Pentax 85mm F.1.4

[lauren_macintosh]

Could someone tell me whats so costly about this lens:

 

Pentax SMCP-FA* 85mm f/1.4 IF

Telephoto Lens

 

It went for over 1,300.00 dollars?

[jerry thirsty]

They haven't been made in quite a while and there weren't a whole lot of them in the first place. As a portrait lens, it's pretty much legendary. If you want an 85/1.4 for Pentax, your choices are the -A, the -FA, or the new Zeiss.

[mc2imaging]

1. It is discontinued.

 

2. It is fast.

 

3. It is sharp.

 

4. It is fast.

 

5. It is built like a tank.

 

6. It is really fast.

 

7. It is really sharp.

 

8. It is way way way discontinued.

 

9. Nobody ever sells the copies they have.

 

10. It is really freakin fast

[shots worth sharing]

The greatest lens review of all time, Matt!

[personalphotos]

Matthew. I think you forgot to mention...it's fast.

 

Seriously though it's the best lens I've ever tried. I had one to play with for 5 minutes one day. Some sample shots here:

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/108081-post1.html

 

If I had a spare $12-1300....anyone need a kidney?

[miserere_mei]

There's still time to bid on this one!!!!

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=150212860778

 

Pentax-A* 85mm f/1.4.

 

It's only at $1,175 right now!

 

2 days and 22 hours left...

 

 

Matthew, exactly *how* fast is f/1.4?

[miserere_mei]

I was thinking, if Pentax wanted to "reissue" an equivalent lens, all they would need to do is release a DA* 55mm f/1.4...

 

http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf

 

Look at the bottom of that page...

[mountainvisions]

Ummm, Matthew did a really good job and let me add.

 

I was reading a site comparing the 85mm 1.4s from all the brands and people were actually canabilizing the pentax version to mount it directly with no need for an adapter onto Canon SLRs.

 

so add in the fact that it's rare, and also coveted by other users and the supply and demand issue comes into play.

 

For a while I was searching for one, but the price of a used model exceeds that of the lens when it was brand new. For that price, it's toooo much money. Better off with the 77mm limited.

[michael_kuhne]

I agree with Justin. The FA version sold new for about $800. It was highly priced then, but these prices now are out of sight. Some years back I considered getting one, but asked myself how much use I would put it to. It is not a huge lens, but not compact either. Rather chunky. When the 77mm Limited came out I turned my attention in its direction because I could see myself taking that along, and the design and build are beautiful. The two have tested very close. The 77 is fast. But the 85 is really freakin fast.

 

But the 77 LTD is really freakin small for what it is.

[personalphotos]

You're absolutely right Michael. I could have bought the one I showed the pics from but it would have cost $1200 from him. So that's the price of 2 77's and it's a great lens but worth twice the price of a 77? I don't think so. Just too little difference between them. So I put the money toward a 77 and a 31. Money much better spent.

 

If that 55 is similar to the 85, I would expect the 85's will drop on the used market significantly. The 55 would be a much better length for portrait work and my guess would be an MSRP around $600-700.

[Sandeha Lynch]

I'll stick with my 1960s preset Zeiss Biotar 58mm f2. Not as fast, admittedly, but sharp for its size on the Pentax K10D ... x1.5, that's 87mm.

 

It's not the sort of lens you'd want to stop down ... full frame.

 

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a119/Sandeha/swansea/IMGP4007_copy.jpg

[miserere_mei]

Peter wrote: "If that 55 is similar to the 85, I would expect the 85's will drop on the used market significantly. The 55 would be a much better length for portrait work and my guess would be an MSRP around $600-700."

 

Peter, given Pentax's 1.53x crop factor, a 55mm is equivalent in FoV to 84.15mm in FF, so the DA* 55mm would be the equivalent lens for cropped sensors. Or maybe that's what you were saying?

 

However, I disagree with your second statement. I have little faith in the common sense of humanity, and even less when we're talking about desperate photographers with chronic LBA. I believe the A* 85mm will continue to sell around $1300, despite the fact that for close to that amount you will probably be able to buy a K20D *and* a DA* 55mm when it comes out.

[del_gray]

In my film days I used Contax cameras with their Zeiss 85/1.4. It was a stunning lens, and reading this I was saying to myself that no way could the Pentax version be better than that Zeiss was. I also now use the 77 Limited, and think the world of it. Then I opened up Peter's link to sample shots and that brick wall hit me square in the face! WOW! I'm speechless.

[davemoss]

I'll stick with my 1960s preset Zeiss Biotar 58mm f2. Not as fast, admittedly, but sharp for its size on the Pentax K10D ... x1.5, that's 87mm.

 

i really wish cropped DSLR shooters would quite saying things like this. a 58mm lens, is a 58mm lens, whether it is on a LF, or a minox. cropping a significant portion of the viewing screen is not making your lens any longer. it is the sam as taking a shot FF, and cropping down to that size. it is not an 85mm lens. if you want the compression effects of an 85mm, you need to shoot an 85mm....

 

now onto the lenses...the pentax 1.4 is indeed a stunning lens, but like all the great 85s (canon 1.2, nikkor 1.4, zeiss 1.4), you need to shoot them FF to get the full effect. that's why i went ot a FF DSLR. if you shoot portraits mainly, then that is the format for those lenses. you can--of course--still use them on cropped DSLRs, but they are losing a good portion of what gives the lens its character.

 

shoot one on a film camera, and the K10D, you will see the difference. I have no beef with cropped DLSRs, but they are not the best tool for shooting portraits. Not until they start designing lenses in the 85mmrange, that will have the characteristics of the FF designs...and i don't think that will ever happen.

 

now for sports and wildlife shots, the cropped is better suited

[michael_kuhne]

Dave Moss- Many of us here still shoot a lot of film, and thus still use FF lenses. Very interesting post.

[ken_yee]

I agree w/ Dave. It has something to do w/ the optical formula of an 85/1.4 lens. It's almost universally regarded as having great bokeh no matter which brand you choose. The 85/1.8 is worse. Ditto w/ a 70-200/2.8 vs. the DA* 50-135.

While the FOV is the same, the rendering results are slightly different IMHO...

[harvey_edelstein1]

Check out the new Voigtlander 58mm F1.4 its chipped to work KA mount.

 

http://www.cameraquest.com/Voigt_SL2.htm

[trw]

Perspective compression equivalence <b>is</b> indicated by crop factor. Depth of field compression is not. An 85mm

lens on Full-Frame does give very close perspective to a 58mm on APS-C. The 58mm would have to be a few stops faster

to allow the same depth of field control though.<br /><br />

The small depth of field wide open on my nFD 85/1.8 makes it much easier to nail critical focus than the 85mm setting on

my Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f3.5 (FD), even if not shooting wide open. <br /><br />

The DA* 55mm should give excellent results due to it's flattering perspective compression and low light capability. It will

not give as small of a depth of field as the 85/1.4 when shot wide open at the same subject distance. This is likely to be a

benefit in many situations (esp. events) as the photographer will be able to open up a stop or more and better freeze

action in low light while maintaining the in-focus zone.<br /><br />

As the DA* 55mm seems to be designed as a portrait lens (compared to the FA 50/1.4 which is general purpose) it'll likely

have the focus helix tuned for 1~3 m subject distance.<br /><br />

Issues like sharpness, bokeh, and colour rendition, will have to wait until the lens is in your hands.

[michael_kuhne]

The 85mm f/1.4 is a very fine lens indeed, marketed primarily as a portrait lens.

 

For general use, I have read by owners that it is a bit soft at wide apertures, but sharpens up starting around f/4.

 

I think its sales moved very slowly, and having the 77mm Limited in the lineup, and with the change to digital, Pentax deemed continuing it as well, to be redundant. Many if not most lenses are actually a bit shorter than spec. Many 85mm come in closer to 80mm. The 77 really is at 77mm. Any difference compared to an 85mm is miniscule. The bokeh of the 77 LTD is also rated as extraordinarily fine.

[steve graham]

I'm fortunate enough to own an FA* 85mm F1.4 and have done for a number of years (and mine isn't soft wide open, very far from it in fact). Now the 77ltd is a very good lens however it's too slow to be a real replacement for my beloved FA* as I do like the very limited DOF that 85mm F1.4 gives and use it often enough to find it useful.

[jorge_diaz_santiago1]

Would anybody know how it compares to the (relatively) new Zeiss 85 f/1.4 ZK Planar T* Manual focus which goes for about $1000. It seems it could be a good substitute, still in production, and cheaper than any used Pentax FA 85 f/1.4 Only caveat would be lack of autofocus, but depending on the use that might not be a problem.

[chris_vidal]

<p>I bought this lens about 20 years ago and I love it. After shooting with my me super and super a analog cameras for years I could not wait for Pentax to release a DSLR.<br>

I finally got the K10 and noticed a big problem with all my "old" Pentax lenses.<br>

The reflexions from the sensor are so strong that you can actually see it on the pictures. It took me a while to figure out that the older (pre digital) lenses have no or very little anti reflex coating on the surface that is directed towards the sensor. Film will not reflect light the same way as digital sensor. In some cases that makes for a nice effect. Most of the time this is not what you want.<br>

I was wondering if anybody else had the same problem.</p>

<p>Cheers,</p>

<p>Chris</p>