[normhead]

Look what you started Hancock, are you proud of yourself?

[clackers]

How about curvy? =)

Nah, we all know it's the inside that counts. Or maybe some like large front elements...

Edit: I'll show myself out..

(Laughs)

[clackers]

I can't wait for the Weighty Eighty to join my Fat Fifty.
Then the Thick Thirty?

What will our anorexic Three Princesses make of their hefty new cousins?

[normhead]

Or maybe some like large front elements..

.

woooo hooooo

Leave a10 in the camera strap.

[Sandy Hancock]

What will our anorexic Three Princesses make of their hefty new cousins?

Surely you mean the Anorexic Amigos (the Shredded Seventy, Fit Forty and Trim Taut Terrific Thirty)?

[shardulm]

That clearly shows the DA*55 held up very well. It never was a bad lens.. part of the reason is that it is 85mm equivalent for the APS-C system. So it had to be stellar. But this D-FA* seems like an IQ monster.
Omg... this only raised my expectation for the D-FA*85. What will they do with the new 85.. I have to start saving/selling

[BruceBanner]

Interesting comparison. Granted, I am looking at the photos on my phone and I am not pixel peaking (that can wait until the morning), but there is less of a difference than I would have expected...

Nope lol, it's night and day (on some shots). The first shot says it all ready, super sharp, 3d pop, amazing bokeh. It's doing brenizer method shots without the stitching and additional frames!

The DA55 is renowned for having great bokeh, and the DFA is better by a fair margin.

Yup.

Looks like the DA55 holds up.

Nope (imo).

---------- Post added 08-12-18 at 11:47 AM ----------

Surely you mean the Anorexic Amigos (the Shredded Seventy, Fit Forty and Trim Taut Terrific Thirty)?

Do a brenizer shot with the DFA 50 Sandy, hehe, could be something very special indeed!

[jab2980]

Now I am really interested in the 85mm. I can do without 50mm, but an 85mm lens of this quality would be a dream to have. I guess I should get K1 first though...

I've had the same thought myself, but then realize that I can't ever imagine a time when I'd reach for anything but the FA 77 when shooting in that FL range. Silent focus, WR, and updated coatings are a nice benefit but don't come into play for about 97% of what I use the 77 for.

[Fenwoodian]

I've had the same thought myself, but then realize that I can't ever imagine a time when I'd reach for anything but the FA 77 when shooting in that FL range. Silent focus, WR, and updated coatings are a nice benefit but don't come into play for about 97% of what I use the 77 for.

.

It's common that for high quality products, one ends up paying a lot more for just a little bit of improvement. I guess that not everyone needs that incremental increase in IQ. It all depends on one's needs (and pocketbook).

This new Pentax 50mm lens is better than your FA 77 lens. But is it worth twice the cost of your FA 77? Not to you, but it might be to those of us with either a deeper pocket and/or who have a need for the ultimate in IQ at this focal length.

[BruceBanner]

.

It's common that for high quality products, one ends up paying a lot more for just a little bit of improvement. I guess that not everyone needs that incremental increase in IQ. It all depends on one's needs (and pocketbook).

This new Pentax 50mm lens is better than your FA 77 lens. But is it worth twice the cost of your FA 77? Not to you, but it might be to those of us with either a deeper pocket and/or who have a need for the ultimate in IQ at this focal length.

Agreed.

I just think people need to have a clear understanding of where this lens succeeds and how important that area is to your photography. Shooting at f1.4-2 is going to be where the goods are at, but if you don't like shooting at those apertures then you're really throwing money away. This lens will suit a studio portrait shooter, shots that can be framed well and time taken over to nail the focus just right. I mean it can be used for other stuff of course but that's where it's strengths lie the greatest.
I would still like to get my hands on a FA77, but really I like the results of what I see produced from a 85/1.4, it just sucks that we have such limited choice of purchasing at that FL and aperture range. I ended up with the Samyang 85/1.4, but it's very difficult to use (by far the hardest lens I've ever had to try and nail focus right with) and suitable to only a few scenarios (such as portrait and still subjects). I too would love to see a brand new 85/1.4 from Pentax with AF!

[Lev]

Agreed.

I just think people need to have a clear understanding of where this lens succeeds and how important that area is to your photography. Shooting at f1.4-2 is going to be where the goods are at, but if you don't like shooting at those apertures then you're really throwing money away. This lens will suit a studio portrait shooter, shots that can be framed well and time taken over to nail the focus just right. I mean it can be used for other stuff of course but that's where it's strengths lie the greatest.
I would still like to get my hands on a FA77, but really I like the results of what I see produced from a 85/1.4, it just sucks that we have such limited choice of purchasing at that FL and aperture range. I ended up with the Samyang 85/1.4, but it's very difficult to use (by far the hardest lens I've ever had to try and nail focus right with) and suitable to only a few scenarios (such as portrait and still subjects). I too would love to see a brand new 85/1.4 from Pentax with AF!

Agree. I often see reviews of fast 50mm lenses where they shoot landscapes. As you say it's ok but main purpose of it is to work with very shallow depth of field. Products or portrait photography where you can easily isolate your point of interest in very small area. But I wouldn't say it's only suitable to shoot in studio though.

[BruceBanner]

Agree. I often see reviews of fast 50mm lenses where they shoot landscapes. As you say it's ok but main purpose of it is to work with very shallow depth of field. Products or portrait photography where you can easily isolate your point of interest in very small area. But I wouldn't say it's only suitable to shoot in studio though.

My 'studio comment' surrounds the size and weight of the new DFA50 in addition to it's difficulty in perhaps nailing those wide apertures in 'real life moving targets'.

I'm a prime lens shooter, when I do events or even stuff for fun I think carefully about what lenses I bring along. I did sell my Samyang 85/1.4 and invested in a FA77 (and collected a FA43 too) just because they are so small and easy to bring with. Taking even the Sammy 85 out to an event made things more awkward, I got frustrated on the number of occasions I struggled to fit into some of the many lens pouches I have, it took up too much space, hard to fit in and typically could only be stowed away in one place (unlike the other smaller lenses that could interchange easily their pouch positions).
Prime lens shooting can mean fluid lens swapping, I'm not saying it's impossible to do on a job with some little and large lenses, but I always feel its much more comfortable with a bunch of smaller roughly equal sized lenses.
You might think I'm being pedantic, but when you go shooting at a rock concert and have to have quick fluid lens swapping, you do have to deal with practical issues that casual walkaround shooters don't fret over. By all means some will most definitely be ok going out for a walk with taking just the DFA50, it all depends what kinda shooter you are and what pressures you face.
For me if I had this lens I would just set up my K-1 on a tripod in a studio and it would never come off

[Lev]

My 'studio comment' surrounds the size and weight of the new DFA50 in addition to it's difficulty in perhaps nailing those wide apertures in 'real life moving targets'.

I'm a prime lens shooter, when I do events or even stuff for fun I think carefully about what lenses I bring along. I did sell my Samyang 85/1.4 and invested in a FA77 (and collected a FA43 too) just because they are so small and easy to bring with. Taking even the Sammy 85 out to an event made things more awkward, I got frustrated on the number of occasions I struggled to fit into some of the many lens pouches I have, it took up too much space, hard to fit in and typically could only be stowed away in one place (unlike the other smaller lenses that could interchange easily their pouch positions).
Prime lens shooting can mean fluid lens swapping, I'm not saying it's impossible to do on a job with some little and large lenses, but I always feel its much more comfortable with a bunch of smaller roughly equal sized lenses.
You might think I'm being pedantic, but when you go shooting at a rock concert and have to have quick fluid lens swapping, you do have to deal with practical issues that casual walkaround shooters don't fret over. By all means some will most definitely be ok going out for a walk with taking just the DFA50, it all depends what kinda shooter you are and what pressures you face.
For me if I had this lens I would just set up my K-1 on a tripod in a studio and it would never come off

And after shooting months with that combination you find out that the K-1 bayonet is no longer interchangeable