|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
09-04-2010, 07:54 PM
|
| |
I have been going through this same thing for a little while now. I have been using an ist D and lately and ist DS for a few years, and lazily the kit zooms and an FA zoom telephoto. I was always less than thrilled with my pictures. I had old pentax lenses from years ago, and I finally dug them out and also bought a few others. I can't believe I was so lazy for a few years.Your product is so much better with the fixed lengths. Here are some observations I've made. I'm not expert, this is just what I've observed so far trying to do what you are thinking.
1) 50mm's - I have made a series of shots with a pair of M50/1.7's and one A50/2. I can find no real difference in the contrast and image between any of them. For the price and slightly more functionality, I'd get an A50/2 to start. I think they suffer only from the lack of cachet of not being "sub-2." Seems like an excellent lens to me. If I get a good deal on an A/1.4 or something, sure, I'll step up, but that A/2 works really well.
2) I just got a K50/4 macro. OMG. This is one amazing lens. Sharp. I have done no head-to-head tests yet, but from the first results I don't see a huge difference vs. the other 50s above f5.6 in contrast and image. The sharpness is amazing, and the macro feature is so much fun. As a daytime camera it's really, really neat. The sharpness also pays off in the viewfinder. It is nowhere near as hard to focus as the others. You know when it's on even without an aftermarket focusing screen. I want to get a doubler for this so I can use it in macro and telephoto and extends its usefulness. This is going to be my 80% of the time lens, the one married to the camera. You can't do those narrow DOF creative shots with this, but boy does it do everything else well.
3) I have two Pentax 28s (the 2.8 and 3.5). They take great pictures but I still prefer the 50s for walking around. I grew up with SLRs and I just expect to have to move about to frame a picture. Sometimes you obviously can't do that, but an inexpensive 18-55mm kit zoom is not bad for those situations.
4) The off brand zooms (Hanimex (Cosina oem) and the branded Sears, (Toyo I think it is oem the one I have) etc.,) are not impressive - about the same quality as a kit zoom or other autofocus zoom in my opinion. I would not bother with manual focus zooms. I am sure there may be something exceptional out there from the top-flight makers, but I would not mess much with a zoom that closely overlaps your kit. It likely won't outperform it.
5) I like a fixed telephoto, and 135mm is good for that on digital. At the moment, I just have cheap Hanimex 135/3.5 and it works well for the occasional time I use that. I used to have a Pentax M 135/3.5; don't know what happened to it. Eventually I will get a Pentax and compare head to head. But for as cheap as these are, just get an off-brand 135mm to play with.
So I would say grab a Pentax-A 50/2 first. They are incredibly easy to find and much cheaper than most others. If you ever find a K50/4 macro affordably, grab that.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-28-2010, 01:26 AM
|
| |
When you say "blown away" what are you comparing it to? A kit lens? Or another 50mm? I don't have an apples-to-apples comparison for you, but I will in a week. I have a K 55mm/1.8 on the way, and I have two M 50/1.7s and an A 50/2. These I have had for almost two decades, though only know really using on DSLR and comparing critically. I also have a K 50/4 Macro on the way.
This is what I am finding as I grow my 50(-ish, counting the 55) collection.
Between the two M50/1.7s I have no difference. Between the M 50/1.7 and the A 50/2, I see no difference, just like what m42man just said - I see nothing special in the M 50/1.7 and I have two copies I've tried. It's good, very good. But no different vs. a 2 except the f-stop. But based on "buzz" I am really excited to see what the 55/1.8 does and the 50/4. From what I can extrapolate the 55/1.8 should be much more interesting than the 50/1.7.
As to metering, I find my A 50/2 and M50/1.7s meter exactly the same in AV for the A and stop-down with the M. I have run some tests on that at every f-stop. Maybe there is something peculiar about the 55/1.8? Anyway, I am going to do some head-to-head comparisons in about a week.
I am betting what I will eventually do is get an A 50/1.4, and keep that and the K 50/4 macro, sell the others. I bet I will keep the 55/1.8 for novelty value. That is my bet now; we'll see how it plays out in a month's time and lots of tests.
I feel that way, too. I bet in a year or two I will spring for one and be overjoyed.
|
