HD PENTAX-D FA * 1 at a Glance: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA *

For the provided HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA * lens, many thanks to the PENTAX official representative office in Ukraine. I was lucky to work with the lens the very next day upon arrival of the HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA * in Ukraine.

HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA *

HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA *

HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA * in this review I will refer to it as 'Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA *'.

Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * was submitted 26.02.2018/28.02.2018/XNUMX. Two days later, namely XNUMX was submitted very similar lens - Tokina Opera 50mm F1.4FF for Nikon and Canon mirror systems. According to my data, in fact, Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * and Tokina Opera 50mm F1.4FF are optically the same lens developed by PENTAX RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD. and sold to Kenko Tokina Co., Ltd.

Optical circuits

Optical Optics Similar GIFs Tokina Opera 50mm F1.4FF and HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA *

There is information on the network that claims the opposite, but, as far as I know, the company puts an asterisk only on home-grown lenses of its own design. That is why the new Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * and Pentax HD DFA * 70-200 / 2.8 ED DC AW there is a star, but the new Pentax HD Pentax DFA 24-70 / 2.8 ED SDM WR there is no star, as, most likely, this is a common development with Tamron (look at the optical schemes Pentax HD Pentax DFA 24-70 / 2.8 ED SDM WR и Tamron SP 24-70 / 2.8 Di VC USD G2 and everything will become clear).

Another indirect confirmation that the Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * is Pentax's own development is the inscription on the side of the lens mount 'Made in VIETNAM'. It is reliably known that the main production facilities for the production of Pentax optics are located in Vietnam. The same Pentax HD Pentax DFA 24-70 / 2.8 ED SDM WR manufactured in Japan, most likely not at Pentax factories. I'm sure Pentax users will be able to add a lot of useful information in the comments.

At the time of this writing (end of summer 2018) Tokina Opera 50mm F1.4FF still not on sale. If the lens nevertheless reaches the store shelves, then Nikon and Canon owners will also be able to enjoy certain pleasant moments of the new Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA *. In any case, Pentax and Tokina often collaborate with each other, making together or buying from each other the development of a large number of lenses, for example Tokina / Pentax 50-135 / 2.8, 12-24 / 4, 16-50 / 2.8, 10-17 /3.5-4.5, 35 / 2.8, 100 / 2.8, etc.

The Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * is so far the only fixed lens in the new DFA * star range. Pentax most likely made big bets on this lens, even on the official website separate menu item in site navigation, which tells in detail about this lens.

By the way, Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * has become just second star lens in the line of professional full-frame lenses designed for working with digital cameras (Pentax DFA *). Was the first Pentax HD DFA * 70-200mm f / 2.8 ED DC AW, and therefore it is very important that Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * be the highest quality product.

Star lenses for digital cameras

DA Series *

The series is designed for digital SLR cameras with APS-C sensor (for crop)

Fix Lenses:

  1. SMC Pentax-DA * 55mm 1: 1.4 SDM
  2. SMC Pentax-DA * 200mm 1: 2.8 ED [IF] SDM
  3. SMC Pentax-DA * 300mm 1: 4 ED [IF] SDM

Zoom Lenses:

  1. HD PentaxDA * 11-18mm 1: 2.8 ED DC AW
  2. SMC Pentax-DA * 16-50mm 1: 2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM
  3. HD PentaxDA * 16-50mm 1: 2.8 ED PLM AW
  4. SMC Pentax-DA * 50-135mm 1: 2.8 ED [IF] SDM
  5. SMC Pentax-DA * 60-250mm 1: 4 ED [IF] SDM

DFA * Series (for full-frame SLR cameras):

Fix Lenses:

  1. HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW
  2. HD PENTAX-D FA * 85mm 1: 1.4 ED SDM AW

Zoom Lenses:

  1. HD PentaxD FA * 70-200 / 2.8 ED DC AW
HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA *

HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA *

Sample Photos

All sample photos were taken with a camera. PENTAX K-1 Mark II, on-camera JPEG, picture control mode 'Natural' or 'AUTO' with default (basic) settings. Shadow Compensation: Auto, Lens Correction: On, Vignetting Correction: Auto, Everything Else: Off.

Archive with source files can download from this link (78 JPEG files, 1.2GB).

HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA *

HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA *

My impressions

I had this lens for a short time, so I did not undertake to do a separate full review. But Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * does not need any details, everything is clear with it from the first frames. Over the making of Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * have tried well, in the end we got a great lens.

Most likely the developers followed the path of similar 'large' premium lenses Sony Planar T * FE 50mm f / 1.4 ZA и Sigma 50mm 1: 1.4 DG HSM Artwhich, with all their looks, and especially at the cost, make you quickly understand which lens is in front of you.

I used Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * paired with a brand new one PENTAX K-1 Mark IIon which he looks very organic. Such a bunch during shooting was more felt as a set of a full-frame camera and something like 24-70 / 2.8. I love heavy lenses and do not consider this a significant minus. Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * with its design, weight and dimensions is more like some kind of medium-sized relative, by type Pentax 90 / 2.8 DFA 645 Macro ED AW SRthan a normal fast fifty dollars.

If you find fault with as much as possible, then the tenacity of the auto focus during handheld shooting could be better, but, most likely, this is a question of a bunch PENTAX K-1 Mark II with this lens, as well as my skills with the focusing system of this camera. The number of focusing errors was sufficient for me to pay attention to this. Most of the errors I observed while using AF.C.

I would be interested to see the Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * fighting manual Carl Zeiss Milvus 1.4 / 50 (similar price tag) and Carl Zeiss Otus 1.4 / 55 (the best of the best). I'm sure that nevertheless Carl Zeiss Otus 1.4 / 55 easily outperforms Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * in most optical disciplines.

To summarize, the Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * is big, beautiful, heavy and pleasant. This is a great lens for the job.

For some reason, after the announcement of the Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * I immediately remembered Super-Takumar 1: 1.4 / 50 (who is the 'Planar killer') and I was hoping the Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * would be the next killer of modern fifty dollars, especially after some online reviews. But it will be very difficult to defeat modern heavyweights, of which there are already quite a few.

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.

HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA *

HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA *. The lens is shown on the camera. PENTAX K-1 Mark II

All major versions of similar lenses Asahi Opt. Co., Takumar / Pentax:


  1. SMC PENTAX 1: 1.2 / 50 ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN (7/6, 20947, 1975-1984)
  2. SMC PENTAX 1:1.2/50 ASAHI OPT. CO.,JAPAN'GOLD' (7/6, 1981)
  3. SMC PENTAX-A 1: 1.2 50mm (7/6, 20987, 1984-2004)
  4. SMC PENTAX-A 1: 1.2 50mm Special (7/6, 2000)

1.4 / 50 (video)

  1. Super takumar 1: 1.4 / 50 Asahi Opt. Co., Lens made in Japan (8/6, 358, 1964-1966)
  2. Super takumar 1: 1.4 / 50 Asahi Opt. Co. Lens made in japan (7/6, 37800, 1965-1971, F/2 in number)
  3. Super takumar 1: 1.4 / 50 Asahi Opt. Co. Lens made in japan (7/6, 37801, 1965-1971, F/2 dot)
  4. Super takumar 1: 1.4 / 50 Asahi Opt. Co., Lens made in Japan (7/6, 37802, 1965-1971, comma after 'CO.')
  5. Super-Multi Coated TAKUMAR 1: 1.4 / 50 ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN (7/6, 37902, 1971-1972)
  6. SMC TAKUMAR 1: 1.4 / 50 ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN (7/6, 37908, 1972-1975)
  7. SMC PENTAX 1: 1.4 / 50 ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN (7/6, 20847, 1975-1977)
  8. SMC PENTAX-M 1: 1.4 50mm ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN (7/6, 20867, 1977-1984)
  9. SMC PENTAX-A 1: 1.4 50mm (7/6, 20887, 1984-1989)
  10. SMC PENTAX-F 1: 1.4 50mm (7/6, 20827, 1987-1991)
  11. SMC PENTAX-FA 1: 1.4 50mm (7/6, 20817, 1991-2023)
  12. HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDMAW (15/9, 21260, 2018->)
  13. SMC PENTAX-FA 1: 1.4 50mm Classic (7/6, 2023->)
  14. HD PENTAX-FA 1: 1.4 50mm (7/6, 2023->)

1.8 / 55 (video)

  1. takumar 1:1.8 f=55mm Asahi OPT. CO., Japan (6/5, 1958, zebra)
  2. Auto-takumar 1:1.8 f=55mm Asahi OPT. CO., Japan (6/5, 1958-1960, zebra)
  3. Auto-takumar 1:1.8/55 ASAHI OPT. CO., Lens made in Japan (6/5, 1960, with 'R')
  4. Auto-takumar 1:1.8/55 ASAHI OPT. CO., Lens made in Japan (6/5, 1960-1962, no 'R', oblique lines of the depth of field)
  5. Auto-takumar 1:1.8/55 ASAHI OPT. CO., Lens made in Japan (6/5, 1962, no 'R', straight lines of depth of field)
  6. Super takumar 1: 1.8 / 55 Asahi Opt. Co., Lens made in Japan (6/5, 1962, fine ribs, f/1.8 left)
  7. Super takumar 1: 1.8 / 55 Asahi Opt. Co., Lens made in Japan (6/5, before 1965, fine ribs, f/1.8 right)
  8. Super takumar 1: 1.8 / 55 Asahi Opt. Co. Lens made in japan (6/5, 37106, before 1971, large ribs)
  9. Super-Multi Coated TAKUMAR 1: 1.8 / 55 ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN (6/5, 37104, 1971-1972)
  10. SMC TAKUMAR 1: 1.8 / 55 ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN (6/5, 37108, 1972-1975)
  11. SMC PENTAX 1: 1.8 / 55 ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN (6/5, 20747, 1975-1977)

2 / 55 (1.9 / 55)

  1. Auto-takumar 1:1.9 f=55mm Asahi Opt. Co.,Japan (6/5, 1958-1959)
  2. Auto-takumar 1: 2 f = 55mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan (6/5, 1958-1959, zebra)
  3. Auto-takumar 1: 2 f = 55mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan (6/5, 34100, 1958-1959)
  4. Super takumar 1: 2 / 55 Asahi Opt. Co., Lens made in Japan (6/5, small fins, F/2 left)
  5. Super takumar 1: 2 / 55 Asahi Opt. Co., Lens made in Japan (6/5, small ribs, F/2 on the right)
  6. Super takumar 1: 2 / 55 Asahi Opt. Co. Lens made in japan (6/5, 37103, 1962-1973, large ribs)
  7. Super takumar 1: 2 / 55 Asahi Opt. Co. Lens made in japan (6/5, 37107, additional aperture pins)
  8. SMC TAKUMAR 1: 2 / 55 ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN (6/5, 37109, 1973-1975)
  9. SMC PENTAX 1: 2 55mm ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN (6/5, 1976-1977)


  1. SMC PENTAX-M 1: 1.7 50mm ASAHI OPT. CO., JAPAN (6/5, 20877, 1977-1984)
  2. SMC PENTAX-A 1: 1.7 50mm (6/5, 20897, 1984-1989)
  3. SMC PENTAX-F 1: 1.7 50mm (6/5, 20837, 1987-1991)
  4. SMC PENTAX-FA 1: 1.7 50mm (6/5, 20907, 1991-2004)


  1. SMC PENTAX-M 1:2 50mm ASAHI OPTICAL CO. (5/5, 20677, 1979-1985)
  2. SMC PENTAX-A 1: 2 50mm (5/5, 20697, 1985-1998)


  1. takumar 1:2.2/55 Asahi Opt. CO., Japan (6/5, 1961-1963)
  2. Auto-takumar 1:2.2/55 ASAHI OPT. CO., Lens made in Japan (6/5, 1961-1963)


  1. takumar 1:2 f=58mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan (6/4, 1957-1958)
  2. takumar 1: 2 f = 58mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan (6/4, 1957-1958, labeled 'R')

DA (APS-C: 1.4/55 DA* + 1.8/50 DA)

  1. SMC PENTAX-DA * 1: 1.4 55mm SDM (9/8, 21790, 2008->)
  2. SMC PENTAX-DA 1: 1.8 50mm (6/5, 22177, 2012->)

Asahi-Kogaku (M37x1, 3.5/50 + 2.4/58 -> M42)

  1. takumar 1: 3,5 f = 50mm Asahi-kogaku (4/3, 1952, M37×1)
  2. takumar 1: 3.5 f = 50mm Asahi-kogaku (4/3, 1952, , M37×1, pre-set)
  3. takumar 1: 2.4 f = 58mm Asahi-kogaku (5/3, 1954, M37×1, silver)
  4. takumar 1: 2.4 f = 58mm Asahi Opt. Co., Japan (5/3, 1957-1958, M42)

The lens names in this list correspond exactly to the lens name label on the lens barrel (except for the serial number and/or filter diameter).


The Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * is a truly new round in Pentax optics, designed to meet the needs of modern Pentax full-frame DSLR cameras to the fullest.


  1. premium lens, the first lens in the new generation of Pentax DFA * star lenses
  2. ring-type ultrasonic focusing motor (specially designed for this lens)
  3. fast enough auto focus. In fairness, I should note that the reaction speed of this lens is not lightning fast, and the time for the lens to completely run during focusing from infinity to MDF and vice versa, for example, is one and a half to two times longer than that of Canon EF Lens 50mm 1: 1.4 Ultrasonic 1993 of release
  4. quiet auto focus, but still the noise level is sufficient to in some situations affect the sound track, which is recorded using the microphone built into the camera
  5. good auto focus in live view (depending on the camera used)
  6. continuous manual focus control (the lens supports the Pentax Quick-Shift Focus function, which allows manual focusing even in the automatic [AF] position of the focus mode switch)
  7. focus ring remains stationary during auto focus
  8. convenient manual focus, wide rubberized focus ring. The focus ring pitch is approximately 135 degrees. When extreme positions are reached, the focus ring continues to rotate without affecting the focus.
  9. AF / MF focus mode switch (old Pentax SMC FA 50mm f / 1.4 there was no such switch)
  10. internal focusing (during focusing, the front lens remains stationary, focusing is due to movement of the rear lens group)
  11. dust protection, all-weather protection (moisture protection) of the lens body (7 special protective inserts against dust and moisture are used in the body)
  12. good build quality, metal bayonet mount, convenient focus ring, plastic bayonet mount hood with the ability to install in the opposite direction. The front cover can be snapped into place easily with the hood installed
  13. window with focusing distance in meters and feet
  14. special dust and moisture repellent coating SP (Super Protect) of the front lens
  15. diaphragm with 9 rounded petals, a fairly round hole on the diaphragms from F / 1.4 to F / 3.5 (approximately)
  16. electromagnetic aperture control (mostly very useful during movie shooting for smooth iris control)
  17. no focus shift
  18. Aero Bright Coating II new special enlightenment optics (used in conjunction with the more familiar Pentax HD Coating)
  19. In the optical scheme, an aspherical element is used, as well as several elements with an abnormally low dispersion (an analog of low dispersion elements)
  20. a small MDF equal to 40 cm (usually similar lenses have an MDF equal to 45 or 50 cm)
  21. vignetting is not enhanced when using a sufficiently thick filter (with high sides)
  22. when used on Pentax cameras, a kit with a stabilizer is obtained (the merit of the system as a whole is greater than the lens). I was able to take pictures with my hands on shutter speed 1/6 second, with certain efforts for 1/4 second, using the camera PENTAX K-1 Mark II. At the time of this writing, the Nikon, Canon, and Sony mirror systems did not have the original fifty dollars with a stabilizer, and the only such solution for them was only Tamron SP 45mm F / 1.8 Di VC USD F013
  23. Pentax's original case design, reminiscent of the old-fashioned old-school Pentax lenses
  24. Pentax so far simply has nothing better of such solutions, and therefore the potential owner can be sure that this is really the 'best of the best'
  25. most likely, a lens profile for popular RAW converters, for example, from ADOBE, will soon appear, which will allow you to quickly and accurately correct some optical distortions (distortion, vignetting etc.)
  26. built-in functions PENTAX K-1 Mark II easily correct vignetting and distortion (more merit of the camera, not the lens)
  27. good weight balance with a kilogram camera PENTAX K-1 Mark II
  28. the lens tolerates side and backlight very well
  29. on heavily covered diaphragms you can easily get 18-ray star effect
  30. good, sometimes excellent optical performance. Low or medium levels of basic optical distortion
  31. quite pleasant bokeh (no concentric onion circles, no bright edges of the confusion discs, and also no 'fish scale' effect with well-compensated vignetting in the out-of-focus area). At F / 1.4 at the edges and corners of the image, the discs of confusion turn into 'lemons' and truncated 'lemons'. Let me remind you that the perception of bokeh is a rather subjective factor and this point can easily fall into the 'lens flaws'


  1. heavy weight, 910 grams (955 grams with lens hood). The Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * weighs more than any other 'heavy' autofocus lens at f / 1.4
  2. large sizes (the diameter of the filter is 72 mm instead of the classic 77 mm, which is used by many professional lenses)
  3. no depth of field scale and tags for working in the infrared spectrum (the old model Pentax SMC FA 50mm f / 1.4 tags are available)
  4. strong effect of 'Focus Breathing' (changes in viewing angle during focusing). During focusing towards MDF, the viewing angle decreases
  5. high price, about 1200 dollars (at the same time, for the sake of justice, it is worth noting that the price of Sony Planar T * FE 50mm f / 1.4 ZA more higher)
  6. compatibility problems [1]: fewer compatible cameras due to the presence of an electromagnetic diaphragm. With incompatible cameras, due to the presence of an electromagnetic diaphragm, the lens will always work only at F / 1.4. Some cameras will need to upgrade their firmware for compatibility with iris control with Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA *
  7. compatibility problems [2]: this lens will not work on older cameras that do not support lenses with a built-in focus motor. Some cameras will have to upgrade firmware to be compatible with Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * auto focus
  8. despite the reduced MDF, the maximum magnification factor during macro photography is only 1: 5.56
  9. maximum relative aperture F / 1.4. For example, the Canon system has similar autofocus solutions with an aperture of F / 1.2 (Canon EF Lens 50mm 1: 1.2 L USM) and even F / 1.0 (Canon EF Lens 50mm 1: 1.0 L USM) In such a massive and complex lens I would like to see F / 1.2 and more
  10. F / 4 to F / 16 aperture blurs have the shape of regular polygons
  11. certain optical imperfections. On F / 1.4, the image could be even better, since on F / 2.0 there is still an improvement in resolution, especially in the corners and edges of the image, as well as a decrease in vignetting
  12. There are no modern alternatives for this lens (the Pentax system is more of a problem than this fifty dollars). Unfortunately, even third-party manufacturers such as Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Samyang, Yognuo, etc. do not make autofocus lenses like this for Pentax SLR cameras (perhaps this is a temporary drawback). Due to the lack of alternatives, a potential user will buy a Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * with any price tag that theoretically can be hung on it
  13. in the blur zone, aberrations (frigging, or longitudinal aberrations, coloring the contrast transitions in the blur zone in green and violet colors are noticeable). There is also a slight blooming (bright purple halos around strongly contrasting details in the sharpness zone). A better control of chromatic aberration was expected from such a lens.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram

Add a comment:



Comments: 53, on the topic: Overview of HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA *

  • Н

    How are there no alternatives? And Sigma 50 1.4 ART is also with autofocus

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Sigma 50 / 1.4 ART is only available for Sigma, Nikon, Canon, Sony A and Sony E, and for Pentax it is not available.

  • anonym

    Review on Pentax K1-II wait?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      He has already been seen by all and sundry. Good review from Dima here, I agree with his conclusions.

  • anonym

    It would be interesting to compare with the old SMC PENTAX FA 1: 1.4 50mm and the old manual Carl Zeiss Planar 1,4 / 50 ZK T *

    • Arkady Shapoval

      I saw such a comparison here.

  • Artem

    I didn’t like fifty dollars at all. It seems sharp, but the boke is not impressive. Architecture is so generally its weakest side. even siigma (not art) and it looks better.

  • Pokemon

    Arkady, how do you like the camera itself?
    Pentax promises to shoot at 300 thousand, i.e. at the level of D3s or 1DS mk3.
    By the way, the local Pentax AF system is often scolded by many who held ff Nikona in their hands.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      I shot 2000 shots with it, and after that it turned out to be efficient. Whether it will last up to 300.000 - the investigation will show.
      But I want to point out that 300.000 has never been a problem for the top-end Nikon and Canon of the upper end. For example, the Nikon D3 from 2007 easily passes 300.000, the same Canon EOS 5D Mark II from 2008 easily takes 500.000, and therefore in 2018, 10 years after the release of the same Canon EOS 5D Mark II, I consider it a rather weak indicator to promise guaranteed 300.000 ... But if in reality the average mileage of the PENTAX K-1 Mark II reaches 500.000, this will be a decent indicator. So far, there is not enough sampling for the PENTAX K-1 / K-1 Mark II, and given that the camera has a low burst speed, a small buffer size and is slow to write data to memory cards (only UHS-I bus is supported), such a large the shot will accumulate for many users over the years.
      PENTAX K-1 Mark II camera as a camera, there are many small nuances, maybe there are specific questions about it, I will try to answer. Judging the camera in two or three words is very difficult.

      • Pokemon

        Thanks. Arkady, how did you use a raw converter when processing photos?
        In some photos from K-1 on the flicker, I noticed an emphasis on blue (about the same as on D800 on green). Is everything ok with color in BB cars?
        DD like D800 / D810?

        • Arkady Shapoval

          The review indicates that all photos are on-camera JPEG.
          DD + - as D800 / D810
          Color can always be made good, the only question is the amount of time

          • Pokemon

            I see. Thanks.

      • Reutov Andrey

        I wanted to clarify a bit what the indicator of guaranteed shutter release means. It has little to do with how many frames can be removed without changing the shutter. The figure of 300 guaranteed shutter release indicates that the manufacturer guarantees that all this number of shutter releases will work out the minimum shutter speed specified in the camera’s specifications. In the case of the Pentax K-000 and Pentax K-1 II, a shutter speed of 1/1 s is guaranteed for 8000 operations. How much the shutter is really enough will show the operation of the camera. From my own experience, for example, I met medium-sized Pentax 300D with a shootout of about 000, with a guaranteed shutter release of 645. That is, a 200-fold excess. The guaranteed shutter response rate in the Canon EOS 000D Mark II, as well as in the Canon EOS 50D Mark IV, is 000. In the Nikon D4 and Nikon D5, this figure is 5. That is, top-end cameras from both manufacturers sneak up on this Pentax parameter

        • Arkady Shapoval

          Need to wait.
          Pentax 645D and K1 are not the same thing. When there is reliable evidence that K1 can run 1.500.000, then it will be possible to compare 645D and K1, saying that their operating range is much higher than stated. But again, this requires a large sample. In my experience, any camera can go to mind-blowing performance, even entry-level cameras. In isolated cases - how lucky. Also, I have come across more than once that individual cameras can fail without realizing the declared number of shutter releases.
          There is one more pitfall - the shutter itself is usually very, very tenacious and problems do not appear in it over time. A classic example is the long-suffering old man Nikon D700, in which all three shutter / mirror / diaphragm assemblies are strongly connected, and at 150.000 + - only one eccentric, which is responsible for the operation of the mirror, fails, as a result, for good, the entire module needs to be replaced shutter-mirror. In this case, they also say that "the shutter flew". Also, many other cameras have a lot of problems with the mirror mechanism. Therefore, there is always a fear - the shutter can run on K1 / K1-II and at 300.001 frames work out 1/8000, but what will happen to other nodes? And believe me, there are a lot of them :).
          Then the next question is maintainability. If there are no problems with spare parts for popular brands and their repair, almost any homebrew specialist from the nearest service will disassemble Nikon / Kenon, then will things go so well with Pentax K1 / K1-ii?
          Further it is even more difficult - sooner or later the camera breaks down, given that the Pentax K1 / K1-II are TOP cameras, then will the user be able to count on a quick replacement of the camera with another, as does the service Nikon NPS, Canon NPSwhether something similar works, for example, in the countries of the former CIS.
          I advise you not to fool yourself with shutters at all, shoot as many frames as the situation or desire requires. The thought of shutter mileage shouldn't bother the photographer at all. If the shutter dies or the camera breaks down, the photographer should always be ready for this and have a clearly worked out plan of action. Replacing the shutter is, after all, not so difficult and expensive. I am sure that a professional who allows himself to wear out the valves can easily spend a little money to replace them.

          • Н

            To go nuts! looked at the links to the service at the Olympic Games! K1 is good, but if you consider that k5-2 runs well, then the bomb should be on the K1 shutter in general

            • koba

              excluded! Indeed, my K52 was presented to a friend after 530000, but the K1 has a completely different shutter, which seems to be much more reliable.

          • scif

            I support, I had two long-suffering nikon d700s with different runs and flew to both the mirror lifting mechanism (the camera worked if you turned on and off the liveview - but it was scary), then a second problem appeared - the on-camera flash started to blaze by itself - at least sb- 800, sb900, sb910, sb5000 - this problem was never solved. I had to part with both 700s, but the impressions of the d700 are unforgettable. do not worry about the shutter resistor - shoot

          • stabbing

            Pentax's service is not particularly worse than that of N and K. Moscow and Peter - Myester and Zuma are official dealers. Now we have improved the quality of service, by the way. There are very few complaints.

          • Boris

            I have a 5D mark 2, the shutter was covered when shooting about 40.
            So all these stories about "guaranteed" quantities ...

            • Arkady Shapoval

              If we take the average sample by cameras, then it + - falls under the guaranteed quantity, and in the case of 5dm2 it exceeds

        • BB

          D810 and D850 are NOT top cameras

  • Skai

    Damn, I would take a penthouse at the time, but somehow their full-frame apparatus passed me, only for an astrogide and convenient control I’m ready to forgive everything and everything :-)
    Glass is interesting, just as a working option, quality, reliability, weatherproof - for all kinds of different mixes - fire.

  • zengarden

    Everything seems to be fine, a decent lens, but something doesn’t catch on ...
    PS. Girl with a dove - a great photo :)

    • Onotole

      How did she even catch him?)) O_o

      • Arkady Shapoval

        They somehow catch them all the time. Children :) here's another.

        • Onotole

          I was also a child and I remember for sure that trying to catch a pigeon was a completely useless venture :)

  • Eugene

    Pleased with the lack of longitudinal HA, but the bokeh is somehow uneven;) But the price and weight were not at all pleased.

  • scif

    a nice drawing near the glass))) on a nikon such would be screwed with full compatibility and without glitches

  • spitzer

    I liked the colors, uniformity and plasticity of the blur, like resa throughout the frame. Boke didn’t enter at all, it’s kind of simple ..

  • stabbing

    the fact is that the size of the K mount does not allow making an autofocus lens at 1.2, only a manual one. it exists - A50 / 1.2. was discontinued just a few years ago.
    secondly, the economic component - who will buy optics for 1.2? it won't be cheap. Rico puts out what he can sell and people can buy. from here there are price caps. FF up to $ 2000. and premium optics are not more expensive than other brands, if not cheaper. the photo department is tiny - optimal solutions are needed to survive. and above all cost-effective.
    thirdly, the difference in the depth of field between 1.2 and 1.4 is negligible to bother with the development of such a lens.
    it can be made by the manufacturers of mirrorless cameras, and as for the old Canon 50 / 1.2 - the lens is expensive and optically not outstanding in the open.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      1. The end user should not worry whether the bayonet allows it or does not allow it, he only cares about one thing - the Canon system has 50 / 1.2, 50 / 1.0 (since September 1989!) And two 85 / 1.2 units and all are autofocus. In this case, it is an indicator that the system is already a whole stop somewhere and in some way better.
      2. For example, I would buy optics with 1.2, and indeed the same Canon 50 / 1.2 sells well. In general, it’s not clear to me personally, where is the prejudice that nobody buys optics with 1.2? At the same time, the price tag for Canon 50 / 1.2 is not particularly higher, and averages $ 1400 versus $ 1200 for Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA *. Also often 50 / 1.2 can be bought new significantly cheaper, for example, now by 1300... If we are still talking about price formation, then I have a counter question, if Sigma released its 50 / 1.4 ART for Pentax - who would buy the Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA * if it is twice as expensive as Sigma?
      3. F / 1.2 is not only DOF, in fact, personally, I would be buying the last 50 / 1.2 about DOF. Also, I want to draw attention to the fact that the Canon 50 / 1.2 is quite suitable for practical use in a number of photo tasks on F / 1.2, while its optical imperfections in some situations can play him good, especially in artistic shooting. In the same direction of photography, such an open resolution is not required as in the Pentax 50 / 1.4 DFA *.

      Of course, I understand that these are complex philosophical questions about the system, prices and needs, because, in fact, there are a lot of factors. We’ll wait and see how the system will further develop, Pentax 85 / 1.4 DFA * is coming.

      • stabbing

        1. Of course, the consumer should not worry. But there are technical limitations that cannot be circumvented.
        I had a few fifty kopecks 1.4 and had an A50 / 1.2 - I don't find anything special about 1.2 versus 1.4. Moreover, I sold 1.2.
        2. Why come up with? Sigma is worth https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1045458-REG/sigma_311101_50mm_f_1_4_dg_hsm.html 950 USD. And DFA * 50 / 1.4 - 1197 USD (this is the starting price, after a while it will be slightly lower). The price difference is $ 247. Whence two times ????

        Well, Pentax did this Sigma - that's a fact.

        Nikon does not have autofocus 1.2 for the same reason. Canon has other mount options.
        3. I had other non-autofocus 1.2 fifty dollars. Both Zuyks are 50 and 55. And I did not see anything special in them. This is some kind of fetishism. If anyone has photofetishism, there is no problem finding A50 / 1.2.

        • Arkady Shapoval

          No, the same Canon - 50 / 1.2L system has no fetishism, there simply are no other modern L-series fifty dollars (something close to stellar lenses in this case). Nikon has the same trouble - apart from the 58 / 1.4 with a gold border, there is nothing decent out of the autofocus fifty dollars. By the way, it is believed that autofocus on Nikon 50 / 1.2 is also not done due to the lens mount. The topic has been discussed by Pentax and Nikon many times, but still I am of the opinion that they did not make autofocus 1.2 for other reasons. Nikon will have something from the category 58 / 1.2 or even 58 / 1.0 or even 58 / 0.95 with autofocus under their brand new mirrorless cameras (presumably they will be shown one of these days).

          As for the price of Sigma, I was really a bit wrong. But even now, $ 250 is already a tangible difference.

          As for Pentax 'done' sigma, “the CameraVille” is pretty good at all the videos for Pentax. We need to wait a couple more confirmations.

          • stabbing

            Due to the diameter of the mount, neither Nikon nor Pentax can make an autofocus lens with a speed of 1.2. And Canon for this in 1987 changed the mount. The EF mount, as you know, is not compatible with the older Canon FD standard.

            The diameter of the EOS mount 54 mm, it is specially made so that you can
            produce autofocus mirror optics with aperture of f1.0.
            This is even stated in the technical description on the Canon site.
            And the diameter of the mount K and F is only 44 mm. 1 cm larger than the diameter of the mount.

            Canon's mount diameter is larger than that of the medium-format Mamiya 7 - 49 mm and is close to the Bronika S2A - 57 mm.

            Canon had 1.0 aperture autofocus lenses - EF50mm f / 1.0L USM

            You don’t understand that you cannot put 10 liter 11 liters of water in a bucket?
            I am surprised that you have to tell common truths ...

            • Arkady Shapoval

              In the commentary above, I did not see the common truths, can you please clarify what you had in mind.

              As for the possibility and impossibility of making 1.2 optics for Nikon mount, there is only one correct answer - for certain lenses (in terms of focal lengths) it is possible to do this.

              I used to seriously study this issue, but because of specific thoughts and / or facts:

              1. One of the problems with creating a 50/55/58 f / 1.2 for a Nikon system is the problem of the mounting location of the microprocessor pad. In fact, this is not a big problem, just look at the same Canon 50 / 1.0 in which the platform weighs in the air behind the rear lens and even affects the bokeh. As a good counterexample - for the manual Nikon 50 / 1.2 AIS, craftsmen cut in Lushnikov's Dandelion, it is also a chip to confirm focusing (imitation of pseudo-autofocus, with which the Pentax system has no problems), as well as for automatic exposure metering on younger Nikon DX models (again Pentax has no such problems), as well as to be able to use this lens in any scheme modes available on cameras, from classic P, A, S (TV for Pentax), M to the usual “green mode”. This is how it is done. and no problem.

              2. One of the problems is the installation of the focusing system. There are several solutions for this. The simplest thing is to do internal focusing (namely internal, and not with the help of the rear group of lenses, for which there is really little room for the motor). In this case, the lens will outwardly resemble the same Canon 50 / 1.0 - a thickening of the body from the bayonet towards the front lens. The motor is put on the middle groups of lenses and everything works well. You can also make a conventional screwdriver autofocus drive, and you will get approximately the same as Nikon 85 / 1.4D, in which focusing is due to the rear. A similar problem was encountered during the creation of the Nikon 105 / 1.4, as a result, instead of a large ring motor, a microscopic ordinary compact ring motor with a marigold was installed there.

              3. Reading Nikon's "1000 and One Nights", I came across the opinion of a Nikon engineer that the creation of autofocus optics is technically possible, but Nikon does not do them for commercial reasons, since the existing developments are not profitable for the system. A good example supporting this idea is the fact that Canon stopped producing its 50 / 1,0 and replaced it with 50 / 1,2 for economic reasons. Partially the same goes for the 85 / 1.2 USM and its upgrade to 85 / 1.4 USM. Making 1.2 is not easy, especially if the lens is optically no worse than its counterparts with 1.4. When moving from 1.2 to 1.4, the aperture increases by only a third of a stop, and the weight and size increase disproportionately quickly. The same goes for the price tag.

              4. Also 1.2 is not done due to some problems with modern matrices, which are not able to absorb all the rays coming from the lens. But this is also a rather complicated topic to deploy in a single comment.

              Most likely the same is true for the Pentax system.

              To summarize and summarize: autofocus optics with 1.2, at least for Nikon, can be done, there are no fundamental physical prohibitions on this, and the technical component is quite feasible. The optics themselves are not made, because it is not economically profitable. The size of the mount in this case plays the role of only an aggravating factor.

              • stabbing

                Do you know at least one autofocus lens with a 44 mm mount and a long flange distance? me not.
                Pentax and Nikon essentially have one working length and the same mount diameter.
                so our discussion is interesting, of course, but Nikon will implement his fast aperture lenses on Z mount and very soon. :) although I think it will be expensive.

                so the thing is, I think, in technical limitations.

              • Arkady Shapoval

                I don’t know, it’s true.

              • stabbing

                Nikon’s new Z-mount has a diameter of 55 mm and allows you to design optics with a 0.95 aperture.

          • stabbing

            most likely the new mirrorless Nikon will have a short working length and a large diameter of the mount. thanks to this they will make any optics they need. I think that even SHU lenses with 1.2 will be real.
            that is, with this system they will bypass the limitations of the F mount. which is actually outdated, like K.

            soon announcement - 26 August.

      • Onotole

        What is the general advantage of f / 1,2 over f / 1,4? Is it just 1/3 of a stop (not a “whole stop”) more aperture? I bet no photographer in the world will be able to say 1,2 or 1,4 from a picture, except from an exe. At one stop, the difference is not always perceptible, but here it is only a third (this is even though vignetting with such high-aperture lenses always pulls more than two stops).
        Can you name a case from real life when something could be removed at 1,2 but it did not work out at 1,4 precisely because 1,4?

        • Arkady Shapoval

          With this logic, it turns out that F / 1.4 is not needed, because there is F / 1.7, and F / 1.8 is already nearby, and F / 2.0 is not so far, too, few people will tell.
          The question, addressed to me, is of course insidious. The answer is obvious and negative. I have an additional question and it consists only in whether it is worth the effort and what the result will be.
          So, regarding 1.2 and a third of a stop - when now ISO is measured in millions, you will not surprise anyone with a silent picture at high ISO, the difference in a third of a stop is really insignificant. But when my ISO ceiling was around 800 (the times of lamp-based standard cameras), and lowering it to ISO 640 was already a great achievement, yes, then I felt these third of the stop very significantly, both during shooting and during development, everywhere ... Even the simple transition from 2.8 to 1.8 was a huge leap, and the transition from 1.8 to 1.4 was felt very strongly in some situations. If by facts, then at 1.8 it was difficult to shoot indoors with the old woman d40, but with 1.4 it was possible to shoot in some places without a flash (the addition-transition from 35 / 1.8 to 50 / 1.4). I still have on my site this a shot in such conditions at d40 and 50 / 1.4.
          I repeat, of course, now - it's a trifle. But even now I will not give up 1.2, practice has taught me that 1.2 is not only aperture ratio, depth of field or some other things. In short, 1.2 is a very bright and reliable indicator of premium optics, and it is always more convenient to work with it in the details. Here are just lovers can not see the little things point-blank :)

          • Onotole

            Of course insidious, that was the reason for>:]

            The point is not only and not so much in ISO and DOF. The laws of physics that with increasing aperture, it becomes more difficult (and as a result - more expensive) to make such a lens. There is an increase in the size of "glass" and increased requirements for the accuracy of assembly, alignment and ensuring the preservation of the specified parameters in time and in different environments. And the complication of focusing work due to the finer depth of field.
            Who needs a hypothetical, say 50 / 1,0 at the price of $ 3000, which will focus for 10 seconds (while the output of good photos will be 1 in 20-30 frames), have vignetting in 3 stops and a wild coma in the open, and when you accidentally drop it from the height of the sofa onto a soft carpet - you will have to carry it to the service for realignment, because it turned out that heavy lenses bent the duralumin case by a couple of micrometers when dropped (and this is already critical)?

  • stabbing

    Pentax has an old (1991 !!!!) FA50 / 1.4 - it is still being produced. A very nice looking lens. Very small and very lightweight. The smallest. But ... his permission, of course, will be clearly lower on open ones. And even on the covered ones, I think that perhaps at f8 it can be close to the new one across the entire field of the frame.
    There is also a DA * 55 / 1.4 also motorized and with full weather protection. Good crop lens. Covers the full frame. BUT…. On pentaxforums there is a comparison with the new DFA * 50 - if the new one is already sharp in the center from 1.4, then this lens was developed on an APS-C sensor and really only pulls up to f8, where it can compete. In the center, he is not bad at FF with 2.8, but he cannot compete with the new one.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Yes, the old 50 / 1.4 are nice looking, as they are mostly 'warm-tube' 7/6 Planars. But, of course, they are far from the heights of modern optics. That being said, I'm sure in some situations on F / 5.6-F / 11 it will be difficult to distinguish them from the 50 / 1.4 DFA *.

      • stabbing

        on the covered ones - maybe. must watch. and there may be another situation.
        the fact is that the DFA * 50 was postponed with the release, since it had to be modified to work with sensors with a resolution higher than 36 MP. it is even officially stated.
        but there is nothing to check yet. unless Tokina will release her lens and see it at 50 Mp Canon ...
        or with an adapter for Canon on Sony A7RIII.

        however, it is not a fact that in a real battle, Tokina Opera will be completely identical to Pentax. It would be interesting to see if you have Nikon - he just has a 36 megapixel camera, please tell us in the review. but so far the lens is not on sale and it is not very clear when it will start selling ... it was on the news that it was summer. but the summer is almost over.

  • stabbing

    Korean review and comparison with DA * 55 / 1.4 - many use DA * on FF.

    another new draws beautiful rays in the evening and at night :)))

  • A.N. Onim

    Arkady, can you talk about the stabilizer in the camera? Can I remove with a fifty dollars, for example, with a shutter speed of 1 / 15s without grease?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      The staff works well, in the review I pointed out that it is possible to remove from 1/6 a fifty dollars.

      • A.N. Onim

        Cool! This means I read through the line))))

  • NE

    From the review of L. Evtifeev:

    “.. it can be seen that the lens (HD PENTAX-D FA * 1: 1.4 50mm SDM AW DFA) is at the resolution limit of the 36 Mpix matrix (Pentax K-1). small traces of debayering artifacts are visible. But ZEISS Milvus 50 / 1.4 works in more comfortable conditions, the 50 Mpix Canon 5DsR matrix is ​​enough for it and there are no artifacts in the picture at all.
    “.. The moiré we see in the center of the target on the HD PENTAX-D FA ★ 50mm F1.4 SDM AW lens tells us that during the debayering process, the signal in these areas was not correctly restored. This happens when the resolution of the optics exceeds the resolution of the sensor. Considering that we see this effect at 1.4 aperture, we can conclude that the lens is excellent and it could use a higher resolution camera to realize its full potential. ”
    Preliminary result - the resolution of the HD PENTAX-D FA ★ 50mm F1.4 SDM AW lens is limited by the resolution of its camera .. "

  • Vyacheslav

    Yes ... A fifty-kopeck piece with a filter diameter of 72 is impressive! Whether it is A50 / 1.7 and a bunch of other articles from 49!

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2018/08/pentax-dfa-star-1-4-50-sdm-aw/

Version en español de este artículo https://radojuva.com/es/2018/08/pentax-dfa-star-1-4-50-sdm-aw/