Fast fifties - info please!

What an interesting thread... thanks for all the useful information!

What about the 50mm f2? I had one and was very disapointed with the tonality of it.

I recently bought a 50mm f1.4. It's brilliant. For interest's sake I covered a charity musical with this lens + my super-A and a friend's *istds. www.pbase.com/ogps/tingewick . It isn't the best use of the lens, and the lab scanning wasn't fantastic, but I think the people who were in the play won't care, and probably enjoy these photos more than if I'd used a powerful flashgun with a slow consumer zoom?

Can anyone recommend a good wide-angle for someone that doesn't have one? I thought 24mm seemed a nice focal length. 28 and 35 seem a bit timid.

Duncan.

24mm is a fantastic focal length for architecture, landscapes, etc.

If you want the same effect on DSLRs though you will need something wider.

Thanks for the advice john,

Can you recommend a specific 24mm optic from Pentax? Or for that matter - from anyone else, for use with the LX?

TIA,
Duncan.

Look no further than the SMC Pentax 24mm f2.8 that I am currently offering on eBay!

Otherwise, any of the AF 24mm lenses should be fine. I prefer Pentax lenses and stick to them.

The LX does not use the A setting of the lenses, so the earlier SMC Pentax and SMC Pentax-M lenses are no problem.

John,

Do we deduce from this sale that you have bought or are buying a piece of new Pentax DA glass? 12-24mm, 14mm, 16-45mm?

Pray tell.

G

I think it's a fair deduction that I'm swapping things around a bit (again...) and all the lenses you list, George, would happily be on my list.

However, the first is likely to be the 12-24mm. I mean, how could I resist it?

I've got the 12-24 and so far I've done some interiors with it. First impression is really favorable. There's practically no barrel distortion at 18mm which is impressve. You could even forget to use the lens correction filter and you'd never know the difference!

The 31 is a great normal for the D. I'm still in LA but when I get back to Massachusetts, I'll test it more thoroughly. So far, I'm impressed as hell! It may be the best lens I own!

I have a 50mm A 1.4 which was my second favourite lens (after my 24 mm A 2. on my MZ-50. Sadly though, both this and the 24mm have been sat in their cases for months. After reading Matt's first impressions and experiences with the lens on a digi body, I'm now desparate to acquire a *istDL and rediscover the joys of this lens in the digital realm.

This thread is going to have a negative impact on my bank balance!

Sorry about the bank balance Juno
Just hope they're fungus free after being sat in the dark
Matt

Don't ask me to explain the inexplicable. After a few delays thanks to the truly appalling Parceline (avoid at all costs), I have just got mine. I'll post some pics when I get my site sorted out.

First impressions are pretty good. It's reassuringly heavy, and feels more solid than the 24-90 and 18-35. It doesn't flop about like the 24-90, though that's partly to do with the fact that there is very little travel to the lens barrel when zooming. Manual focus feel is excellent, like a Limited lens.

It's usable on a film camera, with no vignetting above 18mm, and only a small amount at 15mm.

I got mine from Technikdirekt. From date of order it took two days to reach Birmingham from Germany, then one day to Park Royal (five miles away from me), then five days to me. Sad.

G

Me too. I'd best check them out ASAP. Both lenses are in mint condition with original cases, lens covers and caps, so if fungus has developed during their period of neglect I'll be teed off to say the least.

Further to previous post, checked both lenses and they are fungus-free, thank God! Examining the lenses carefully in good sunlight was in fact a pleasure and not the harrowing experience I was expecting - they look spotless.

Content in the knowledge that my quality primes are still good and keen for a new lease of life it's time to buy my first digital SLR. Looking at current prices and specs it's going to have to be a istDL rather than a DS - I like the idea of the more sophisticated 11-point autofocusing and better viewfinder offered by the latter, but I can bag a DL body for £443 (Pixmania) while a DS body costs at least £140 more. As funds are tight due to home improvements and my recent wedding, I need to go for the cheapest availlable option.

Given that I won't be in a position to buy another lens for a while, do you think that I will get by for the time being without too much frustration and regret using just my 24 and 50 As? My only other lenses are the 35-80 mm FAJ that came with my MZ-50 and a Sigma 70-300 APO, neither of which I expect to work very well (if at all!) on a istDL. Your opinions based on your experience and knowledge would be much appreciated.

When I got mine just before Christmas Jessops were doing the DS and kit lens for about £550 so if you could sell the kit lens you'd possibly be close to the price of the DL.

Having gone digital I'm not regretting selling my own 24mm so I reckon you'd get good use out of yours. I've been using an old SMC-M 50mm F1.7 quite a bit. The two zooms should work fine although so far with my DS the only zoom I've had satisfactory performance from was an 80-200 F2.8.

£550 is a very good deal for the DS + lens, for sure. I've heard that the 18-55 isn't a great zoom lens, but I'll bet it would perform better than my old 35-80, so I'd consider keeping it to support my primes and to use in situations where AF would be best. I'd also get a wider angle of view at 18mmm. Hmmm, I guess an extra £100 ain't too bad for a slightly better camera and a useful zoom lens......you've got me thinking!

The 18-55 is ok for point and shoot style stuff and it's quite decent at portrait lengths when stopped down (I had a play in the studio with mine).

It's probably ok(ish) when stopped to F11 or so at the wide end as well.