[Arisenfromash]

Dear All,

I'd like to use my Pentax *ist DS for some low light street photography. I'm getting decent results with my XR rikenon 1:2.2 55mm.
Still, if somone could recommend me a better manual lens, m42 is fine too, I'd be happy.

Thanks!

[kypfer]

My personal favourite for low-light candid work is my Fujinon EBC 35mm f/1.9 … my Petri and Kiron 28mm f/2 both seem just that little bit too wide and my Takumar 50mm f/1.4 just that little bit too long, which effectively leaves out any other 50-55-58mm wide-aperture lenses … call me fussy

[steephill]

Better in what way? You can get an extra half stop by going for the excellent Pentax-M 50mm f1.7. 55mm on the *istDs gives a short telephoto perspective, If you want a more normal view then look at the very common Pentax-M 28mm f2.8. There is also an f2 version but it is rarer and more expensive.

[photogem]

Dear All,

I'd like to use my Pentax *ist DS for some low light street photography. I'm getting decent results with my XR rikenon 1:2.2 55mm.
Still, if somone could recommend me a better manual lens, m42 is fine too, I'd be happy.

The XR Rikeon 55/2,2 isn't a good performer at all, only the Riconar 55/2,2 can "top it in a minus way".

If you shoot with a manual lens and 50 or 55mm are fine, I recommend the SMC Pentax M50/1,7 as a far superior lens and still very cheap to find.
There are quite a few f1,4 lenses but f1.4 with it's narrow depth of image isn't fun for low light street.

The SMC Pentax A50/1,7 gives an advantage that you can be quicker because you don't have to use the Green Button Mode (i.e. the AE-L button on your *ist-DS).


Quite a few Rikenon lenses which are better, so there is a lot of choice. One would be the Rikenon P50/1,4... a very nice lens superior to it's XR-Version!


If you want M42: Takumar 55/1,8 or Takumar 55/2, and of course the 50mm/1,4 Takumars.

[Just1MoreDave]

Some other lens ideas: Sigma Superwide II 24mm f2.8. You want the Superwide II because it has the A button on the aperture ring and that makes it easier to use. There is an autofocus version too. The M42 versions are not as good. Another 24mm lens is the Kiron 24mm f2 made by Kino. There are several versions of this lens with Vivitar or Panagor branding, M42, K or KA mounts.

At 28mm I like the Pentax 28mm lenses, any version you can find is at least good. What I have is the Pentax-F 28mm f2.8 which has autofocus.

Autofocus is not that amazing on the DS; if you are any good with manual focus, get those versions instead.

[pres589]

Sigma 24 or 28mm EX DG f1.8's (autofocus may not be great with this, 'it depends', they're not great with my K-5 II but they're very good lenses in my opinion)
Pentax FA 50 f1.4
Samyang 85mm f1.4 (manual focus only)

All available in good condition used for about $300 each, maybe closer to $200 for the Samyang.

[Just1MoreDave]

Also, there is a point where it makes more sense to buy a newer camera than a different lens. It depends on your budget of course, and local availability. If you have $50, a lens makes sense. Here in the US you can often find a K20D or a K-7 for $100-150, with years of remaining life. Yes, they are not competitive with even ten year old cameras at high ISO, but that's why they are so cheap. The other possibility is a K-30 or K-50, with or without aperture block failure. Those cameras do perform well at higher ISOs and some people have opted to use them unrepaired, with manual/M42 lenses.

[kayakfari]

The DS sensor works OK in low light only if you use low ISO (200 or 400, maybe 800) and don't underexpose. There's not much room to lift shadows and you need long exposures. It's not a great choice for low light street shots unless you're going for a gritty, grainy BW look.

[fotopan]

* ist DS was my first DSLR, I regret I sold it years ago. Only 6MP, but the photos that came out of this camera were very nice. However, I agree as to the noise and ISO - low-light machine it was not.

[Arisenfromash]

* ist DS was my first DSLR, I regret I sold it years ago. Only 6MP, but the photos that came out of this camera were very nice. However, I agree as to the noise and ISO - low-light machine it was not.

might buy a second camera then, still i'm all kinds of happy with the ist DS and i'll stick with pentax in general after owning sony and canon before.

Thanks!

[spiralcity]

Kypfer and steephill gave a few good reco's IMO. I use Fujinon EBC glass quite often and find it to be rathe good, same said for the Pentax M-50, I love that little lens.

You could try the EBC Fujinon 55mm 1.8, the SMC Pentax - A 50mm f2, and the Takumar 55mm 1.8, these may be a tad bit longer than what you are looking for, but with some readjustments in technique you will get great results.

[photogem]

Kypfer and steephill gave a few good reco's IMO. I use Fujinon EBC glass quite often and find it to be rathe good, same said for the Pentax M-50, I love that little lens.

You could try the EBC Fujinon 55mm 1.8, the SMC Pentax - A 50mm f2, and the Takumar 55mm 1.8, these may be a tab bit longer than what you are looking for, but with some readjustments in technique you will get great results.

There are several SMC Pentax M50 lenses, the 1,4, 1,7 and 2 (f2 not so great)
I am astonied you mention the A50/2: It is far inferior to the M50/A50/1,7.
I found both f2 versions pretty bad, also their construction is not up to particular the M50/1,7.

Then I'd rather to for the DA50/1,8 which is light and has a good enough AF.

[spiralcity]

There are several SMC Pentax M50 lenses, the 1,4, 1,7 and 2 (f2 not so great)
I am astonied you mention the A50/2: It is far inferior to the M50/A50/1,7.
I found both f2 versions pretty bad, also their construction is not up to particular the M50/1,7.

Then I'd rather to for the DA50/1,8 which is light and has a good enough AF.

I have np problems with any of the glass I mentioned, I know they are not top of the game but at the price point what do you expect? My M50 is a nice lens, it works well for what I do, and I stand by it, but of course that's my opinion. Construction of the A lenses is definitely not up to par with M. I was offering budget friendly solutions and the A glass is cheap and I think will compete with the Rik he is currently using. The EBC glass and Taks will sell higher. Obviously, there is much better glass on the market, but that was not the point of my post.

The DA50 is another good choice, the more choices the better. Thats what the OP is looking for. He can do the research and decide.
how about adding a M42 Mamiya Sekor 55mm 1.8? I think I seen one for 25.00 on the bay.

[photogem]

This is not some competition about who gives better recommendations.
But some recommendations are not clear (as with your M50) and some I find critical, such as the M50/2 and A50/2 because I find them also too cheaply made, both I had to repair several times and optically with a few cents extra one can go far superior.
So not just a matter of taste but a also a matter of sense + sensibility, won't you agree?

I have no problems with any of the glass I mentioned, I know they are not top of the game but at the price point what do you expect? My M50 is a nice lens, it works well for what I do, and I stand by it, but of course that's my opinion.

Again, there are many M50 lenses and you don't specify which one!

Construction of the A lenses is definitely not up to par with M.

That is only partly true:

The A50/1,4 is one good example, same quality in manufacture as the M50/1,4
The M50/2 (which you might mean?) exists in 2 versions, the late is as bad as the A50/2!!!
But the recommended M50/1,7 is indeed superior to the A50/1,7, not only mechanically but optically that tiny inch as well.

The A70-210 is of a fantastic quality, as good as both M80-200's.

A100/4 macro and M100/4 macro: Same quality! A-version wins (but in price as well)
Some A lenses have no comparison, particular the A50/2,8 macro, one of my very favourite lenses.
If I'd had to choose just one lens to own, this might be the one I'd chose.

I was offering budget friendly solutions and the A glass is cheap and I think will compete with the Rik he is currently using.

Almost any 50mm glass will compete with his Ricoh lens, that is not difficult.
But the M50/1,7 is very cheap to find, IMO a waste to go for the much inferior M50/2

The EBC glass and Taks will sell higher. Obviously, there is much better glass on the market, but that was not the point of my post

Again not the case: There are 55mm Taks which can be found for very little money (But with an adapter, allthough the China-M42 adapter is cheap and fine if fix installed)
I have seen 55mm Taks going for $ 20. Sometimes even with a body.

The DA50 is another good choice, the more choices the better. Thats what the OP is looking for. He can do the research and decide.
how about adding a M42 Mamiya Sekor 55mm 1.8? I think I seen one for 25.00 on the bay.

Yes, that one I think is a great alternative (with green button)
There are sometimes even Tomioka versions of it on the market for reasonable prices.
I have seen one for $25 but battered filterthreads.

[spiralcity]

This is not some competition about who gives better recommendations.
But some recommendations are not clear (as with your M50) and some I find critical, such as the M50/2 and A50/2 because I find them also too cheaply made, both I had to repair several times and optically with a few cents extra one can go far superior.
So not just a matter of taste but a also a matter of sense + sensibility, won't you agree?


Again, there are many M50 lenses and you don't specify which one!

That is only partly true:

The A50/1,4 is one good example, same quality in manufacture as the M50/1,4
The M50/2 (which you might mean?) exists in 2 versions, the late is as bad as the A50/2!!!
But the recommended M50/1,7 is indeed superior to the A50/1,7, not only mechanically but optically that tiny inch as well.

The A70-210 is of a fantastic quality, as good as both M80-200's.

A100/4 macro and M100/4 macro: Same quality! A-version wins (but in price as well)
Some A lenses have no comparison, particular the A50/2,8 macro, one of my very favourite lenses.
If I'd had to choose just one lens to own, this might be the one I'd chose.



Almost any 50mm glass will compete with his Ricoh lens, that is not difficult.
But the M50/1,7 is very cheap to find, IMO a waste to go for the much inferior M50/2



Again not the case: There are 55mm Taks which can be found for very little money (But with an adapter, allthough the China-M42 adapter is cheap and fine if fix installed)
I have seen 55mm Taks going for $ 20. Sometimes even with a body.



Yes, that one I think is a great alternative (with green button)
There are sometimes even Tomioka versions of it on the market for reasonable prices.
I have seen one for $25 but battered filterthreads.

Umm, I don't think I'll join you down this rabbit hole.