Great stuff! Anxious to see if the release an autofocus film SLR which would make this lens a must-have. The Pentax MX I ordered in "mint" / working condition arrived Monday from Japan. I charged the shutter, fired it, then everything went wrong. It's on the way back to Japan 😢 With further research, it's apparently a systemic problem with the MX. Pentax's higher-end manual focus bodies just don't seem to age as well compared to Olympus, Nikon, and Canon. I also had an LX die on me and a K2 with a shutter speed dial that almost took two hands to turn. Maybe I'll try a K2dmd next. I have a Kf, 31mm, and 150-450mm at the cottage right now. I'd really love to have a single lens ecosystem. So far this kit is amazing. My FF Canon bodies😮 with the 45mm Tamron and 100-400mm are better in every way... except they're, I don't know, boring? I hate the controls on the EOS 3 and the R both. I think I'll revisit Nikon next after Pentax. The D780 has excellent video AF while using F mount. I wanted to go Pentax but I think F3+F100+D780 may be the play. I'll miss my Canon F1 with the speed finder, but my OCD absolutely hates the FD bayonet and how it plays with adapters. Anyway, my morning coffee is gone. Time for some fishing, archery, and photography😁
This is a pretty incredible lens and whatever Ricoh releases as a film SLR, I have to imagine this will be compatible with it. And I'm fast on my way to being a single-primary-ecosystem for digital and it's a great feeling. My digital cameras now are the A7 IV and GFX 50S II, which is only going to be used once in a while. The A7 IV does the heavy lifting. I'll be selling off my K-1 soon and at that point any time I want to use a digital camera I don't own, I'll probably just rent one.
This lens, for someone, could be a hidden gem: its outside looks awful and until you use it, you won't believe how optically good is it. I used mine quiet alot with K-30 as a portrait lens and some time with Z-1p as a kit. On K-1 it also worked well, but since I've got FA 43 Lim I started to use it less and less.
I have that lens. It is quite good. I accept its sharpness from f/2.2. Its good thing is apurture ring so it can be fully used with older cameras. Also filter size of 49mm is nice size (lots of older Pentax lenses had that filter size) . But lens has one very bad problem. Its focusing slides (not sure if it is a proper word) is kinda weakly attached inside (maybe only glued). It is easy to break them free, for example when trying to unscrew stuck filter. Or just have lens hood mounted and bump it into something. It happened to me twice. My local service was able to easilly glue that parts back but in my opinion it should not happen it first place. Ps. With MZ-5N it paries neatly.
I have. The A versions I've used hot spot like the dickens, which for me is a deal-breaker. The M versions seem better in terms of that, for reasons I don't understand. The 1/7 lenses in both variants have a tendency to develop fungus in the read cell that seems unique to those lenses, which is also odd. As a general statement about lenses of this vintage, the slower lenses have a reputation (across makers) for being more technically perfect. So next year I plan to do a Pentax lens comparison video with 50mm lenses of different speeds and from the M42 Takumars to to modern 50mm lenses to see what changes have happened with them over the years and if the long-standing belief that speed comes with a quality loss is true.
@@DavidHancockInteresting points - I have versions of all the 1.4 from K / M / A / F and FA., the first of which was an M that I have owned since 1982. The K was basically the smc Takumar taking the Voigtländer/Zeiss Ultron/Planar type a step further with improved SMC (I would argue T didn’t catch up until the Rollei Carl zeiss 1.4 which is T not HFT coated). The K is my personal favourite of all the 1.4 Zeiss Ultron types (on film) the M A and F all suffer slightly from the M platform downsize - squeezing 7/6 into the lens body arguably was at the limits of coatings at the time - the FA is not as such a redesign it is basically an M lens with the F motor and electronic contacts but and its a while since I took one apart - each element is a tad wider in the space the plastic body allowed. But there are also differences in the FA lens between 1991 and 2021. By early 2000s SMC was at the end if its life - Hoya owned Pentax FA are better than the last independent Pentax FAs - subjectively. I dont own a Ricoh generation FA but would assume that SMC now and SMC in 1976 are light years apart. I have not used any really on digital 35mm more on Digital APS - and the FA makes a better 78 than the K or A and can cope without a lens hood more often. PS as an aside I use a SMC Tak 50 1.4 on my Rollei German SL35 with Rollei’s wonderful M42-qbm adaptor that retains auto diaphragm on any M42 - its as good if not better than the first qbm Zeiss 50m f1.4 with auto switch. On my SL2000 I use a qbm IV Rollei 50 f1.4 for obvious reasons but still prefer the way the Takumar or K 50 draws on both B&W and Velvia. Didn’t say in previous post - a nice review thanks.
Have used the 50 FA and 28 f2.8 FA since the 90s. Both lovely lenses
Great stuff! Anxious to see if the release an autofocus film SLR which would make this lens a must-have.
The Pentax MX I ordered in "mint" / working condition arrived Monday from Japan. I charged the shutter, fired it, then everything went wrong. It's on the way back to Japan 😢 With further research, it's apparently a systemic problem with the MX. Pentax's higher-end manual focus bodies just don't seem to age as well compared to Olympus, Nikon, and Canon. I also had an LX die on me and a K2 with a shutter speed dial that almost took two hands to turn. Maybe I'll try a K2dmd next.
I have a Kf, 31mm, and 150-450mm at the cottage right now. I'd really love to have a single lens ecosystem. So far this kit is amazing. My FF Canon bodies😮 with the 45mm Tamron and 100-400mm are better in every way... except they're, I don't know, boring? I hate the controls on the EOS 3 and the R both.
I think I'll revisit Nikon next after Pentax. The D780 has excellent video AF while using F mount. I wanted to go Pentax but I think F3+F100+D780 may be the play.
I'll miss my Canon F1 with the speed finder, but my OCD absolutely hates the FD bayonet and how it plays with adapters.
Anyway, my morning coffee is gone. Time for some fishing, archery, and photography😁
This is a pretty incredible lens and whatever Ricoh releases as a film SLR, I have to imagine this will be compatible with it. And I'm fast on my way to being a single-primary-ecosystem for digital and it's a great feeling. My digital cameras now are the A7 IV and GFX 50S II, which is only going to be used once in a while. The A7 IV does the heavy lifting. I'll be selling off my K-1 soon and at that point any time I want to use a digital camera I don't own, I'll probably just rent one.
This lens, for someone, could be a hidden gem: its outside looks awful and until you use it, you won't believe how optically good is it. I used mine quiet alot with K-30 as a portrait lens and some time with Z-1p as a kit. On K-1 it also worked well, but since I've got FA 43 Lim I started to use it less and less.
happiness is a good lens. tyvm for the video.
I have that lens. It is quite good. I accept its sharpness from f/2.2. Its good thing is apurture ring so it can be fully used with older cameras. Also filter size of 49mm is nice size (lots of older Pentax lenses had that filter size) . But lens has one very bad problem. Its focusing slides (not sure if it is a proper word) is kinda weakly attached inside (maybe only glued). It is easy to break them free, for example when trying to unscrew stuck filter. Or just have lens hood mounted and bump it into something. It happened to me twice. My local service was able to easilly glue that parts back but in my opinion it should not happen it first place.
Ps. With MZ-5N it paries neatly.
I've not run into that issue, but I believe it. :D This lens does create simply lovely images.
I read that the F 50mm 1.7 (or A or M same formula) is better than this one, have you tried it?
I have. The A versions I've used hot spot like the dickens, which for me is a deal-breaker. The M versions seem better in terms of that, for reasons I don't understand. The 1/7 lenses in both variants have a tendency to develop fungus in the read cell that seems unique to those lenses, which is also odd. As a general statement about lenses of this vintage, the slower lenses have a reputation (across makers) for being more technically perfect. So next year I plan to do a Pentax lens comparison video with 50mm lenses of different speeds and from the M42 Takumars to to modern 50mm lenses to see what changes have happened with them over the years and if the long-standing belief that speed comes with a quality loss is true.
@@DavidHancockInteresting points - I have versions of all the 1.4 from K / M / A / F and FA., the first of which was an M that I have owned since 1982. The K was basically the smc Takumar taking the Voigtländer/Zeiss Ultron/Planar type a step further with improved SMC (I would argue T didn’t catch up until the Rollei Carl zeiss 1.4 which is T not HFT coated). The K is my personal favourite of all the 1.4 Zeiss Ultron types (on film) the M A and F all suffer slightly from the M platform downsize - squeezing 7/6 into the lens body arguably was at the limits of coatings at the time - the FA is not as such a redesign it is basically an M lens with the F motor and electronic contacts but and its a while since I took one apart - each element is a tad wider in the space the plastic body allowed. But there are also differences in the FA lens between 1991 and 2021. By early 2000s SMC was at the end if its life - Hoya owned Pentax FA are better than the last independent Pentax FAs - subjectively. I dont own a Ricoh generation FA but would assume that SMC now and SMC in 1976 are light years apart. I have not used any really on digital 35mm more on Digital APS - and the FA makes a better 78 than the K or A and can cope without a lens hood more often. PS as an aside I use a SMC Tak 50 1.4 on my Rollei German SL35 with Rollei’s wonderful M42-qbm adaptor that retains auto diaphragm on any M42 - its as good if not better than the first qbm Zeiss 50m f1.4 with auto switch. On my SL2000 I use a qbm IV Rollei 50 f1.4 for obvious reasons but still prefer the way the Takumar or K 50 draws on both B&W and Velvia.
Didn’t say in previous post - a nice review thanks.