[Klaus]

A shaky, old marvel ...

http://www.opticallimits.com/pentax/906-...50f28macro

[Schlimperdibix]

I'm glad I just got used FA 50/2.8 macro which combines the same optical design with the excellent build quality of the good-old FA macro lenses.

 

Btw, great review!

[davidmanze]

The sharpest Pentax lens ever according to many, a bit of a shame about the level of build quality, maybe Schimperdibix was right getting the previous FA copy!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/124690178@N08/

[robbiec]

This lens is one that has stood out for me as crying out for a refresh for a long time, be it body only and rounded Aperture blades like the DFA100WR macro or something more substantial with rounded Aperture blades, HD coatings, DC motor and WR body and a focus limiter. A bit of a sleeper in the Pentax line up unless you have tried it.

[Guest]

Thank you for this review. I have waited for it for the longest time, not that I needed it. I have it after What Digital Camera stated that it is even sharper than the DFA 100 macro, which at that time I have already owned.

 

The only disappointment is the AF accuracy at distance above 10M or so. I have to snap a couple of times with refocusing just to make sure I have one sharp image. Strangely this is less of a problem at macro range. I know people will tell me this IS a macro lens and should be used as such but I do not have the luxury to own both the DA* 55 and this lens.

 

The DFA 100 on the other hand has no such focusing problem, so you can't say that this is a common trail for macro lenses.

[JJ_SO]

"a bit of a shame about the level of build quality", "I have to snap a couple of times with refocusing just to make sure I have one sharp image." "I'm glad I just got used FA 50/2.8 macro which combines the same optical design with the excellent build quality of the good-old FA macro lenses."

 

Wow. A highly recommended lens… I'm sure, I'm totally wrong and I'm also sure it's only early morning because I can't detect the 4 ½ ☆ in most of the sample pictures. Maybe, if I staid with Pentax, I also would be satisfied with such a hmmm, hey, why not call it "lens"? I never find out. But if a mechanical crappy thing gets this kind of marks, the earlier version must fly beyond the 5 ☆ horizon?

[Klaus]

"a bit of a shame about the level of build quality", "I have to snap a couple of times with refocusing just to make sure I have one sharp image." "I'm glad I just got used FA 50/2.8 macro which combines the same optical design with the excellent build quality of the good-old FA macro lenses."

 

Wow. A highly recommended lens… I'm sure, I'm totally wrong and I'm also sure it's only early morning because I can't detect the 4 ½ ☆ in most of the sample pictures. Maybe, if I staid with Pentax, I also would be satisfied with such a hmmm, hey, why not call it "lens"? I never find out. But if a mechanical crappy thing gets this kind of marks, the earlier version must fly beyond the 5 ☆ horizon?

 

These images are heavily post-processed (mentioned in the sample section actually) and compressed by Dean.

 

I would have chosen a less aggressive approach and higher quality settings but I didn't plan to shoot any field images in the first place. Thus I am grateful that Dean provided them.

[JJ_SO]

Would you go as far as to say the sample pictures don't show what the lens is capable of?

 

I know, I'm the party-pooper again and think there's much work behind it. As well as I know, i would never come as close as this to a bee with the 40 mm Micro Nikkor, which I'm pretty impressed of btw., although "only" 3½  ☆. But behind this flattery there's still the little devil telling me "but I would like to see the real performance, not the post-processed, super-compressed one". Sorry, can't switch that off.

[Brightcolours]

 But behind this flattery there's still the little devil telling me "but I would like to see the real performance, not the post-processed, super-compressed one".

https://pixelpeeper.com/lenses/?lens=1061

[Klaus]

https://pixelpeeper.com/lenses/?lens=1061

 

Interesting site - didn't know this one.

 

One of the problem with most Pentax DSLRs is also the AA filter. Pentax has chosen an aggressive approach here thus many images are softer than they should be (except for the K-3 (II) and K-5 IIs). This is also reflected in the LW/PH actually - we will not  push the conversions settings beyond a certain degree thus the max. LW/PH are comparatively low.

 

However, you can't blame the lenses for this.