[sutherland]

Some questions regarding the Squirrel image:
- is the EXIF accurate with the ISO that is logged (ISO 12800)
- what focusing mode did you use (eg: Center, SEL, Auto, etc.)
- were you hand holding the 600mm or did you have it stabilized
- did you have SR turned on

[normhead]

Slow AF on the 60-250 is an overblown issue. It's slower than the newest lenses like the 70-200 and DFA50, but it's not "slow", per se.

Indeed, I use the 55-300 because of the 60-250's weight, but I have may shots that required decent AF taken with it.

[mbukal]

Slow AF on the 60-250 is an overblown issue. It's slower than the newest lenses like the 70-200 and DFA50, but it's not "slow", per se.

The optical is a 60-250 / 4 very grateful lens, a fantastic range, the size is acceptable (all better than the FA 80-320 ), the lack of the focus speed (nothing faster than the FA 80-320 - slow as DA17-70 / 4), the new ff lens with the aperture f4 and the approximate range but with a faster focus, smaller body and better optics would be a big blow to the existing 70-200 / 2.8 which does not have a small body, I doubt, a shorter range of 60-250 as 70-200 / 4 with a faster focus and a smaller body but with weakened optics of 60-250 / 4, especially from 70-200 / 2.8 wil be the likely reality, I hope I'm wrong, and that will be a greater range of 70-200, faster focus of 60-250, a little body of 65-250 and optical as DA * 60-250 , of course with all and a price between 60-250 / 4 and 70-200 / 2.8 , modest and realistic

[pinholecam]

Sorry* Fenwoodian, you also had answered to the same question in an old thread that i've just found and read now....

[29-06-17 / #16 of "New Zeiss Milvus 50mm f/1.4 lens on my Pentax K1" :
" (...)The FA77 Limited is up against one of the best Zeiss lenses there is, the Zeiss Milvus 85mm f/1.4. The 85 Milvus is the single best lens I have ever shot (the exceptional Zeiss 135/2 APO is a close second)! The Milvus 85 is much sharper than the FA77, and it's bokeh is exceptional (even Zeiss themselves call it "The King of Bokeh"). I believe most photographers who have shot both lenses would agree that the Zeiss 85 Milvus is clearly a few steps above the FA77 in just about every lens characteristic.(...)"

Sorry again,

best regards

Ben-G

And then the FA77ltd is AF, very small and has a different working distance to the 85mm.
Not to mention the price.

Unless one is totally an 'objective' shooter who just takes a big/heavy 135/2 or 85/1.4 out for a portrait/model session or drives to location, if the user needs to walk/hike for long periods with a range of lenses, then the 'best lens' needs to take into account encumbrance as well, and this is where the limiteds give an added benefit.

[Kerrowdown]

Off to the beach, taken today in the Highlands of Scotland @ 9 Centigrade, positively tropical.

Living up to her name IMHO, “Gorgeous Lady”(Pentax-A* 200mm F2.8 ED) wide open.

[Nguyen Tuan Trieu]

i just have new K-1 last week after over 15 years with full lens & Nikon body experiences!
I'm very happy with Pentax now and my first gears is with FA 77mm limited & SMC 1;1.4/50 Asahi Opt.. Japan
Loving !

[Kerrowdown]

i just have new K-1 last week after over 15 years with full lens & Nikon body experiences!

Welcome to photography the Pentax way, from another Nikon convert... albeit nearly forty years ago now when I turned in all my F3's.

[pschlute]

i just have new K-1 last week after over 15 years with full lens & Nikon body experiences!
I'm very happy with Pentax now and my first gears is with FA 77mm limited & SMC 1;1.4/50 Asahi Opt.. Japan
Loving !

Cannot go wrong with those two lenses on the K1

Welcome.

[ivanvernon]

[/COLOR]As a Pentax collector and hobbyist, my favorites are:

FA 31
FA 77
D FA 50 f 2.8 macro
FA* 85mm f 1.4
Kiron 105mm f 2.8 1:1 macro
Canon 55mm f 1.2 (converted to K mount)

[paolojackson]

I've been impressed with the DA*55 on the K-1 (in full frame). Everything negative about the lens is true: SDM is slow, vignetting, messy bokeh at times, soft corners, etc. Despite all of those "shortcomings", the lens produces nice, saturated colors, it's sharp in the center at f/1.4, and the lens can be had under $350. IMHO it's a big jump over the FA50, and punches well above its street price tag when compared to the DFA 50, which the cheapest I've seen on the used market was around $700-800.

[normhead]

I've been impressed with the DA*55 on the K-1 (in full frame). Everything negative about the lens is true: SDM is slow, vignetting, messy bokeh at times, soft corners, etc. Despite all of those "shortcomings", the lens produces nice, saturated colors, it's sharp in the center at f/1.4, and the lens can be had under $350. IMHO it's a big jump over the FA50, and punches well above its street price tag when compared to the DFA 50, which the cheapest I've seen on the used market was around $700-800.

Shooting at even ƒ2...

How would you even know it has soft corners?


And given the number of lens I have that have produced smooth bokeh.... smooth bokeh is definitely a function of the lens to a point, but understanding the characteristics of the lens you're using is more relevant than the lens used.

[paolojackson]

Shooting at even ƒ2...

How would you even know it has soft corners?

exactly! People love to obsess over every little thing...and that is their right. But for me, the DA*55 has been an absolute revelation after lusting over the DFA* 50.

[normhead]

exactly! People love to obsess over every little thing...and that is their right. But for me, the DA*55 has been an absolute revelation after lusting over the DFA* 50.

Same here. It's the lens I carry in my bag, when I don't have a plan to use it, but I want it there just in case I have the opportunity. I saw the comparison images, DFA* 50 1.4 compared to DA*55 1.4, and noted, the DFA is a little smoother in some images, (not in all images) , but too big to carry as a probably un-needed lens. The 55 is the right size to take along for the ride, even when you don't expect to use it, just in case. The DFA, I'd have to have plan to use it to take it. I have lots of lenses in the same boat. I don't need another one.

[BruceBanner]

I've been impressed with the DA*55 on the K-1 (in full frame). Everything negative about the lens is true: SDM is slow, vignetting, messy bokeh at times, soft corners, etc. Despite all of those "shortcomings", the lens produces nice, saturated colors, it's sharp in the center at f/1.4, and the lens can be had under $350. IMHO it's a big jump over the FA50, and punches well above its street price tag when compared to the DFA 50, which the cheapest I've seen on the used market was around $700-800.

Shooting at even ƒ2...

How would you even know it has soft corners?


And given the number of lens I have that have produced smooth bokeh.... smooth bokeh is definitely a function of the lens to a point, but understanding the characteristics of the lens you're using is more relevant than the lens used.

exactly! People love to obsess over every little thing...and that is their right. But for me, the DA*55 has been an absolute revelation after lusting over the DFA* 50.

Same here. It's the lens I carry in my bag, when I don't have a plan to use it, but I want it there just in case I have the opportunity. I saw the comparison images, DFA* 50 1.4 compared to DA*55 1.4, and noted, the DFA is a little smoother in some images, (not in all images) , but too big to carry as a probably un-needed lens. The 55 is the right size to take along for the ride, even when you don't expect to use it, just in case. The DFA, I'd have to have plan to use it to take it. I have lots of lenses in the same boat. I don't need another one.

Yeah I am eyeing up a 55* in the future as well, namely because I simply don't have any WR lens at all currently. When I sold my DFA100 it was to be replaced with the 77, and I vowed to replace the 100 with something wider (focal length) so that it was more versatile. DFA50 would be nice, perhaps overkill, 55* seems a good alternative.

[clackers]

Yeah I am eyeing up a 55* in the future as well, namely because I simply don't have any WR lens at all currently. When I sold my DFA100 it was to be replaced with the 77, and I vowed to replace the 100 with something wider (focal length) so that it was more versatile. DFA50 would be nice, perhaps overkill, 55* seems a good alternative.

Obviously, the DFA is as good as it gets - possibly the best performing AF Fifty available in any brand - but Jun Hirakawa's 55 is not a bad fill-in, smaller and cheaper.