming out is that "reviews" are often flawed, and people can tend to voice an opinion that is not based on first-hand experience. You have extremes on both ends - fanbois who insist that Pentax is the best, and detractors who complain about most everything Pentax does (even though they don't own/use much/any Pentax gear). In the middle are those that actually try to sift through opinions and share their own experiences, good and bad.

08-08-2009, 12:39 PM	#118
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by K-9 It says a lot about the 55. It says the majority of Pentax users do not feel it's worth $400 over and above the FA. How is saving $400 to put towards other gear not a good thing? The same whine was targeted towards the A* 85/1.4, A* 135/1.8, A* 200/4 Macro, FA* 200/4 Macro etc....Now they a worth more used than when brand new....

08-08-2009, 12:51 PM	#119
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,986	Originally posted by Alphonse Woa, what a violence! How I should describe a man who wants only read what he wants read and hear what he wants only hear? Hitler!!! ....... \Godwin's law folks.

08-08-2009, 12:54 PM	#120
nostatic Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: socal Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,575	Originally posted by Wheatfield \Godwin's law folks. Yeah, and look what happened when they bought him a GS... YouTube - When Hitler got a BMW-GS (warning - naughty words in the subtitles)