Manual Focus Forum

Indeed. Not all that surprising for me. The following are results from an old test of ultra-fast 50's. The Pentax comes out on top (above some very expensive glass). Lower numbers are better:

f/1.2 lenses

Lenses tested -------------f/1.2 -----f/2.8 -----f/5.6 -----Average

Pentax SMC 50mm f/1.2 --------101 -------77 ---------50 --------228
Nikon Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 ------116 -------73 ---------49 --------238
Canon FD 55mm f/1.2 ----------117 -------82 ---------45 --------244
Minolta MD Rokkor 50mm f/1.2 -117 -------75 ---------54 --------246
Canon FD 55mm AL f/1.2 -------117 -------84 ---------51 --------252
Yashica ML 55mm f/1.2 --------124 -------90 ---------51 --------265
Olympus Zuiko 55mm f/1.2 -----125 -------90 ---------60 --------275
Nicon Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 -158 ------107 ---------52 --------317
Leitz Noctilux 50mm f/1.0 ----152 -------97 ---------67 --------316
Konica Hexar 57mm f/1.2 ------166 ------129 ---------58 --------353

The Noct-Nikkor was apparently design for wide-open shooting. Not very well, apparently. Imagine paying $3000 for a Noct-Nikkor and $200 for a Rokkor.

Last edited by cogitech (2008-01-27 13:09:25)

cvig wrote:

Pentax K 50mm f1.8 at f1.8:

I assume you meant the K 85mm f/1.8.  (Looks like a typo - just wanted to clarify.)

@dazed: The 85/1.8 M42 lenses generally run around $400.  They are *very* sharp wide open (and at all other apertures); in regards to CA and bokeh it is good but not perfect.  Especially in regards to longitudinal chromatic aberration, this lens is a typical Pentax showing noticeable green in the background blur.

I agree with carpents regarding the CA and bokeh. Typically, I don't find the CA too bad on the 85mm but it can come up. I'll try some photos outside in the snow. I misplaced my ND4 filter though so it is hard to do right now at max aperture.

LucisPictor wrote:

This is some impressive performance of the f1.2!!!

I am happy with it! In regular photos the depth of field is so small at f1.2 that it is hard to judge sometimes. I was curious how it would compare to the K 85mm f1.8 and I think it did well.

carpents wrote:

cvig wrote:

Pentax K 50mm f1.8 at f1.8:

I assume you meant the K 85mm f/1.8.  (Looks like a typo - just wanted to clarify.)

Whoops. Indeed a typo. Sorry about that!

montecarlo wrote:

Or its the smc Pentax 55mm f:1.8 (I think is the smc Takumar 55mm f:1.8 with a bayonet instead of the screw mount)

By the way, great lens !!! Congratulations.

I am keeping my eyes open for 55mm f1.8 lens at a good price but this was indeed the 85mm f1.8. I have heard good things about the 55mm.

Last edited by cvig (2008-01-27 17:43:55)

I didn't know about the 55mm f1.8 versus f2. But if the M 50 f1.7 is better maybe there isn't much point in buying one. I'll have to think about it.

I'm not sure how often I'll use the f1.2 DOF but I was more curious about low light photography at night. At the price of the 50mm f1.2 though it would probably make sense to upgrade to the K100D for image stabilization and use a 50mm f1.4 instead if things aren't moving in the scene.

I do like the idea of the K10 but I also like the high ISO performance of my DL -- it has the same sensor as the K100 except no stabilization of course. I too think 3200 is good for BW. At first, I kept it on ISO 200 as I was coming from a point & shoot but I quickly realized that up to ISO 800 was great and 1600 was great too if the exposure was very close to correct/desired. So my experience is the same as yours with this sensor.

I am leaning towards waiting until the K20 comes out with the thought that the K10s will hit the used market. It is a hard decision as in the USA the K10 body can be brought up to the end of the month for $509 after a rebate.

On the 50mm f1.2, I don't disagree at all. It was definitely an emotional purchase so I'll see how it goes for now. I am happy with the image quality though.

Last edited by cvig (2008-01-27 20:55:59)

dazedgonebye wrote:

That price on  K10 is just amazing.  I've pretty much decided on a 40D, but for $500 I can hardly resist.

I agree -- it is a steal. There is even a slightly better price. I posted about it in the marketplace forum.

Last edited by cvig (2008-01-27 21:21:27)

Sandeep wrote:

Good to see that the Nikon 50mm f1.2 put in an excellent performance in that test. It's reasonably priced and easily available.

I'm guessing that is a typo but to be clear it's actually the Pentax model. Here is a shot of it (with K 85mm f1.8 wide open):



I am curious about the Nikkor 50mm f1.2 though too as the Noct-Nikkor seems to get most of the attention.

Last edited by cvig (2008-01-27 21:34:33)

Not a typo, I was just looking at the rating of the Nikon 50mm f1.2 in that chart. The pentax version seems to be pretty rare, but you see plenty of the nikon ones on ebay every day. Great lens, I found it ever sharper than my previous champ at this focal range the Tak 55mm f1.8 Super-Multi-Coated.

cvig wrote:

I didn't know about the 55mm f1.8 versus f2.

The 55/1.8 and 55/2 are exactly the same lens (6 element in 5 groups). Pentax needed an entry level standard lens, so it put a limiter ring inside the 55/1.8 and sold it as 55/2.0. On the early versions of the 55/2, the ring can be removed to turn the lens into a full 55/1.8.

Cheers!

Sebastien

Last edited by Sebastien (2008-01-28 02:11:16)

Sebastien wrote:

cvig wrote:

I didn't know about the 55mm f1.8 versus f2.

The 55/1.8 and 55/2 are exactly the same lens (6 element in 5 groups). Pentax needed an entry level standard lens, so it put a limiter ring inside the 55/1.8 and sold it as 55/2.0. On the early versions of the 55/2, the ring can be removed to turn the lens into a full 55/1.8.

Thank you, very interesting!
I didn't know that, but always wondered what the difference may be.

Regarding the above shots:
Am I the only one who thinks that the photos are quite soft?
I know it's wide open, but I think this should be better, at least in the center.
I don't have an f1.2 lens, only an f1.4 lens which is considerably better wide open.

Did some searching to see if I could sell my Zuiko 55/1.2 and buy back another, like the Nikon or the Pentax, thought I'd share it:
Average selling prices:
1: Pentax SMC-A 50mm f/1.2 €350
1: Pentax SMC-K 50mm f/1.2 €250
2: Nikon Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 €250
3: Canon FD 55mm f/1.2 €150
4: Minolta MD Rokkor 50mm f/1.2 €200
5: Canon FD 55mm AL f/1.2 €250
6: Yashica ML 55mm f/1.2 €300
7: Olympus Zuiko 55mm f/1.2 €200
8: Nicon Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 €1000+
9: Leitz Noctilux 50mm f/1.0 €3000
10: Konica Hexar 57mm f/1.2 €150

Too bad FD is such a hassle to convert.... Guess I'll keep my Zuiko for now.

Mark.

blende8 wrote:

Am I the only one who thinks that the photos are quite soft?
I know it's wide open, but I think this should be better, at least in the center.
I don't have an f1.2 lens, only an f1.4 lens which is considerably better wide open.

No, I also think the 50mm f1.2 shot is soft. But it is sharper than I thought it would be after taking some photos with it. I've gotten back the use of my tripod so I will try shooting again just in case blur is an issue (I suspect not). Did you also think the 85mm photo was soft?

I know Buze has one of these and I wonder what he thinks of it these days. There were some tests posted over at the Pentax SLR forum on DPReview in which the A and K versions of the 50mm f1.2 were compared. Wide open, the conclusion was the K was sharper on the edges. I believe both matched on the center.

Here are some photos I've taken with the 50mm f1.2 (linked to Flickr, unfortunately Flickr has a size too small and a size too large for posting in threads):

f1.2, 1/180, ISO 800

100%

f1.2, 1/60, ISO 800

100%

f1.2, 1/250, ISO 800, quick moving kid so focus probably a bit off

100%

Last edited by cvig (2008-01-28 16:42:31)