Why use Pentax?

Started Mar 18, 2013 | Questions thread
Alex Sarbu Veteran Member • Posts: 8,862
Re: Why use Pentax?

ultimitsu wrote:

Why criticize Pentax for having a 50-135mm f2.8?

I am not criticising Pentax for having it. I am just saying pentax goes out its way to make lenses of unconventional FL to avoid comparison.

You may be saying it but that doesn't make it true.

I am not saying it is a bad thing, i am just saying that is what it is, and it is true.

Unless you can show some proof (which you don't have, but it would be interesting to watch you trying), I'll call that BS.

I will apply Occam's razor principle and choose the simplest and most logical reason for making a 50-135mm: to have on APS-C approx. the same angles of view as a 70(80)-200 on FF.

For FF 35mm film 70-200 is a common zoom range developed over the years because it suits a lot of photographic needs for different filds of view.

Well, I dont see it like that. Beside 70-200 there is also 70-300, 75-300, 100-400 and 80-400, they all seem to be selling OK, 70-200 on a APs-C is just like a lens between 75-300 and 100-400 on FF. Many canikon aps-c users use them and love that FL.

Put it simply, I would much prefer to this one lens solution than a 50-135 + a 200mm prime for both the convenience and the cost saving.

The 43/1.9 was designed to have the same FL as the image circle of FF 35mm lenses, making it - by a common definition of the term - the only true "normal" lens. Again, this was designed for the benefit of users.

43mm on apsc is like 65mm on FF, It is indeed a weird FL, I have never seen a 65mm prime on FF. for 50mm effective FOV most aps-c users use 30mm or 35mm lens, 35mm lenses are plenty and sigma makes a 30mm DX lens. So by making a 43mm, Pentax is indeed go out its way to make it hard to compare.

You were already told the 43mm is a full frame lens from the film era. It is a true normal, its focal length corresponding to the small format frame's diagonal. It was also made in Leica mount, that should say something about its quality.

OTOH most lenses' focal lengths are not precisely specified, but rounded up/down. Guess what: a 50mm might not have a FL of exactly 50mm.

The FA 31, 43 and 77 are widely regarded as among the very best lenses produced.

I am sorry but this is the first time I heard that they "are widely regarded as among the very best lenses produced". A quick check on photozone shows that 77mm and 43mm both have very weak corner performance and rather bad purple fringing, Canon and nikon 85 f1.8G both beat 77 in performance and price. Nikon's 50 F1.8G would both beat 43mm in performance and price (no comparable canon in that price/speed class).

Oh, really?

First, the numbers are not directly comparable (Klaus specifically says so). Keeping that in mind, the 43mm as tested on the K10D is very sharp once stopped down a little, and while the 77mm 's corner can only catch up at ~f/4-5.6, what would you shoot with it so that it would matter?

For those wanting more technically "correct" lenses, there are alternatives. The 40mm Limited and the 70mm Limited, both pancakes delivering very high center to corner resolutions even wide open. They're cheaper, too (but not cheap - having full metal construction).

Yet there are photographers who likes the old Limited better, for their non-resolution characteristics.

31mm is pretty good but at 1100 USD it is very expensive for a F1.8. Canon 35mm F2 probably beats it in performance and price, Nikon has a 35 F1.8G that cost about 1/5 the price although not exactly a star performer. both canon and nikon offer a high end 35 F1.4 which the pentax just cannot compare.

And now, you skipped looking over Photozone's tests? How... convenient.

This is not taking into accounr there is now a supereme sigma 899 USD 35 F1.4.

If Pentax designed them of unconventional FL to avoid comparison it was to save other makers embarrassment, not because Pentax was afraid of being compared.

I once heard a Russian say exactly that about the quality of Lada compared to Japanese cars. Cute.

Why are you mention those crudely made, unfinished, unreliable cars when talking about Pentax?

You are not a Pentax user. You obviously don't know much about Pentax, nor are you interested in finding out things (otherwise you would ask questions). Are you posting here to convince Pentax users that their cameras and lenses are at Lada's level?


 Alex Sarbu's gear list:Alex Sarbu's gear list
Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax K-1 Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited +6 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow