[LFLee]

what a heated debate here.

I have 77ltd, it is amazing. The DA 70 is on my wishlist too.

I would suggest that get the 77 ltd first. why? simply it seem to me the FA ltd price goes up faster than those of DA ltd.

Lee

[jsherman999]

what a heated debate here.

I have 77ltd, it is amazing. The DA 70 is on my wishlist too.

I would suggest that get the 77 ltd first. why? simply it seem to me the FA ltd price goes up faster than those of DA ltd.

Lee

.

I don't thnk this debate is heated

When I first started on the forum, this comparison seemed to be hotly debated, with folks angrily defending their choice. Since then, it's calmed down a bit, with everyone fom both camps pretty much understanding the strengths of both lenses.

I have and prefer the 77, but wouldn't mind finding a way to justify getting the excellent little DA 70, also.


.

[benjikan]

The 70 is sharper across all apertures from wide open to f16.

[Blue]

The 70 is sharper across all apertures from wide open to f16.

Not at f1.8 and f2.

This is what Photozone says about them:

---

Last edited by Blue; 05-22-2010 at 05:08 PM.

[Rondec]

Of course. It doesn't open up to f1.8 or f2. If you need those, then you should definitely get the FA 77. If you don't need wider than f2.4, then the DA 70 may be better. I got my DA 70 for 425 and couldn't justify the increased expense for the FA 77, but I can certainly understand someone who need the extra 1/2 stop and dreamy bokeh who wants to get the FA 77.

Just a sample photo with the DA 70 and my daughter...

[dgaies]

I've owned both and you really can't go wrong with either (FWIW, I ended up keeping the 77).

Here's a shot I took yesterday morning with the 77.

Kx+FA77, f/2.5, 1/60s, iso1600

[aegisphan]

Everyone has their own valid point. To me, the FA 77 is more of a specialty lens, while the DA 70 is a rounder, general lens. This kind of comparison appears quite often in other platforms as well (pre-asph vs. asph, 35/1.4 vs. 35/2, etc.).

Looking at the FA 77, I have to say it is perfect for portrait, individual shot (high center res., low corner). In addition, I believe it has higher amount of micro-contrast as well to produce a more "alive" picture. I think that's why Wheatfield said he preferred it for studio work by a small margin. This quality is quite subtle, cause flat lighting easily render a flat picture. The FA 77 exhibits smooth tonal gradation and OOF transition. Some of these characters are what people move to Leica system, despite its insane high price.

As for the DA 70, it's best suited for street candid, where corner to corner sharpness might come in handy. It's built for such as well (small size, lower f-stop speed, full manual over-ride...). Of course, one can always use them interchangeably, but each has own its forte.

To me, over time, I don't value sharpness much anymore. Any good prime would be enough. The overall feel is what determine the lens for me. If you're not happy with what you have, you won't be able to make the most out of it. A good lens doesn't make a good photograph.

[WerTicus]

i love my da70... its perfect

never had a 77, but its twice the price for what? a little speed is all it has over the 70 imo.... don't see the justification.

[Henrik Kristensen]

i love my da70... its perfect

never had a 77, but its twice the price for what? a little speed is all it has over the 70 imo.... don't see the justification.

Well that's a little bold considering you never had the FA 77

On paper alone it has larger aperture, +7mm focal length, aperture ring, larger coverage (FF). Then in real shooting a lot says it has different rendering/characteristics. Whether it's worth it? To each his own...

Me, I think both are great based on the several pictures we've seen with both. I once had the DA 70 - now I want to try the FA 77

[alfdog]

If you want to see the difference just take the time to go through both of the DA and FA limited "club" threads. Both are great, but the 77 just has a more smooth progressive bokeh, while the 70 is sharper across the frame and also has nice color.

I prefer the look of the 77, but there isn't a real right or wrong answer, it's just what you prefer.

Alfred

[LFLee]

Rondec, that is a very nice photo of your daughter.
It's either the DA70 is amazing or you have a amazingly cute daughter!

I like the colors and the fine details of those messy hair, simply nice!

Lee

[GingerBeer]

It's either the DA70 is amazing or you have a amazingly cute daughter!

Why not possibly both an amazing lens and an amazingly cute daughter?

[MSM]

.

I don't thnk this debate is heated

When I first started on the forum, this comparison seemed to be hotly debated, with folks angrily defending their choice. Since then, it's calmed down a bit, with everyone fom both camps pretty much understanding the strengths of both lenses.

I have and prefer the 77, but wouldn't mind finding a way to justify getting the excellent little DA 70, also.


.

Agreed. I too have seen many a heated debate. Also there is the 43 v. 40mm debate and the slightly rarer debate of the FA 31 v. 35 mm. I have to smile though. It seems that there can be such negative sentiment as to what is lacking with Pentax. Here is a case of 'aren't we all so lucky.' I mean to have these kind of choices to fret over is a great thing.

Buy one or the other (Pentax wants you to buy both, of course.) and enjoy!

[Steve89]

77 ltd suffers for more CA, but......

Just like everyone says, you cant explain it but it just is something special.

Amazing lens, especially for portraits

[ogl]

My FA77 is sharper than DA70 at center at all apertures. It's razor sharp from 2.8 till 8.
DA70 covers better at corners till f4.

I have only CA wide-opened sometimes. It's all problems. DA70 is more COLOURFUL.
FA77 is more pastel.

Photozone tests says the same about my copy of FA77.