[lazarustx]

Well, I had my photography class yesterday and the instructor suggested:
1. I give the 50-135mm a try before ditching it. He's convinced that it has plenty of life left in it with regards to the new camera. He's a great guy so I'm going to take a breath and wait a bit and give the 50-135mm a chance.
2. That if I'm determined to get the new DFA*70-200 that I should consider going back to the gym. My camera/grip and flash/bracket already weigh too much for his liking. His claim is that there's no way that anyone is going to carry that beast for more than a short bit while hiking/partying or sight seeing.

Can any of you comment on its use a walk about lens? Do you guys use it without a tripod? Again, his concern is that I'll immediately ditch it once I get tired of carrying it around for any long periods of time.

Regards,
Rodney

[clackers]

Well, I had my photography class yesterday and the instructor suggested:
1. I give the 50-135mm a try before ditching it. He's convinced that it has plenty of life left in it with regards to the new camera. He's a great guy so I'm going to take a breath and wait a bit and give the 50-135mm a chance.
2. That if I'm determined to get the new DFA*70-200 that I should consider going back to the gym. My camera/grip and flash/bracket already weigh too much for his liking. His claim is that there's no way that anyone is going to carry that beast for more than a short bit while hiking/partying or sight seeing.

Can any of you comment on its use a walk about lens? Do you guys use it without a tripod? Again, his concern is that I'll immediately ditch it once I get tired of carrying it around for any long periods of time.

Regards,
Rodney

Whoa, Rodney, you said you had the 28-105 for hiking, the 100 Macro for flowers, and were looking for a portrait lens for parties ...

Indoors, right? Something like the FA77 or the cheaper DA70 would be great.

BTW, I do have the 50-135 and if doing a six mile hike or similar would rather carry it than my Tamron 70-200 and cop the loss of pixels ... the IQ as you know is wonderful.

[lazarustx]

EDITED:
@clackers....You've summed it up well, and I hope that some of you can get me straightened out here. You are correct, I do currently use the 28-105 as my walkabout (and I've got no complaints about it). I've also been seeking feedback on a portrait lens, and I've gotten plenty good advice. However, all the options just seem to have made the decision all the more difficult.

Here's a few pieces of tidbit that might help you folks get me on track:
1. The 50-135 was my most used lens on my prior cameras. Nice size, and quite honestly, it gave me what I needed for portraits at any focal length. It's versatility was pretty damned nice and the fact that it was f2.8 across the board was sweet too.
2. Getting the 50mm for the old bodies worked out great. Great focal length for portraits and the lens wasn't as intimidating as my 50-135.
3. I haven't been able to put my finger on it, but the 50-135mm I think has an issue with auto focus on the K-1 under some conditions. I read a thread discussing that at some point but I dismissed it. I'll see what I can find again in the forum.
4. The 50mm on my full frame just isn't cutting it now that I'm practically on top of my guests in order to get them into the frame.
So I'm inclined to save a few bucks and pick up the FA77. Or maybe due to my concern about the 50-135, I should jump and get the 70-200.
That's where I stand. The 70-200 seems where I'm leaning as I've really got a bug about the autofocus on the 50-135. However, I really need better proof of a real problem before I write it off.

So that's where I'm at.
Regards,
Rodney

[UncleVanya]

FA 77 should be perfect on k-1 if 50 worked on apsc.

Maybe the older fa* 80-200 is worth trying to find? I had one on crop and it was sweet but heavier than I wanted. However it is lighter than the dfa 70-200. (200g less and .3 inches Shorter)

[RobA_Oz]

FA 77 should be perfect on k-1 if 50 worked on apsc.

Maybe the older fa* 80-200 is worth trying to find? I had one on crop and it was sweet but heavier than I wanted. However it is lighter than the dfa 70-200. (200g less and .3 inches Shorter)

I concur on both counts. There are usually several FA*80-200s on eBay, and the prices are, if anything, a bit lower than they were a few years ago (US$1,100 and upwards, dependent on condition).

[cesar chimey]

FA77 is my favorite on the k1

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

What work for portraits is very personal and dependent on the situation. But you've already indicated that you feel your 50mm and 100mm to be wrong for you. So lets focus on the range classically considered portraits lenses.

The A*85/1.4 and its sibling the 77/1.8ltd (they share nearly the same lens design) are great lenses. But they are also very sharp lenses. In that sense they aren't traditional portrait lenses, and your ladies might find them too unfriendly.

In that regard the FA*85/1.4 does much better. Without being soft it gives a smoother skin texture.

Then there is the K85/1.8 and its sibling the SMC-Takumar 85/1.8. A very nice portrait lens that also give you a smootheer skin texture.

The M85/2 and its sibling the Super Takunar 85/1.9 are also traditional portrait lenses in that sense. It is one of these lenses that appears to do better on digital than on film for some obscure reason.

Now if you really wish to hide signa of age etc you shouldn't forget Pentax both soft portrait lenses:
K85/2.2. soft
FA85/2.8 soft
The K85 soft gives better controle over the softness, but the F85 soft has autofocus...
Both allow you to let whatever the subject wish to hide dissapear in romantic bliss. The prices is actually quite low, probably because people think they can achieve the same in post processing. But I have enjoyed mine.

Had you not ruled out 100mm as too long I'd also suggested the K105/2.8, which is also a nice portrait lens which hide some aspects of reality.

[lazarustx]

What work for portraits is very personal and dependent on the situation. But you've already indicated that you feel your 50mm and 100mm to be wrong for you. So lets focus on the range classically considered portraits lenses.

The A*85/1.4 and its sibling the 77/1.8ltd (they share nearly the same lens design) are great lenses. But they are also very sharp lenses. In that sense they aren't traditional portrait lenses, and your ladies might find them too unfriendly.

In that regard the FA*85/1.4 does much better. Without being soft it gives a smoother skin texture.

Then there is the K85/1.8 and its sibling the SMC-Takumar 85/1.8. A very nice portrait lens that also give you a smootheer skin texture.

The M85/2 and its sibling the Super Takunar 85/1.9 are also traditional portrait lenses in that sense. It is one of these lenses that appears to do better on digital than on film for some obscure reason.

Now if you really wish to hide signa of age etc you shouldn't forget Pentax both soft portrait lenses:
K85/2.2. soft
FA85/2.8 soft
The K85 soft gives better controle over the softness, but the F85 soft has autofocus...
Both allow you to let whatever the subject wish to hide dissapear in romantic bliss. The prices is actually quite low, probably because people think they can achieve the same in post processing. But I have enjoyed mine.

Had you not ruled out 100mm as too long I'd also suggested the K105/2.8, which is also a nice portrait lens which hide some aspects of reality.

I worry that that soft lens might not be suitable for other situations. I can certainly see how they have a need, I just wonder if they aren't a bit to nichey for me. Thanks for all your feedback!

[kooks]

IMO.. the SIGMA 85mm is a wonderful lens.. so far my favorite for portraits.. bokeh at 2.0 or under that is lovely with K1

[cyberjunkie]

The A*85/1.4 and its sibling the 77/1.8ltd (they share nearly the same lens design) are great lenses. But they are also very sharp lenses. In that sense they aren't traditional portrait lenses, and your ladies might find them too unfriendly.

In that regard the FA*85/1.4 does much better. Without being soft it gives a smoother skin texture.

Then there is the K85/1.8 and its sibling the SMC-Takumar 85/1.8. A very nice portrait lens that also give you a smootheer skin texture.

The M85/2 and its sibling the Super Takunar 85/1.9 are also traditional portrait lenses in that sense. It is one of these lenses that appears to do better on digital than on film for some obscure reason.

Now if you really wish to hide signa of age etc you shouldn't forget Pentax both soft portrait lenses:
K85/2.2. soft
FA85/2.8 soft
The K85 soft gives better controle over the softness, but the F85 soft has autofocus...
Both allow you to let whatever the subject wish to hide dissapear in romantic bliss. The prices is actually quite low, probably because people think they can achieve the same in post processing. But I have enjoyed mine.

Had you not ruled out 100mm as too long I'd also suggested the K105/2.8, which is also a nice portrait lens which hide some aspects of reality.

I agree with Douglas.
His choice and his concise explanations are absolutely spot-on.
I might add that any lens can be used to shoot portraits, and that some very nice portraits were taken with other focals... but a "portrait lens" and a lens used to shoot a portrait are definitely two different things!
Of course there is no law that prescribes to use a 70/85mm on full frame. I tend to shoot tight portraits, not the usual head & shoulders, so i prefer a 100mm or even a 135mm.
There is something that defines a "portrait lens" though. Two things actually.
One is speed. That is: the ability to focus on the pupil of the eye and have the background, or even the back of the head, out of focus.
The other is the optical signature. It has to be smooth, not_too_clinic. In proper soft focus lenses a layer of "glow" coexists with the requested sharpness.
From a certain "smoothness" to "proper soft focus" there are an almost infinite number of steps, which depend on the optical signature of the objective in use, the diaphragm, the focusing distance, the illumination, and of course the post-processing.

Nobody else but Douglas mentioned the Pentax soft focus lenses. I think they deserve to be included in any portrait lens list for the K-1.
The OP wrote that buying a second-hand lens makes him nervous. I don't comment on that, to each his/her own. It's just a pity... restricting the choice to new lenses don't give much choice.
Of course there are countless wonderful portraits shot with optics that i don't consider "portrait lenses", and many forum users think that the choice of the lens is not so important because it's always possible to work on the image in post processing. I can't say it is wrong, it's just not the way i think/feel.
So, no matter how much people would like to have one, i don't consider my 85mm f/1,4 A Star a good portrait lens. It is a great lens, maybe even the best Pentax ever made, but not an ideal portrait lens!
Hence i agree with the choice of the two 85mm soft focus. The F and FA versions have the same optics, while the K has a different rendition.
I also recommend the 120mm soft focus for the 6x7 and the Tamron SP 70-150mm f/2,8 soft focus.
All of them can become quite sharp if stopped down.
The Pentax-K 135mm f/2,5 is an old classic, with an optical layout from the times of the Spotmatic.
I will also give a try to a combo that would probably prove its worth with the K-1: a 50/55mm f/1,2 with a 1,5x (or 1,4x) converter. I shot a group portrait with my Revuenon/Tomioka 55mm f/1,2 a few days ago, the beautiful OOF of the city lights in the background, and the creamy halo of the candles in the foreground, screamed "portrait"
A good teleconverter will turn the lens into a useful 80mm f/1,8. I'm curious to see how it works...

EDIT:
It occurrs to me that there is an interesting new lens available in Pentax mount:
http://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-105mm-f2-smooth-trans-focus-stf-lens/
And this is a very detailed explanation of how Smooth Trans Focus lenses work:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/articles/photo-articles/smooth-trans-focus-sony-...f28-guide.html

cheers
P

[redcat]

If OP can deal with manual focus then Samyang 135mm f2 is a great option, it compete on equal terms with the Zeiss Apo Sonnar 2/135, that's amazing considered the price < 500$ of the Samyang lens !

[Class A]

The Laowa 105/2 STF is available in K-mount.

It got to be considered to be one of the prime candidates for portraiture due to its apodisation element that creates a buttery-smooth bokeh.

Too bad it does not support an "A"-position on the aperture ring. It is an MF lens as well, so it is certainly not for everyone.

[cyberjunkie]

Yes, a real pity, IMHO.
Not such a great engineering effort, considering that i have seen lenses converted to P-KA with good results, even from other mounts!
It seems that because it made no sense with the 14mm Macro/Shift, Venus decided to go the same way... but such a nice 105mm STF cries for electric contacts
Not sure AF would be so necessary, at least for its main use (portraits)

cheers
P

[gatorguy]

I'm surprised no one has suggested the Bower (Samyang/Rokinon) 8mm5 1.4. Pretty sure it's full-frame compatible and at the price it's well worth trying. I've hit some great images with it. Great pop, very dimensional, and really pleasing bokeh. Just because it's not expensive don't' assume the image quality is lacking. At less than $300 it's no risk at all to give it a try IMHO. Granted there's no autofocus but you wouldn't use that for portraits anyway. Personally I believe it will far exceed what you might expect considering the price.

EDIT: I see Redcat mentioned the also budget friendly but very well reviewed Samyang 135.

[lennyl]

I'm waiting for DFA HD 135/2 DC WR (my favorit portrait lens on D750 was Nikon 135/2DC)...I want max.f2 and AF.

FA43/1,9 @f2,5
imgp8200.jpg at ImageHosting.cz - Hosting pro tvoje fotky a obrazky

FA43/1,9 @f2,2
http://www.imagehosting.cz/images/imgp79kwk.jpg

FA77/1,8 @ f2
http://www.imagehosting.cz/images/imgp05cmc.jpg

FA77/1,8 @f2
imgp05bdb.jpg at ImageHosting.cz - Hosting pro tvoje fotky a obrazky

DA*200/2,8 @2,8
http://www.imagehosting.cz/images/imgp0670.jpg

DA*200/2,8 @2,8
imgp0663.jpg at ImageHosting.cz - Hosting pro tvoje fotky a obrazky