Opinions on fast prime telephoto?

Reportage · 10-26-2010, 01:03 AM

With Sigma 24mm f/1.8 and Pentax FA50mm f/1.4, what would be recommended telephoto to complete the 3 lens setup?

**Digitalis** · 10-26-2010, 01:36 AM

The FA77mm f/1.8 is certainly a good place to start, if you're lucky a FA*85mm f/1.4 or the manual focus A*135mm f/1.8 there aren't a lot of longer lenses faster than f/2 in the pentax line up.

the DA 70mm f/2.4 is also an excellent performer, the D-FA 100mm f/2.8 WR macro is also quite versatile for both portrait and macro work.

DSims · 10-26-2010, 02:16 AM

Originally posted by Digitalis

The FA77mm f/1.8 is certainly a good place to start, if you're lucky a FA*85mm f/1.4 or the manual focus A*135mm f/1.8 there aren't a lot of longer lenses faster than f/2 in the pentax line up.

the DA 70mm f/2.4 is also an excellent performer, the D-FA 100mm f/2.8 WR macro is also quite versatile for both portrait and macro work.

I think I'd agree with all of this, but in order to stay more affordable the F or FA 135/2.8 or aforementioned D-FA 100mm f/2.8 WR macro (it really is good for portraits and seems better than the non-WR) might be the better ones.

If a little shorter FL is OK there's no replacement for the FA77/1.8 (my favorite lens, I think). The DA70/2.4 is of course good too, and cheaper, but if you get the FA77 I doubt you'll be left wanting.

**Digitalis** · 10-26-2010, 02:22 AM

you might also consider the new sigma 85mm f/1.4 - I don't know when it is being released in pentax K mount but it will probably be a bit later than the EF and F mount versions.

Originally posted by DSims

if you get the FA77 I doubt you'll be left wanting.

but you will also be left thinking, I wonder what the DA70mm f/2.4 is like...

As an owner of the FA77 i'll admit those thoughts have crossed my mind more than once, especially when my FA77 was on a hunting expedition.

**Lowell Goudge** · 10-26-2010, 05:23 AM

you really need to define telephoto.

although this is anything longer than 50mm usually it describes lenses in excess of 100mm. I don't see anyone suggesting a real telephoto, so the question is do you want telephoto or portrait?

**Digitalis** · 10-26-2010, 05:27 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

.. it describes lenses in excess of 100mm. I don't see anyone suggesting a real telephoto.

On APS-C, the FA77 and DA70mm still fit in that classification with the DA70mm being a classic 105mm which, in case you haven't noticed was a very popular focal length amongst Nikon photographers for portraiture. All the other lenses I have suggested still fit in the over 100mm category on APS-C

SpecialK · 10-26-2010, 06:20 AM

Your question is too vague. But, three lenses is not "complete" for most people.

**dadipentak** · 10-26-2010, 07:34 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

you really need to define telephoto.

Really! There's a lot of FL real estate above 'normal.'

**Lowell Goudge** · 10-26-2010, 07:42 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

you really need to define telephoto.

although this is anything longer than 50mm usually it describes lenses in excess of 100mm. I don't see anyone suggesting a real telephoto, so the question is do you want telephoto or portrait?

Originally posted by Digitalis

On APS-C, the FA77 and DA70mm still fit in that classification with the DA70mm being a classic 105mm which, in case you haven't noticed was a very popular focal length amongst Nikon photographers for portraiture. All the other lenses I have suggested still fit in the over 100mm category on APS-C

It is not a question of what fits a very broad range it is a question of what does the OP want.

Originally posted by SpecialK

Your question is too vague. But, three lenses is not "complete" for most people.

Agree totally, no matter what anyone suggests, without more guidance, he can have anything from 70mm to 500+mm.

Originally posted by dadipentak

Really! There's a lot of FL real estate above 'normal.'

That's why I asked, the question. Every one is jumping in here with their pet lens making all sorts of assumptions on a range that is so broad that it is a joke.

Lets get the OP to define what he wants, in rough terms. Focal length, speed and cost, or at least main purpose. i.e. portrait, landscape, wld life???

JonPB · 10-26-2010, 08:58 AM

Purely from a convenience point of view, if I had a 24mm and a 50mm and wanted a longer lens, I'd go for a 100mm. Having the same ratio between a set of primes seems like a good idea to me, but I'm not sure whether that's just because I like the numerical simplicity of it or whether it is photographically meaningful. For me, a 35/50/70 kit is excellent, although I would never recommend that kit for others as it is basically one standard and two portrait-length telephotos.

That said, what body are you putting these lenses on? It sounds like you are looking at the "traditional" lineup of three primes, which meant 35mm, 50mm, and 135mm; with a Pentax digital, those would be matched by 24mm, 35mm, and 90mm lenses.

More to the point, how do you anticipate using this lens? Your signature says that you are a sports photographer; you might need a longer telephoto than would be recommended for a general purpose setup.

If shallow DOF is your primary requirement, the FA*85 is the way to go (as I assume manual focus for sports photography isn't your niche). If a fast shutter is what you need, depending on your current camera I might even suggest looking at a K-5/K-r/K-x for their high ISO quality; an f/5.6 zoom is only 2 stops slower than an f/2.8 lens, and those cameras might be more than two stops better than your current body, and the narrower aperture will help any autofocus system. If you are budget-limited, prime telephotos are going to hurt but the DA70 and various 100mm macros are worth a look. [It is very strange to list the DA70 as a "budget" lens, but that's just because Pentax doesn't have much by way of low-price prime telephotos.]

But I think the bottom line is that there is no more "traditional" lineup of prime lenses for photography. Zooms are good enough now to become the standard, general purpose kit of choice. If you're buying primes, you buy the focal lengths you need, and as others have mentioned we don't know what your needs are and so making recommendations is difficult.

On the other hand, there isn't a bad autofocus Pentax telephoto prime lens that I know of. I'm not familiar with off-brand telephotos, but Pentax's offerings in this area are all worthwhile.

Reportage · 10-26-2010, 10:06 AM

I am looking at 3 because the more i have, the more i start thinking which lens to use and the more lenses left at home.

should be somewhere in the 85mm-135mm range as plan to get a 150-500mm in future.

**Lowell Goudge** · 10-26-2010, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by Reportage

I am looking at 3 because the more i have, the more i start thinking which lens to use and the more lenses left at home.

should be somewhere in the 85mm-135mm range as plan to get a 150-500mm in future.

OK now we're getting somewhere.

If you are talking about the old portrait range, and you want AF then you are a little limited.

depending on what you want to shoot, either a FA77F1.8 or FA85F1.4 (or perhaps the new sigma) would be good, fast and allow a lot of creativity. You could also look at a FA135F2.8 if you want a longer option, but forget the 1.8 unless you have lots of money. You could, in a pinch put a quality 2x TC on the 77 or 85 to get the needed reach without getting a 135.

That allows for later purchase of a 200F2.8 or 300F4.

If you go for MF there are a lot more options,

deadwolfbones · 10-26-2010, 10:42 AM

I'd get the 100/2.8WR or Tamron 90/2.8 macros.

Colorado CJ · 10-26-2010, 10:42 AM - **1 Like**

I just picked up an old Focal 135mm F2.8 from a pawn shop for $20.00. It looks like it was never used in great condition.

With the limited amount of pics taken, it looks to be a nice sharp lens, even wide open.

So, don't forget to look for some old glass as well, you can get a great fast tele lens for little to nothing.

Blue · 10-26-2010, 11:47 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

you really need to define telephoto.

although this is anything longer than 50mm usually it describes lenses in excess of 100mm. I don't see anyone suggesting a real telephoto, so the question is do you want telephoto or portrait?

Even on film, anything over 58mm to 100mm was often considered a short tele. Even Dimitrov's site has them divided up that way.

10-26-2010, 01:03 AM	#1
Reportage Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 739	Opinions on fast prime telephoto? With Sigma 24mm f/1.8 and Pentax FA50mm f/1.4, what would be recommended telephoto to complete the 3 lens setup?

10-26-2010, 01:36 AM	#2
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	The FA77mm f/1.8 is certainly a good place to start, if you're lucky a FA85mm f/1.4 or the manual focus A135mm f/1.8 there aren't a lot of longer lenses faster than f/2 in the pentax line up. the DA 70mm f/2.4 is also an excellent performer, the D-FA 100mm f/2.8 WR macro is also quite versatile for both portrait and macro work. Last edited by Digitalis; 10-26-2010 at 01:48 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Tokina SD 400mm f/5.6 KA (Auto-aperture) Fast Telephoto Prime, Worldwide Ship!	wallyb	Sold Items	7	01-12-2010 06:56 PM
The mandatory fast lens , choices, opinions	bdery	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	39	07-25-2009 03:03 PM
Fast short telephoto zoom - alternatives	Noisychip	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	09-27-2008 04:54 PM
Opinions on Pentax Zoom Telephoto SMCP-FA J 75-300mm f/4.5-5.8 AL	raider	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	07-15-2007 04:27 PM

10-26-2010, 02:16 AM	#3
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by Digitalis The FA77mm f/1.8 is certainly a good place to start, if you're lucky a FA85mm f/1.4 or the manual focus A135mm f/1.8 there aren't a lot of longer lenses faster than f/2 in the pentax line up. the DA 70mm f/2.4 is also an excellent performer, the D-FA 100mm f/2.8 WR macro is also quite versatile for both portrait and macro work. I think I'd agree with all of this, but in order to stay more affordable the F or FA 135/2.8 or aforementioned D-FA 100mm f/2.8 WR macro (it really is good for portraits and seems better than the non-WR) might be the better ones. If a little shorter FL is OK there's no replacement for the FA77/1.8 (my favorite lens, I think). The DA70/2.4 is of course good too, and cheaper, but if you get the FA77 I doubt you'll be left wanting.

10-26-2010, 02:22 AM	#4
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	you might also consider the new sigma 85mm f/1.4 - I don't know when it is being released in pentax K mount but it will probably be a bit later than the EF and F mount versions. Originally posted by DSims if you get the FA77 I doubt you'll be left wanting. but you will also be left thinking, I wonder what the DA70mm f/2.4 is like... As an owner of the FA77 i'll admit those thoughts have crossed my mind more than once, especially when my FA77 was on a hunting expedition.

10-26-2010, 05:23 AM	#5
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	you really need to define telephoto. although this is anything longer than 50mm usually it describes lenses in excess of 100mm. I don't see anyone suggesting a real telephoto, so the question is do you want telephoto or portrait?

10-26-2010, 05:27 AM	#6
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge .. it describes lenses in excess of 100mm. I don't see anyone suggesting a real telephoto. On APS-C, the FA77 and DA70mm still fit in that classification with the DA70mm being a classic 105mm which, in case you haven't noticed was a very popular focal length amongst Nikon photographers for portraiture. All the other lenses I have suggested still fit in the over 100mm category on APS-C

10-26-2010, 06:20 AM	#7
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	Your question is too vague. But, three lenses is not "complete" for most people.

10-26-2010, 07:34 AM	#8
dadipentak Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Baltimore, Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,590	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge you really need to define telephoto. Really! There's a lot of FL real estate above 'normal.'

10-26-2010, 07:42 AM	#9
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge you really need to define telephoto. although this is anything longer than 50mm usually it describes lenses in excess of 100mm. I don't see anyone suggesting a real telephoto, so the question is do you want telephoto or portrait? Originally posted by Digitalis On APS-C, the FA77 and DA70mm still fit in that classification with the DA70mm being a classic 105mm which, in case you haven't noticed was a very popular focal length amongst Nikon photographers for portraiture. All the other lenses I have suggested still fit in the over 100mm category on APS-C It is not a question of what fits a very broad range it is a question of what does the OP want. Originally posted by SpecialK Your question is too vague. But, three lenses is not "complete" for most people. Agree totally, no matter what anyone suggests, without more guidance, he can have anything from 70mm to 500+mm. Originally posted by dadipentak Really! There's a lot of FL real estate above 'normal.' That's why I asked, the question. Every one is jumping in here with their pet lens making all sorts of assumptions on a range that is so broad that it is a joke. Lets get the OP to define what he wants, in rough terms. Focal length, speed and cost, or at least main purpose. i.e. portrait, landscape, wld life???

10-26-2010, 08:58 AM	#10
JonPB Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Portland, OR, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 430	Purely from a convenience point of view, if I had a 24mm and a 50mm and wanted a longer lens, I'd go for a 100mm. Having the same ratio between a set of primes seems like a good idea to me, but I'm not sure whether that's just because I like the numerical simplicity of it or whether it is photographically meaningful. For me, a 35/50/70 kit is excellent, although I would never recommend that kit for others as it is basically one standard and two portrait-length telephotos. That said, what body are you putting these lenses on? It sounds like you are looking at the "traditional" lineup of three primes, which meant 35mm, 50mm, and 135mm; with a Pentax digital, those would be matched by 24mm, 35mm, and 90mm lenses. More to the point, how do you anticipate using this lens? Your signature says that you are a sports photographer; you might need a longer telephoto than would be recommended for a general purpose setup. If shallow DOF is your primary requirement, the FA*85 is the way to go (as I assume manual focus for sports photography isn't your niche). If a fast shutter is what you need, depending on your current camera I might even suggest looking at a K-5/K-r/K-x for their high ISO quality; an f/5.6 zoom is only 2 stops slower than an f/2.8 lens, and those cameras might be more than two stops better than your current body, and the narrower aperture will help any autofocus system. If you are budget-limited, prime telephotos are going to hurt but the DA70 and various 100mm macros are worth a look. [It is very strange to list the DA70 as a "budget" lens, but that's just because Pentax doesn't have much by way of low-price prime telephotos.] But I think the bottom line is that there is no more "traditional" lineup of prime lenses for photography. Zooms are good enough now to become the standard, general purpose kit of choice. If you're buying primes, you buy the focal lengths you need, and as others have mentioned we don't know what your needs are and so making recommendations is difficult. On the other hand, there isn't a bad autofocus Pentax telephoto prime lens that I know of. I'm not familiar with off-brand telephotos, but Pentax's offerings in this area are all worthwhile.

10-26-2010, 10:06 AM	#11
Reportage Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 739 Original Poster	I am looking at 3 because the more i have, the more i start thinking which lens to use and the more lenses left at home. should be somewhere in the 85mm-135mm range as plan to get a 150-500mm in future.

10-26-2010, 10:28 AM	#12
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	Originally posted by Reportage I am looking at 3 because the more i have, the more i start thinking which lens to use and the more lenses left at home. should be somewhere in the 85mm-135mm range as plan to get a 150-500mm in future. OK now we're getting somewhere. If you are talking about the old portrait range, and you want AF then you are a little limited. depending on what you want to shoot, either a FA77F1.8 or FA85F1.4 (or perhaps the new sigma) would be good, fast and allow a lot of creativity. You could also look at a FA135F2.8 if you want a longer option, but forget the 1.8 unless you have lots of money. You could, in a pinch put a quality 2x TC on the 77 or 85 to get the needed reach without getting a 135. That allows for later purchase of a 200F2.8 or 300F4. If you go for MF there are a lot more options,

10-26-2010, 10:42 AM	#13
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450	I'd get the 100/2.8WR or Tamron 90/2.8 macros.

10-26-2010, 10:42 AM - 1 Like	#14
Colorado CJ Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Colorado Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,429	I just picked up an old Focal 135mm F2.8 from a pawn shop for $20.00. It looks like it was never used in great condition. With the limited amount of pics taken, it looks to be a nice sharp lens, even wide open. So, don't forget to look for some old glass as well, you can get a great fast tele lens for little to nothing.

10-26-2010, 11:47 AM	#15
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge you really need to define telephoto. although this is anything longer than 50mm usually it describes lenses in excess of 100mm. I don't see anyone suggesting a real telephoto, so the question is do you want telephoto or portrait? Even on film, anything over 58mm to 100mm was often considered a short tele. Even Dimitrov's site has them divided up that way.