Should I upgrade? SMC 50mm f2

jasonbenoit · 06-27-2013, 09:59 AM

I have an ME Super SE with a few lenses. One of them is the SMC Pentax 50mm/2. I would exclusively use a 50mm prime lens if I had to. Do you think it's worth it to upgrade to a better 50mm lens, though? I would definitely appreciate the bigger apertures because I'm often using my ME Super in low-light situations, but that's not enough to justify the price for me. Is the image quality that much of an upgrade?

Adam · 06-27-2013, 10:05 AM

The 50mm f1.7 is only about 40 bucks, and I'd say it's worth getting if you also plan to use it on digital.

Reliant K1000 · 06-27-2013, 10:37 AM

I have both the 1.7 and the 2.0. IMHO the 2.0 gives great results - I've used it very successfully for video and used it for many years on my film cameras.

The 1.7 is just that little bit better and for under $50, is a bargain worthwhile seeking out.

One of the best ways of getting old lenses...purchasing a lens/body combination. I bought a nice 105mm macro lens for a bit over $100 and a P3n came with it as a bonus...that's how I looked at it.

Kozlok · 06-27-2013, 10:49 AM

I got a Takumar 55 f2 for around $30 that I feel is a huge upgrade from my 50/2.

civiletti · 06-27-2013, 12:34 PM

The 50/2 is a fine lens if you use it stopped down to f5.6 or smaller. The faster 50's are better at wide aperture, and, of course, allow narrower depth of field if you are into that.

Nesster · 06-27-2013, 12:43 PM

The 50/2 is fine, I don't hesitate to exhange it with a 50/1.7 and see them as equivalent. To get more speed and maybe a bit better lens, you'd have to go to the 1.4.

jasonbenoit · 06-27-2013, 12:56 PM

I was looking at the 1.4 (going from 2 to 1.7 isn't really dramatic enough for me) but if it's only maybe a bit better, I'll hold off. Thanks guys.

**TomB_tx** · 06-27-2013, 03:42 PM

I have a few f1.4 Pentax lenses, but for overall image quality I prefer the f1.7!

Nesster · 06-28-2013, 06:07 AM

Originally posted by jasonbenoit

I was looking at the 1.4 (going from 2 to 1.7 isn't really dramatic enough for me) but if it's only maybe a bit better, I'll hold off. Thanks guys.

See the test results...

**paulh** · 06-28-2013, 06:26 AM

I think the 50/2 is a fine lens, sharp when stopped down with rich saturated colors. But the 50/1.7 to me is dramatically sharper at the wider apertures, with much nicer bokeh. To me it's a huge bargain at $40-$50.

06-27-2013, 09:59 AM	#1
jasonbenoit New Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 3	Should I upgrade? SMC 50mm f2 I have an ME Super SE with a few lenses. One of them is the SMC Pentax 50mm/2. I would exclusively use a 50mm prime lens if I had to. Do you think it's worth it to upgrade to a better 50mm lens, though? I would definitely appreciate the bigger apertures because I'm often using my ME Super in low-light situations, but that's not enough to justify the price for me. Is the image quality that much of an upgrade?

06-27-2013, 10:05 AM	#2
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,594	The 50mm f1.7 is only about 40 bucks, and I'd say it's worth getting if you also plan to use it on digital. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Should I upgrade?	gifthorse	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	2	11-27-2012 03:18 PM
Should I upgrade?	chattphotos	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	11-02-2012 11:09 AM
what should i replace my smc fa 50mm f1,4 with	indeo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	07-11-2012 10:13 PM
Should I upgrade?	MacroStuff	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	7	12-03-2011 12:10 AM
Should I upgrade my monitor	Javaslinger	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	3	08-11-2011 07:16 AM

06-27-2013, 10:37 AM	#3
Reliant K1000 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: BC - On the 49th parallel Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 235	I have both the 1.7 and the 2.0. IMHO the 2.0 gives great results - I've used it very successfully for video and used it for many years on my film cameras. The 1.7 is just that little bit better and for under $50, is a bargain worthwhile seeking out. One of the best ways of getting old lenses...purchasing a lens/body combination. I bought a nice 105mm macro lens for a bit over $100 and a P3n came with it as a bonus...that's how I looked at it.

06-27-2013, 10:49 AM	#4
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	I got a Takumar 55 f2 for around $30 that I feel is a huge upgrade from my 50/2.

06-27-2013, 12:34 PM	#5
civiletti Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Oregon Photos: Albums Posts: 1,435	The 50/2 is a fine lens if you use it stopped down to f5.6 or smaller. The faster 50's are better at wide aperture, and, of course, allow narrower depth of field if you are into that.

06-27-2013, 12:43 PM	#6
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	The 50/2 is fine, I don't hesitate to exhange it with a 50/1.7 and see them as equivalent. To get more speed and maybe a bit better lens, you'd have to go to the 1.4.

06-27-2013, 12:56 PM	#7
jasonbenoit New Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 3 Original Poster	I was looking at the 1.4 (going from 2 to 1.7 isn't really dramatic enough for me) but if it's only maybe a bit better, I'll hold off. Thanks guys.

06-27-2013, 03:42 PM	#8
TomB_tx Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,446	I have a few f1.4 Pentax lenses, but for overall image quality I prefer the f1.7!

06-28-2013, 06:07 AM	#9
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	Originally posted by jasonbenoit I was looking at the 1.4 (going from 2 to 1.7 isn't really dramatic enough for me) but if it's only maybe a bit better, I'll hold off. Thanks guys. See the test results...

06-28-2013, 06:26 AM	#10
paulh Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: DFW Texas/Ventura County, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 33,253	I think the 50/2 is a fine lens, sharp when stopped down with rich saturated colors. But the 50/1.7 to me is dramatically sharper at the wider apertures, with much nicer bokeh. To me it's a huge bargain at $40-$50.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search