| Author: | |
Forum Member Registered: September, 2007 Location: Upstate NY Posts: 77 | | Review Date: September 15, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $10.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharp and Cheap, usable with DSLRs without having to stop down meter | | Cons: | Plastic buiild | |
I really like this lens, I have both it and the M variant, and subjectively it seems the a version is sharper. It seems a touch soft at f2, but I get great results from f2.8 onwards. I love being able to use all my modes on the K10D, and to be able to control the aperture from the body. For $10, I couldn't go wrong.
Here's a sample photo, with a little USM in PSCS2, but not much at all.
(Non working link removed)
| |
| |
| | |
Senior Member Registered: July, 2008 Location: montreal Posts: 136 | | Review Date: July 29, 2008 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | small,very sharp when stopped down | | Cons: | nothing really | |
I don't know why people don't likethat lens,i bought it several years ago when i had a K1000 and still use it on my DS2.It's a very sharp lens at f-stop that i use (from f/8 to f/16),sure it's soft at f/2.0 so not as sharp as the 1.4 and 1.7 version stopped at f/2.0...that's maybe why it don't gets some good reviews!
It have a warm color cast (it was present on my slides also),but that's ok.
Cheap $ sharp ,small good buy even if it's not THE best  | |
| | |
Veteran Member Registered: April, 2008 Location: Minnesota Posts: 1,529 | | Review Date: July 24, 2008 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Cheap, easy find, small, | | Cons: | none | |
I really don't know why this lens gets a bad rap. This was my first non-AF lens that I used and I think it performs great. For anyone starting out like me this lens is easy to get a hold of and even easier to use because of the "A" setting.
 | |
| | |
Veteran Member Registered: January, 2008 Location: Florida Posts: 514 | | Review Date: April 26, 2008 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Build quality, sharpness, price | | Cons: | less pleasing at f2 | |
This is a very underrated lens. It is wonderfully sharp and actually compares in quality to the 1.7 model at f8. That's outstanding! The flare and sharpness degrade from f4 to f2, but shooting that wide open can be avoided in many cases.
The bokeh is not ideal, but acceptable.
Build quality: I've had both the 1.7 and the 2.0 open for maintenance and I can say for certain that the build quality of the 2.0 is better than the 1.7. Hands down.
Neither has bad build quality out of the box, but many of these lenses are approaching 30 years old, so you've gotta bet that whatever used sample you get might have been dropped or tossed around a closet countless times. If the lens was heavily used, it will be a bit loose.
Overall, if you are on a budget (as I usually am) and want a fine 50mm lens for super low investment, don't hesitate to pick one of these up. Waaaay better than the kit lens in sharpness and color.
| |
| |
| | |
| | | Review Date: April 6, 2008 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | very well constructed; good image quality; durable | | Cons: | | |
This lens has produced great results for me on both film and digital. I now have the f/1.7 version, which is better, but only really noticed when open wide.
| |
| | |
Junior Member Registered: February, 2008 Location: St louis MO Posts: 42 | | Review Date: February 16, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | It's a great value, and will best most zoom lenses costing quite a bit more in image quality | | Cons: | soft at the edges untill stopped down to about F8 | |
I use this lens for landscape, and stiched panoramas.
I'm actually supprised at just how sharp it is.
However to get decent results when stitching multiple images I need stop down to F:8, or the edges are just too soft. It actually seems to be sharper than My 28:2.8 A
As for the build quality: it's a 30 dollar lens.
| |
| | |
Senior Member Registered: December, 2007 Location: Perth Australia Posts: 293 | | Review Date: January 11, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Natural color transmission. Excellent bokeh. | | Cons: | Plastic. Manual focus. | |
I have found this to be the ideal indoor portrait lens. Very good skin tone transmission with a focal length that preserves the rounded contours of the human face. Good DOF of about 30cm at 1.5 metres produces sharp head shots with soft background.
Manual focus on K100d is fast and easy and less 'finnicky' than the faster 50mm lenses.
There appears to be a variation in quality of these models to explain the many bad reviews - or a variation in the reviewers!
| |
| | |
Senior Member Registered: January, 2007 Location: Phoenix, AZ USA Posts: 165 | | Review Date: June 16, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Very sharp and accurate exposures | | Cons: | None | |
I just acquired this lens from my son's K1000 camera that I bought him in the early 1980's. I also have an M50 1.4 that gets great reviews and several other lenses for my K10D (kit lens, Quanatarays, Vivitars etc.). I never saw any real differences in any of these lenses until I used the A2.0. I immediately noticed the sharpest image I've ever had on my K10 and I do not need any exposure compensation like I do with all of the other lenses. In comparison, my M50 1.4 takes very soft photos at all aperature settings and needs a +.7 EV comp. I wish I could explain this discrepancy given the mediocre ratings above. | |
| | |
New Member Registered: June, 2007 Posts: 5 | | Review Date: June 5, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Cheap | | Cons: | Not as optically good as the 1.4s | |
No, not as good optically as the 1.4 50s from Pentax, but for the price it's still pretty good! You can pick these up for about $20 used, these days, and it's a very usable lens.
| |
| | |
Veteran Member Registered: February, 2007 Location: Phoenix Posts: 1,056 | | Review Date: March 14, 2007 | Not Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | compact, lightweight, | | Cons: | build quality | |
I bought this lens as a stand-in for my Super-Takumar 50/1.4 when I don't feel like dealing with the M42 adapter, manual stopped-down metering, and several-stop EV adjustment the Takumar requires for use. Unfortunately, the A 50/2 is a vastly inferior lens in both build quality and wide aperture optical quality, and I find myself missing the Takumar whenever I use it.
That said, this is a very lightweight (i.e. plastic-bodied) lens that protrudes only a little from the front cowling of my K100D. The ability to adjust the aperture with the dial on the back of the camera body makes this a much more convenient lens to use than older manual lenses, though this convenience comes at the cost of quality.
All in all, I wish I'd saved my money for a better automatic aperture 50.
| |
| | |
Administrator
Site Webmaster Registered: September, 2006 Location: Arizona Posts: 51,595 | | Review Date: January 9, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Cheap and compact | | Cons: | Made of plastic | |
Since this lens is optically identical to the M 50mm F2, there's not much more to say about it. It takes fine pictures, but the plastic built is degrading.
I'm barely recommending it, but it loses 1 rating point because of the plastic.
| |
| | |
Inactive Account Registered: December, 2006 Location: Boise, Idaho Posts: 27 | | Review Date: January 8, 2007 | Not Recommended | Price: $29.00
| Rating: 3 |
| Pros: | It's cheap and lightweight. | | Cons: | Poor performance wide open and doesn't pick up until stopped down to at least f/5.6. Double ugly bokeh. | |
If at all possible save your money for something better such as a 50 f/1.4 or f/1.7. If you're absolutely bucks down then buy it but keep it stopped down in the f/5.6 to f/11 range if possible i.e., buy faster speed film or crank up the DSLR ISO setting.
| |
| | |
Veteran Member Registered: September, 2006 Location: North Idaho Posts: 696 | | Review Date: January 8, 2007 | Not Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 4 |
| Pros: | inexpensive | | Cons: | slow for a 50mm | |
I had two of these lenses, sold one with a K1000 and will sell the other with a MX, (if I ever decide to get rid of the MX). This lens was the standard, default lens sold in the late '70s and early '80s with the K1000 and M series bodies.
The lens is very well constructed but has only average to above average optical qualities. There is not much to recommend this lens, nor much to disparage it either. Doesn't really excite, while neither is it a huge disappointment. Just sort of 'blah'.
If you have great need of a 50mm lens, and you can obtain one for an extremely low price, then it is a worthwhile purchase. However, you would probably be much more happy with one of the various f/1:1.4 or f/1:1.7 50mm lenses that Pentax has produced. Current market prices are an accurate measure of the esteem with which this lens is held.
| |
;)
;)
