Hi everyone, just looking for some advice on the FA50 1.4 lens.

I have a selection of 50mm (ish) lenses, all of them manual focus:

M50 F1.4
A50 F1.7
K55 F1.8
Chinon F1.9

I like all of the above, but my particular favourite is the M50 F1.4 which works like a dream with the K-01. A friend of mine has lent me a FA50 F1.4; I have always thought about getting one as I sometimes hanker for AF. However, after doing some comparative tests yesterday in difficult shooting conditions (very low light) on my K-01, I actually seem to prefer the operation and images from the M50 to the FA50. The 'M' images are warmer and don't have a blue tone that the FA50 seems to impart. Also, AF was useless on the FA50, it would not lock on in the low light and when it did it hunted a lot and was quite slow. In contrast, I found manual focussing quite easy and accurate with the M50, using the focus peaking on the K-01.

At the moment, I'm thinking it's not worth buying the FA50 which would cost me £180 in as new condition. Does anyone have any views on the FA50 and its merits? I'm particularly interested in hearing from anyone who has regularly used both this lens and a M50 F1.4.

Thanks in advance.

Regards
David

Excellent Phil, both the blog and the images, I thoroughly enjoyed reading it.

Regards
David

Even though the two shots are at the same exposure setting, the cameras have dealt with them very differently. The exposure on the K-3 shot looks more accurate to me, in particular the detail in the white areas is greater on the K-3 shot and looks a little over-exposed on the K-5 version.

On the other hand, the K-5 image has a little more 'pop'. On balance I think the K-3 shades it and clearly has more detail, but I agree with Dr. O that the photographer has more to do with the quality of images nowadays than the camera does.

I am starting to get a bit tempted by the K-3 though, looking at this post and some other recent comments by people who've bought one.

Regards
David

Welcome to the site and the forum, I hope you enjoy it!

Regards
David

Mine is the same Maria, it's very inconsistent, sometimes back focusses and sometimes front focusses with the same lens! The K-5iis does not have this issue.

Regards
David

If anyone's got a DFA 100m F2.8 Macro WR (the one without the aperture ring), the converter without glass is well worth having. It will transform the magnification potential of the 100mm macro and still enable aperture control from the camera

Regards
David

Powerful indeed. Shots 4 and 6 in particular strike a chord with me.

Regards
David

You beat me to the post Bill, have a look at my previous comment

Regards
David

Hi Bill

It is a stunning image, BUT it is back-focussed slightly and this is making it look flatter and not as 3 dimensional as it should be. The sharpest focus in this shot is in the lady's hair and not on the eyes.

Have you checked the AF adjustment on your K-5 with each lens you own? It may make a huge difference, it is item 26 in the camera menu and allows an adjustment of -10 to +10. Minus pushes the focus back, whereas plus brings it forward.

If the image was shot with a manual focus lens then you have just missed the focus slightly.

There is nothing else wrong with the image, colours, vibrancy etc. are spot on IMO.

Stopping down a little may have helped this shot, but I am not a fan of this as it will in itself make your images look flatter. Shallow DOF is a great asset in making your portraits look more dynamic and interesting, but you have to make sure the focus is 100% spot on.

Regards
David

Regarding an earlier post, the K-5iis doesn't have focus peaking but live view is very usable and is especially useful when using a 10 stop filter as it enables a view of the image to be maintained when the viewfinder is pitch black.

I've never used the focus peaking on a K30, but on the K-01 it's pretty good, great for indoor work in low light with a manual focus lens, but not much use for landscapes.

Regards
David