| Author: | | New Member Registered: November, 2006 Location: Utah Posts: 1
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 28, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Fast aperture, superb image quality, fast focus | | Cons: | None | |
This is one lens I wish I had not sold. I've had the F1.4, F1.7 and F2.0 versions of this series and the F1.7 would be my preference. Sure, you lose almost one stop over the F1.4, but I found that the bokeh was equal to the F1.4 and the color rendition / accuracy was better with the F1.7. There was a certain "feel" about the F1.7 especially with natural light; the tones were accurate and not over saturated like you sometimes get with the F1.4.
I highly recommend the F1.7 for portraits and close-focus work. It's also light weight and very well balanced on digital or film bodies.
| | | | | | | Senior Member Registered: August, 2007 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 233
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 12, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $155.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Fast. Super Sharp Wide Open. Light. Autofocus. | | Cons: | none | |
I have owned so many 50mm's (and multiple samples of almost all of them). The M1.4, M1.7, A1.7, FA1.4, DFA2.8 as well as numerous 3rd party 50's.
This one is the best.
Wide open, this lens will beat any 1.4 in terms of sharpness up to f2.8. After that, it is about even. This lens is a bit cooler in color than the 1.4, but I like that. Some prefer the bokeh produced by the 8-blade 1.4, but I personally think the 1.7 still renders out of focus beautifully.
Compared to the DFA 50mm f2.8 Macro, it is about the same in terms of center sharpness. The macro has the added benefit of excellent corner and edge sharpness. However, the macro is a large lens (almost double in size and weight) and it is slower. The macro is much more a special purpose lens.
Optical formula-wise, all the 1.7's are almost the same. The F and FA have autofocus, and life is just a bit easier with autofocus. However I have found the FA version to perform even better than the M and the A versions. The reason for this is that the FA1.7 and the FA1.4 are identical in size. (Normally the 1.4's are larger lenses). This results in the FA1.7 having a recessed front element almost like some macro lenses. (It is quite a bit recessed). The result is a built-in hood effect which helps increase sharpness and contrast even without a hood. In fact, this is one of very few lenses where adding a hood only gives a very marginal improvement. I'm not sure about the F version (I think it is also similar).
This lens took me a very long time to find (thanks Tom! for giving me a great deal), but of all the 50's definitely my favorite.  | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: December, 2007 Posts: 8,237
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 7, 2008 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Extremely sharp at all apertures, especially larger | | Cons: | none | |
Found this lens in a local store and almost didn't buy it, because I already have the FA 50 1.4. Boy, am I glad I did. It's sharper at the lower apertures than the FA 50 1.4 - 1.7 and 2.0 are sharper. After that, it evens out.
Because of it's incredible performance at the lower f-stops, this has become by go-to low light lens now, replacing the Fa 50 1.4. I mostly use the 1.4 for when I absolutely need 1.4, or want it's special bokeh.
Very highly recommended.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2008 Location: Florida Posts: 514
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 13, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $175.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp! Quick focus, fast, Monet masterpiece bokeh | | Cons: | hard to find, Monet masterpiece bokeh | |
I will never sell this lens. Wonderful performance all around. Useful focal length. This is the lens on my camera by default. Love it. Only comes off when I need zoom versatility or longer focal length.
The color saturation is very satisfying and the sharpness is consistant through the entire aperture range from edge to edge of the frame. You just have to learn to manage the depth of field to master it.
The bokeh is the debate for this lens. It renders out of focus backgrounds like a Monet painting. It is not creamy smooth, but neither is it harsh and distracting in most conditions (wide open it can be a tad obnoxious). I like it a lot. The rendering is very unique in that people have at first glance mistaken some of my portrait work for paintings rather than photographs. I don't know if that's good or not, but it makes for interesting discussions and its pictures get attention & generate more work for me. That says something.
Frankly, I like the bokeh a lot for it's uniqueness and for the fact that background often sets the stage giving context to a scene. Creamy smooth color transitions can make an exciting portrait into a plain picture. Besides, if you find it a bit harsh, a little software work can fix it in a snap, however it's significantly more difficult to bring definition out of a background that is too soft.  | | | | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2007 Location: Chicago Posts: 24 | | Review Date: February 15, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $90.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharpness and color rendition | | Cons: | Possibly a bit narrow field on digital | |
This is by far my favourite lens, on my ist DL it made a world of diffrence, I always used this for portraits, on my K20, I am so stunned by the IQ with the kit lens that it seems to narrow the gap between lenses. I have to say that I find mine to produce the highest quality images at the 2.8 f-stop setting, could just be me though. All of my pentax-using friends now own this lens as well.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: May, 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Posts: 6,513
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 29, 2009 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | two of the sharpest "50mm" | | Cons: | | |
as mentioned, this one of the sharpest 50mm ever made. the FA50/2.8 macro is the sharper one and got the best bokeh rendering but the 1.7 has a 1 stop and a third advantage over the 2.8. that is a lot of light and OOF isolation factor.
also, at f2 sharpness and f2/8, it is equal to that of the FA35/2. except that the 50/1.7 has a brighter exposure than the 35.
| | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2009 Location: Toronto Posts: 24
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 21, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $130.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharp, flat field | | Cons: | slow af performance | |
only knock it by 1 because it's slow af performance same with the fa 50mm 1.4. they aren't da lenses so can't expect much from old technology besides the resolving power of the glass.
this is very contrasty, sharp, and excellent for portraits. i match this on my k20d and its deadly.
this is an impressive 50mm lens provides good value to get the most out of your sensor.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: August, 2009 Location: Lapu-Lapu City Cebu Posts: 14 | | Review Date: May 25, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | very good for portraiture | | Cons: | no lens hood | |
this is a must for portrait shots the details are very sharp/fine - i have tested it with my new k-x and it blends well with it - i have to experiment more with this lens @ slow shutter speed on a landscape to see how far this would go...
The only thing i don't know if this lens can be attached or have a lens hood with it?
Over- All - i rate it @ 8.75 because of it's quality and price
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2009 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 317
6 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 8, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Corner Sharp Wide Open, very usable wide open, AF lock is confident. | | Cons: | The bokeh against its 1.4 cousin. AF isn't always correct. | |
The rare FA 50mm F/1.7
She can produce some pretty nice corner sharp results wide open.. which is this lenses primary appeal I suppose. However when the time came to move from the FA to the DA, the 6 aperture blades of the 1.7 didn't quote produce the bokeh effect of the 8 blades in the 1.4.. thus the 1.7 was discontinued. Wide open (both at 1.8) she is sharper than the 1.4 but lacks the bokeh.
This was taken with the 1.7 at F1.8
This was taken with the 1.4 at F1.8
The 1.4 produces a better Bokeh while the 1.7 is sharper in focus.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: January, 2010 Location: Md Posts: 33 | | Review Date: November 5, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Small, light, fast AF, Tack Sharp, Low Price | | Cons: | None | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
| |
This lens is a beast. I've had it for several months now and love it. I bought it at a local camera shop that deals mostly with Canon and Nikon. It was mounted to a cheap Pentax film camera - paid $80 for both. The body is worth about $30, which means I paid $50 for the lens! I couldn't believe it when I saw it.
It performs extremely well and nicely complements my DA 18-55 II and DA 55-300. I also own the M version of this lens and as another poster said the optics are about the same but you get auto-focus.
| | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2010 Location: bronx Posts: 6
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 3, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Close focus, low light | | Cons: | None | |
I was into SLR in the 70's and sold my film camera in 2001. Manly used point and shoots. Was never happy with the results. I am a pixel peeper LOL.
But enjoyed the small size of the point and shoot zooms.
In those days film canisters had muliple uses..LOL
But I broke down and got the K-X on sale in New Jersey for $400.00.
Great camera. its nice using an slr again.
I started buying alot on the old Takumars on ebay but hated using the adapter. I then moved to the M w/ k mount but liked the automation of the A lenses.
But now I'm hooked on Autofocus. I leave the focus point set on center. Old school
So I have bought and sold about 40 lenses on ebay since August looking for the perfect fit. Taking comparason shots. My wife calls it the lens fiasco.
My dinning room looked like a camera store for awhile.
I bought this lens on ebay with a bunch of lenses. the seller was a pawn shop that did not no how to list the item correctly. Lucky me. But to be fair I have ended up with a lot of junk on ebay as well. But I can't list what I feel I paid for it. If I had to replace it I would pay $200.00.
I get really amazing shots indoors with my k-x at iso 1600 at F1.7
The sharpness wide open is amazing.. The auto focus hunts a little put locks in great. I always use a lens hood.
I have the 50mm a f1.4 which is collecting dust since I got this.
I am keeping..
Pentax A 50mm 1:1.4
Sigma 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 APO (HAS PROBLEMS) WORKS ONLY AT INFINITY
Pentax 50mm FA 1:1.7 auto focus
SMC Pentax-F 80-200mm F4.7-5.6 REALLY SHARP
SMC DA L 55-300mm f/4-5.8 ON ORDER FROM CANADA FOR $220.00
Great Forum...
Matt | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2010 Posts: 753 | | Review Date: June 4, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | compact, fast, sharp, fast af, price, bokeh | | Cons: | manual focusing, not so useful focal length on dslr | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
| |
...as some reviewers above I have to agree that this lens is outstanding value. To my naked eye it is sharp as 43 limited. Objects in focus pop out. Slightly on colder side of overall colour cast. Fast autofocus. Bit less contrast than DA*50-135 and 43 limited.
All in all - good buy.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2011 Posts: 118
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 7, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $350.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | sharpness, bokeh, compact size | | Cons: | manual focus | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: New
| |
I bought this lens new in box, many moons ago, for about $150, can't remember exactly how much.
Looking at ebay lately, I see that price has jumped like other Pentax lenses.
Much like M50/1.7, it is a sharp little lens. Sharper wide-open than 50/1.4, up to about f2 or f2.8. I would not use FA50/1.4 wide open but this lens is very usable at f1.7.
Love to bring this lens along when low light shot is required. The only drawback is, like most AF lenses, small focusing ring is a challenge to manually focus.
Same optical spec as F50/1.7, but interestingly this is one of odd lens where FA version is rarer than the F, as many have reported.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: April, 2011 Location: near Berlin Posts: 9
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 24, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | IQ, size & weight, fast AF, bokeh wide open | | Cons: | a bit soft up to f/2.2, bokeh stopped down | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
| |
In 80% of all cases I use this lens and I can rely on it. IQ is very fine maybe a bit warm but I like it. Wide open the bokeh is fine but the sharpness is not best. Stopped down a bit it is quiet sharp but the bokeh... It can be a bit nervous. CAs are well controlled but sometimes too visible. I won't miss this lens. As hood I use that one from the smc M 85/2. Fits great!
Paul
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: January, 2009 Location: Rochester, MN Posts: 765
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 25, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $300.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, compact, 3D effect, warm FA rendering, CA resistance | | Cons: | Micro-contrast not as good as FA 43, getting pricier, durability | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 9
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K5
| |
A classic lens. Though price is much higher than a few years ago, still worth it at current prices ($250-300 used) IMO. Has the classic warm FA rendering, with great 3D subject pop. I like the focal length on APS-C (essentially a very short telephoto) for indoor portrait shooting; it's a little long for a walk-around "normal" lens on APS-C. Some argue that FA 50/1.4 beats it in bokeh; I personally found that the FA 50/1.7 rendered OOF areas beautifully. AF was fast, but not lightning. The sharpness is great across the frame, but the degree of micro-contrast at pixel peeping levels isn't up to par with the FA 43 limited, giving the latter the appearance of being sharper. Overall this was a great lens, which I felt fortunate to acquire. While I replaced it with an FA 43, it's the one lens I've had any regret about parting with. Very highly recommended. Get one if you can.
| | |
;)
;)
