F3.5 Vs F1.4 or 1.7

[thesimson01]

Hi pro's of photography,

I'm looking for a 50mm f1.4 or 2.8 Pentax (or Sigma)lens. Now i have a 18-55mm f3.5 that came with the K100D body.

Is the f1.4 or 1.7 a lot faster than the F3.5? Does it worth the money? (around 250$)

Most of use is parade and low light pics.

Thanks.

 

[blackjackdelta]

I would read a book on exposure, by Peterson. Yes and they are.

Jack

 

[Furgus]

yes it is worth it.

Read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number

Not sure if Pentax has one or not, but both Canon and Nikon have a 50mm f/1.8 for around $100, and it is a must have for anyone.

 

[ukcatfan]

The SMC-FA 50mm f/1.4 is an excellent lens! I only paid $175 and it was worth every penny. I only use the kit, the 50mm, and the SMC-DA 50-200mm. I also have an older SMC-A 50mm f/2, which is also nice, but not really needed since I got the new one. There is not a $100 version for Pentax, but comparably this lens is somewhat cheaper than the Canon or Nikon f/1.4 50mm lenses. It is also at a higher build quality than the inexpensive f/1.8 lenses.

 

[gokenin]

I wouldnt get fixated on the FA50 1.4 there are also the Pentax Fa 50 1.7 and the F50 1.7 both these lens tend to be a little cheaper and many would argue that the FA 1.7 as actually better for shaprness. I have the F series lens and think it was just as good as the 1.4 when i had it.

 

[thesimson01]

Thanks for the infos