On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:59 AM, Larry Colen <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Apr 29, 2010, at 3:30 PM, Adam Maas wrote: > >> My experience is that pretty much all of the 1st party 50/1.4's are >> weak wide open. The FA's probably the best of the lot, but it's weak >> until f2, the Canon is very bad, the old Nikon 50/1.4 is mediocre, the >> new version is somewhat better but still not what you'd call sharp >> until f2.8. >> >> If you want wide-open performance the Sigma 50/1.4 will simply destroy >> any of the non-exotic 1st party options, its aspherical element >> increases performance at wide apertures by a very noticeable amount. > > > Where do you rate the 55/1.4? > > Sharp, soft, exotic or not close enough to 50 to count? > > -- > Larry Colen [email protected] sent from i4est
>From what I've seen, the 55/1.4's on the border of the exotic range price-wise. What I've seen from it looks good, and it's better than the FA 50 at wide apertures, but I don't think it comes close to justifying its price over the other options in K mount (all three of the excellent 3rd party fast ~50-ish lenses are notably cheaper than the 55/1.4, with similar performance. Pentax is not in a position to demand a price premium over Zeiss) -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
