[Wheatfield]

FWIW, I have the both the 70 and 77 mm lenses, as well as the *55.
The 55s bokeh is kinda busy, but it makes up for it by being quite good at wider apertures and stupid sharp at f/5.6-f/8.

Between the 70 and 77, I actually like the 70 more, to the point I've pretty much retired my 77.
The 70 isn't noticeably less sharp, I don't think it is softer wide open than the 77 is stopped down to 2.4, but I'd have to deliberately compare them to be sure.
I think it has a slight advantage in OOF rendering, but that is a judgment call not something that is quantifiable. YMMV.

It's kinda funny, but as good as the 77 is, I can't really bring myself to like it. On 35mm, it was too short, but not quite short enough on APS-C it's too long, but not quite long enough.
So anyway, I'd look seriously at the 70LTD if you want a nice short tele that is suited to portraiture.

[panoguy]

All in all, I am bamboozled.

Ha ha. We all are! The resale market for Limited anything from Pentax isn't bad these days (thanks to better and better bodies and this forum), so buy them used and resell them for the loss of shipping if you want.

I lusted after the 77 for a long time, but after trying one for a week next to my 70, it wasn't worth the extra $ to me. I think the FA43 is a different story, though...

[creampuff]

If you want the most versatility with one lens, the DFA 100mm Macro WR is very, very good. There is definitely a difference with the rounded aperture blades speaking as one who's had the FA, DFA and DFA WR versions of the 100mm macro. The only issue with the 100mm macro is the working distance to your subject will be a little longer than the other lenses, which could be an issue if you shoot more of the subject but you're in a tight interior.

The FA 77mm Limited vs DA 70mm Limited debate all boils down to how much you wanna spend and rendering. I got both but the FA 77mm always has the edge imo, but different people will have their own preference. But if you're on a shoestring budget, then settle for the DA 70mm. It will take fine photos too and is the smallest in size. Sigma 70mm Macro may be sharp but it is big and heavy lens and doesn't focus as fast as the rest. Don't discount some of the zooms covering the range too (eg. DA* 50-135mm)

[twitch]

Be aware that the Sigma prime options are huge lenses compared to Pentax primes, FA or DA.

In my view, if you are happy with the IQ of the DA40, you will be at least as happy with the IQ of the DA70. They have the same look and rendering in their images, if anything the DA70 is even better.

[paperbag846]

In my view, if you are happy with the IQ of the DA40,

More than happy. Thanks for the insight guys! I'm going to think about the DFA 100 vs. the DA 70 - I don't need either right away, so unless you think that the DA 70 deal at 400 is such a good one that I MUST have it, I'll let it slide for now.

[dgaies]

If you want the most versatility with one lens, the DFA 100mm Macro WR is very, very good. There is definitely a difference with the rounded aperture blades speaking as one who's had the FA, DFA and DFA WR versions of the 100mm macro.

I forgot to mention that the FA100/macro has a focus limiter, which is nice when you're not using it for close/macro work. The 100WR doesn't have one, but I'm not 100% suire about the DFA (non-WR).

[Pentaxor]

the DFA 100 WR and FA 100 render differently. personally, I prefer the old FA. for me, the WR lost that kind of color vividness that I am so happy with the FA.

[creampuff]

I forgot to mention that the FA100/macro has a focus limiter, which is nice when you're not using it for close/macro work. The 100WR doesn't have one, but I'm not 100% suire about the DFA (non-WR).

Quick Shift on the DFA/DFA WR have pretty much made the focus limiter redundant.

[Rondec]

More than happy. Thanks for the insight guys! I'm going to think about the DFA 100 vs. the DA 70 - I don't need either right away, so unless you think that the DA 70 deal at 400 is such a good one that I MUST have it, I'll let it slide for now.

That is an awfully good deal. Looks to me like new DA 70's are selling for 500-ish dollars right now. I got a new one a year ago for 425 and felt pretty good about that. As someone else said, if you are getting a good deal and you don't like it, you can always resell with almost no loss to yourself. I know thatyou could sell a used DA 70 for about 400 dollars, for what that is worth.

[paperbag846]

That is an awfully good deal. Looks to me like new DA 70's are selling for 500-ish dollars right now. I got a new one a year ago for 425 and felt pretty good about that. As someone else said, if you are getting a good deal and you don't like it, you can always resell with almost no loss to yourself. I know thatyou could sell a used DA 70 for about 400 dollars, for what that is worth.

Well, it's used. Do you think I could do better than 400 on the used market?

[GeneV]

Like Bill, I have both the 70 and 77, but my subjective preference leans toward the FA77. It works on all of my film bodies and the max speed and thin DOF are big plusses, as is the pixie dust factor. However, for travel and tele other than portrait, the DA70 is superior IMHO. It is tiny and one of the sharpest lenses I've used. The bad news is that unless you use both of them for some time, you will never know which one you really prefer, but the good news is that it is close call between two pieces of superb glass, so you can't go too far wrong.

[dgaies]

Quick Shift on the DFA/DFA WR have pretty much made the focus limiter redundant.

That's true; I actually prefer the quick-shift to a focus limited. I was just pointing it out as an additional difference I forgot to mention in my previous post.

I also didn't mention that the DFA-WR doesn't have a focus clamp, but the feel of the focus on the DFA-WR is superior (IMO) to the other two that it is hardly missed.

[Wheatfield]

Like Bill, I have both the 70 and 77, but my subjective preference leans toward the FA77. It works on all of my film bodies and the max speed and thin DOF are big plusses, as is the pixie dust factor. However, for travel and tele other than portrait, the DA70 is superior IMHO. It is tiny and one of the sharpest lenses I've used. The bad news is that unless you use both of them for some time, you will never know which one you really prefer, but the good news is that it is close call between two pieces of superb glass, so you can't go too far wrong.

I'm not buying the pixel dust thing.
Have you noticed if images off your 77mm have more 3 dimensionality compared to your 70? That was one of the first things I noticed about the 77 when I bought it, but I haven't compared the two lenses in that regard.
I suspect if my shooting room was a little bigger, I'd use my 77 more, and I suspect if I wasn't the lens junkie that I am, I wouldn't have bought the 70mm at all.
But I did, and quite honestly, I'm hard pressed most of the time to see any qualitative or quantitative difference between the two. They are both excellent lenses.
That 7mm shorter focal length was the decider for me, and that's because I only have 30 or so feet from background to wall in my studio.

[Nesster]

The DA70 is an amazing, 'easy' lens - that is, I find it easy to get good photographs using it.

Another alternative not yet mentioned is one of the versions of the Tamron 90mm macro. Very good lenses, a smidge less CA than the DA70, but larger... Good at portrait length.

[Rondec]

Well, it's used. Do you think I could do better than 400 on the used market?

Hard to say then. 400 seems to be the ballpark that most are selling for used these days. It probably then is more a question of how well you think the lens/focal length would work for you.