Is it necessary to upgrade KM50 F1.7 into KM 50 F1.4?


Status
Not open for further replies.

soken

New Member
Mar 5, 2009
801
0
0
34
Biopolis
Hi, all.

I am not sure whether it's an upgradation or not. I got my KM 50 F1.7 for about 4 months, it becomes my favourite lens. and it work perfect with me, except it is soft when aperture <2, but I think it's good for portrait.

How much better is KM 50 F1.4 than 50 F1.7? Is it worth to top up 150 to get a 50 F1.4? share ur experiences. :)
 

sherchoo

New Member
Sep 14, 2005
667
0
0
47
Bukit Panjang
sherchoo.myphotoalbum.com
anything less than f2 gets pretty soft as the DOF get very shallow. You'll probably see the same problem with f1.4. Difference will be that f1.4 will be faster than f1.7
 

trexsg

New Member
May 24, 2008
69
0
0
I like 50mm f2.8 macro better
 

synapseman

Senior Member
May 6, 2003
2,187
0
36
State of Confusion
www.pbase.com
anything less than f2 gets pretty soft as the DOF get very shallow. You'll probably see the same problem with f1.4. Difference will be that f1.4 will be faster than f1.7
My experience with the Sony 50/1.4 is similar.

(I somehow feel it's not as sharp as the older Minolta 50/1.4?)
 

tokrot

New Member
Jun 2, 2003
1,344
0
0
I have one old minolta 50mm f1.4. Absolutely love it.. Most of the time was on my D7D. Sharpness is good even at f1.4. Have seen pictures of Sigma 30mm f1.4. Seems that one is a better lens with excellent sharpness. Thought of getting one but APS-C lens.. so still considering.. ;)
 

synapseman

Senior Member
May 6, 2003
2,187
0
36
State of Confusion
www.pbase.com
I have one old minolta 50mm f1.4. Absolutely love it.. Most of the time was on my D7D. Sharpness is good even at f1.4. Have seen pictures of Sigma 30mm f1.4. Seems that one is a better lens with excellent sharpness. Thought of getting one but APS-C lens.. so still considering.. ;)
Ah yes, the Sigma 30/1.4. Wonderful lens, and yes, very sharp even at f/1.4. But the problem I noticed is that it does not seem to lock onto focus very reliably. Sometimes hit or miss, and at such a wide aperture, even a small miss would result in a totally ruined shot. This does not seem to happen to the CZ 85/1.4. It bites onto focus accurately almost all the time.
 

tokrot

New Member
Jun 2, 2003
1,344
0
0
Ah yes, the Sigma 30/1.4. Wonderful lens, and yes, very sharp even at f/1.4. But the problem I noticed is that it does not seem to lock onto focus very reliably. Sometimes hit or miss, and at such a wide aperture, even a small miss would result in a totally ruined shot. This does not seem to happen to the CZ 85/1.4. It bites onto focus accurately almost all the time.
You got one? So do you recommend it over 50mm F1.4? I was seriously considering it. 30mm on APS would be 45mm. So it's still good for portrait shots. I am amazed by the sharpness, the only gripe about it is this lens is definitely FF or BF even it's new, it needs to send to SC for calibration. Is this true? I believe most of the cases are like that.. How abt yours? :)
 

soken

New Member
Mar 5, 2009
801
0
0
34
Biopolis
You got one? So do you recommend it over 50mm F1.4? I was seriously considering it. 30mm on APS would be 45mm. So it's still good for portrait shots. I am amazed by the sharpness, the only gripe about it is this lens is definitely FF or BF even it's new, it needs to send to SC for calibration. Is this true? I believe most of the cases are like that.. How abt yours? :)
How much is the sigma 30 F1.4? ;) I will consider about it if it's not expensive
 

tokrot

New Member
Jun 2, 2003
1,344
0
0

tsan81

New Member
Jun 17, 2005
277
0
0
east
Visit site
km50 f1.7 -> km 50 f1.4 : no added value. the f1.7 is sharp enough for me. seldom use wide open also.

km50 f1.7 -> km 50 f1.4 RS : RS got circular aperture, does it got a better bokeh?? I have nv seen the difference

km50 f1.7 -> sony 50mm f1.7 new: same as KM f1.4 RS version BUT got warranty lor...

km50 f1.7 -> sigma 30mm f1.4 : 30mm got a wider angle, depend on your preference.
BUT focus is nosier and not that accurate at low light when used on A200. Maybe it focus better with the double cross sensor on A700? and it's for APS-C only. If you are sticking to APS-C for good, give 30mm f1.4 a try. but it hurt pockets.
 

soken

New Member
Mar 5, 2009
801
0
0
34
Biopolis
anything less than f2 gets pretty soft as the DOF get very shallow. You'll probably see the same problem with f1.4. Difference will be that f1.4 will be faster than f1.7
Thx, ya, it 's faster as I did some calculation.

R = f/1.4 r = f/1.7

R/r = 1.7/1.4 = 1.21

Area = pie R (2)


pie R(2)/pie r(2) = 1.21*1.21 = 1.464.

means the area of lens of 1.4 is 1.464 times of 1.7.

In order of get the same amout of light, 1.4 lens is 1.464 times faster.

Maybe it's quite significant.
 

synapseman

Senior Member
May 6, 2003
2,187
0
36
State of Confusion
www.pbase.com
You got one? So do you recommend it over 50mm F1.4? I was seriously considering it. 30mm on APS would be 45mm. So it's still good for portrait shots. I am amazed by the sharpness, the only gripe about it is this lens is definitely FF or BF even it's new, it needs to send to SC for calibration. Is this true? I believe most of the cases are like that.. How abt yours? :)
I've got the Sony 50/1.4, 85/1.4 and the Sigma 30/1.4.

I think my 30/1.4 is a sharp copy. But to be honest, I've not tested it very critically yet. I somehow prefer this focal length over the 50mm on my APS-C cameras. 50mm is quite a neither-here-nor-there focal length for me: Not wide enough for landscapes, not really long enough for portraits. I'd much rather use the 85mm in this case.
 

Ouverture

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2009
2,184
0
0
km50 f1.7 -> km 50 f1.4 : no added value. the f1.7 is sharp enough for me. seldom use wide open also.

km50 f1.7 -> km 50 f1.4 RS : RS got circular aperture, does it got a better bokeh?? I have nv seen the difference

km50 f1.7 -> sony 50mm f1.7 new: same as KM f1.4 RS version BUT got warranty lor...

km50 f1.7 -> sigma 30mm f1.4 : 30mm got a wider angle, depend on your preference.
BUT focus is nosier and not that accurate at low light when used on A200. Maybe it focus better with the double cross sensor on A700? and it's for APS-C only. If you are sticking to APS-C for good, give 30mm f1.4 a try. but it hurt pockets.
50/1.7 is good, provided you got a sharp copy. I used to have a few copies, but since sold them after I got Sony 50/1.4.

KM50/1.4 is similar to Sony ones except it uses 49mm filter, RS is exactly the same 55mm filter but it does not cater to ADI info. I tried to buy 2nd hand ones from here, 3 times were unsuccessful, either got outbidded or last minute buyer withdrawn, so in the end just went to buy Sony one, which is about $150 more but at least got warranty and my badge is MIJ. My copy is sharp at f1.4 as well.

Sigma30/1.4 is definitely a good lens to keep as a "normal" lens. Sharp even at f1.4. BF/FF problem is normally due to user hand movement or subject movement as DOF is very thin at such high aperture. Colours and bokeh is great. Pictures taken from my wife (with no photography experience) using this lens can even pass off as pro look...:thumbsup: However it is more expensive, about $750 and above for new.
 

sulhan

Senior Member
May 11, 2002
4,028
0
36
47
Melbourne, Australia
www.md-sulhan.com
Okay here's my inputs.

Coing form the film time to digital, my expereinces with the 50mm f1.7 (used to own this twice) and F1.4 (which I own 1 now).

Basically, by nature of physics, the faster the lens (wider aperture), more light and "stuff that needs to give you great colors" (ok i dun wanna do to the rays stuff in physics).

Comparing a shot with the 50mm f1.7, you will see that the colors are not as "punchy" given a same scene taken with the 50 f1.4mm - even with lengthen exposure time. In the digital world, this can be easily tweaked in post processing. In the digital world, you can tweak and adjust as mush as you want. You can make an image look like taken with a great lens - at the expense of time in post processing of course.

For a period pre-dlsr, I shot mainly slides (provias) and I can see how muted a shot taken with the 50mm f.1.7 compared to the 50mmf.14. This is where you see the need for the faster lens to optimise the image capturing capability to reap the benefits of the rich colors of a media.

Price wise, yes of course the larger aperture ones would cost more as larger glass (raw materials) are needed.

Well eventually, ask yourself, are you a photo enthusiast that have all the time to tweak and alter an image. if yes then the 50mm f1.7 may be the way to go. Gives you stuff to play with in the post processign stage. However, if you are someone who depends on images to make a living then i guess 50mm f1.4 would be the way to go - les adjustment of color richness required.

These days, i seldom do much post processing in colors. Even for casual famly shoots, I would rather save precious time on other stuff than photo-shopping.

Here is a shot that comes out straight out of the camera. The colors are rich as-is. Its wide aperture allows me to take quick candid indoors like this.

 

Status
Not open for further replies.