My lens is better than yours :-)

Eventually, it comes down to which you are most comfortable with, right?

Did you find an A then recently?
Don't know about the Steinheil Munchen Quinon but the Voigtlander and Zeiss both have good to great reputations. I'm beginning to wonder if the DA*55 might have them all covered (in the 50s only arena excepting close focus and macro) but that is a question for another day

Yes, Robbie! Got one recently from a forum member, and nice one! I don't mind having second copy or K50/1.2

I thought you were only comparing MF lenses... You might need get one of these
http://www.srsmicrosystems.co.uk/566/Pentax-Magnifier-FB-with-Case.html

Please keep us updated with your comparison, and definitely will follow you and Robin...

Kind regards!

P.S. Steinheil Munchen Quinon could easily go above £250, but i got a bargain...
link

There are always more lenses. One of the objectives of this is to end up with fewer. May just be against the laws of physics.

£269.99 !!!!!

Using Live view and magnifier = £0.00

I mentioned to Robin earlier that even with the Live View zoomed in at 10X magnification, it felt like less than a 2mm on the focusing rings could take you in or out of optimal focus at the distance we were working with. The other thing that stood out was the relatively prehistoric DPI on the camera screens compared to a modern smartphone such as a Galaxy 4 with 441 DPI. That combined with better zooming would be quite handy in these scenarios.

The second article is online. It covers our lens choice, testing method, processing, and motivation.

I've started to upload some of my test images, so they will be here tomorrow.

Indeed!

Of the two cameras, the K-5 should be better, since it has 921K pixels on the 3" LCD. But in practice the Olympus E-PL2, several generations old and with only 460K pixels, was easier to work with.

The K-5 screen looks nicer when reviewing images but is harder to work with for focusing. I can't explain it. Obviously down to implementation.

Just buy a s/h magnifier M for £10 or so, works fine on the DSLR's and better built

John

I wish, still looking for one at the right price.

John

I've always found the Cosina to have a harsher more nervous OoF rendering than either the K or A series Pentax lenses, depending on the subject matter.

John

K 50/1.2, the sharpest lens?
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/1505837#forum-post-16923028

Comparison of fast (1.2) "normal" lenses:
https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/pentax-k-50-1-2-40478#comm452883

As for the "green button" and "exposure consistency": De-cripple the K-mount!
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/200075-pentax-ricoh-de...

It's what is in front of the lens that matters.....
a sharp lens isn't necessary for good photography

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=tomioka+55mm+f1.2

'

I am just against this "Tomioka" hype.
Such 50/1.4 or 50/1.7 lenses sold below 20€ before that.
The similar Cosina/Yashica/Revuenon/... 1.2 lenses were not above 100€ on the used market.

E.g. the Revuenon 55/1.2 was sold new together with the Revue Solar 100.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alf_sigaro/2349069901/lightbox/
Revue was a brand name of German catalog company Quelle.
They mostly sold inexpensive or even cheapish articles under that properietary name.

High prices are not really justified, at least the lenses should be a lot less expensive than the corresponding K versions.

In response to the topic title . . . "Oh no it isn't!". Well somebody had to do it.

I agree with JR's comments about softness and focus, even if it does seem like he's "bassman" reincarnated.

I would not be happy with these images if taken with any dedicated macro lens.

I think part of the problem is lighting. The flower heads look as if they are in their own shade, a reflector would have helped enormously.