Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-10-2011, 02:10 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Flushing NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 409
If the FA's were designed with digital in mind, why are the lens hoods so short? Well, I suppose the point is they were also meant for film -- but I think they made a mistake making them built in. The DA's seem to handle flare better. It's easy enough to supplement the FA hoods, I guess, but it kind of mars the svelte elegance of the things, which is one of the things that makes them so pricey. Not that it matters to me, I love my FA31.

The quick shift on the DA40 is not as handy as it might be for me, because the focus throw is so short and the ring is so miniscule. I can't be fair to the DA40 because I just don't feel comfortable with pancakes. I concede it's a great lens considering the price and the compactness.

I wonder if the build quality on the FA ltds may have slipped lately? I'm returning a recently acquired FA 77 because the focus ring is loose and there's quite a bit of play in it before focus actually changes. I agree the rendering is beautiful, but it's a focal length that I'm not sure what to do with.


Last edited by pentup; 01-10-2011 at 02:35 PM.
01-10-2011, 02:24 PM   #17
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by pentup Quote
If the FA's were designed with digital in mind, why are the lens hoods so short? Well, I suppose the point is they were also meant for film -- but I think they made a mistake making them built in. The DA's seem to handle flare better. It's easy enough to supplement the FA hoods, I guess, but it kind of mars the svelte elegance of the things, which is one of the things that makes them so pricey. Not that it matters to me, I love my FA31.
No the FA ltds. were clearly designed for film, but they happen to preform very well on digital as well due to their modern design and coatings. Things like the imaging circle, lens hood, and rear element design all point to designed for film.

The DAs are the ones designed primarily for digital.

I think you really gotta try them for yourself. The differences are pretty obvious with the lenses in hand.
01-10-2011, 02:39 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Flushing NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 409
I was referring to Adam's remarks about the FA ltds and the *ist cameras -- I failed to notice the correction later. So yeah, the hoods aren't the greatest for non-full frame. Trivial compared to other factors, of course. (sorry, paperbag846 -- I added to my post while you were replying)
01-10-2011, 03:08 PM   #19
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by pentup Quote
The quick shift on the DA40 is not as handy as it might be for me, because the focus throw is so short and the ring is so miniscule.
A common criticism, and valid for many. I have tiny hands, and play guitar, so I don't find it that hard actually. It's very very different from some of the great manual focus lenses from the yesteryear, that is for sure.

The quickshift I used much more on the DA 70 which has a much easier to access focusing ring.

01-10-2011, 03:21 PM   #20
Site Supporter
germar's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Austin Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 728
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
I have tiny hands, and play guitar, so I don't find it that hard actually.
I have medium sized hands and I am awful at "Guitar Hero," so I shelved my DA 40 bought an FA 31.

I'm good with that.

germar
01-10-2011, 03:24 PM   #21
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,642
QuoteOriginally posted by johnny9fingers Quote
...I will have to start saving for this purchase so there is time for me to mull this over, I do wish it was possible to try both lenses for a while, but they are not available here in the hinterlands of Wisconsin...
If you're planning on spending some money on a nice lens it may be worth it to rent each of them first to help with the decision. CameraLensRentals.com - Pentax Standard Lens Rentals rents both of them quite inexpensively for four days. Then you can try them out in Wisconsin.

The coatings are the same on both DA and FA Limiteds. As far as my opinion goes I haven't tried the 70, but when I owned the 40 and 43 at the same time, I preferred the 43 so I went with the 77 too.
01-10-2011, 03:39 PM   #22
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
on the coatings....
there are two theories:
a) they are the same
b) they changed between FA and DA.

My stand?
I tend to believe to a) but logically the b) is more plausible.
Why? For exactly the reason others point out. Colour rendition!
If the coatings are the same, then how come the colours are so different?!?
Anybody who saw, compared, shot DA40 vs FA43, or FA lenses (I've tried 3 ltds, FA*24, FA*300/4.5, FA100/2.8 M) in general vs DA lenses (I've tried DA18-55, DA*50-135, DA*55, DA40ltd) will attest that the colours are different. FAs seem to have warm/yellow glow to them. When on AWB the yellows/cyans seem to be favored. In DA lenses it's still warm, but the magentas and deep blues are more favored and deep yellows/reds. Even on manual WB the rendering between the two series (at least in my experience) is markedly different.
In my logic there are two explanations which are possible/plausible: different glass or dfferent coatings....
Many say, there is no proof the coatings changed, but there's no proof for many things....IMO.
01-10-2011, 03:44 PM   #23
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,642
Well axl, we know the coating is different on your 43, but I was hoping no one would bring that up!

01-10-2011, 04:14 PM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Flushing NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 409
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
The quickshift I used much more on the DA 70 which has a much easier to access focusing ring.
I was going to ask about that. Good to know. I really think I don't need the speed of the FA77, and the DA70 is mighty tempting...
01-10-2011, 05:26 PM   #25
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
Got both the DA 70 and FA 77. Is there even a contest? Definitely the FA 77 hands down. Frankly the difference in AF speed is negligible. Both have ridiculously short hoods but the implementation on the DA 70 could be better. I prefer the color rendition of the FA 77 over the DA 70 as axl had mentioned. Both are fine lenses but good as the DA 70 is, I always wish that the background could be less distinct when I shoot head/half body portraits with it. Basically I find f/2.4 is just not wide enough, and the min focusing distance could be closer. That's where the FA 77 shines with the larger maximum aperture and narrower field of view. FA Ltd build quality is definitely a lot better than the DA Ltds. Besides, is there anything nicer looking than a silver FA 77 around?
01-10-2011, 09:10 PM - 1 Like   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Flushing NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 409
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
Basically I find f/2.4 is just not wide enough, and the min focusing distance could be closer. That's where the FA 77 shines with the larger maximum aperture and narrower field of view
I admire anyone who can do a close portrait wider open than 2.4 at that focal length, and keep both eyes acceptably in focus. I can't. This was shot at 2.5, and I wish I'd leaned back a bit, or stopped down. As for backgrounds, they seem to me as much a question of the background's proximity to the subject, as the aperture. I prefer faster lenses as well, but not for the sake of portraits. But that's just because I don't care for the ears blurry, tip of nose blurry, both eyes in focus but only if the person is looking straight ahead kind of shot. I love the 77, but it's an ackward length for portraits on digital, for me. But frankly, so is the 70. I'm used to using a 90 f 2.4 on film.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-7  Photo 
01-11-2011, 01:26 AM   #27
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
QuoteOriginally posted by builttospill Quote
Well axl, we know the coating is different on your 43, but I was hoping no one would bring that up!
Yes, I do have one of the very first 43s with reportedly different coating and leaded glass but this aside the colour rendition between those two series is definitely different!
04-04-2011, 05:32 PM   #28
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 46
OK, what's up about the coating and the glass? Are the lenses being made today worser now than the ones first built? Not wanting to start a big controversy but I would want to think that companies are always seeking to improve their quality, not go the other way. So what's the backstory on this? Thanks, Bob. (looking to buy some FA limiteds)
04-04-2011, 05:45 PM   #29
Pentaxian
v5planet's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Seattle
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,904
QuoteOriginally posted by pentup Quote
I admire anyone who can do a close portrait wider open than 2.4 at that focal length, and keep both eyes acceptably in focus. I can't. This was shot at 2.5, and I wish I'd leaned back a bit, or stopped down. As for backgrounds, they seem to me as much a question of the background's proximity to the subject, as the aperture. I prefer faster lenses as well, but not for the sake of portraits. But that's just because I don't care for the ears blurry, tip of nose blurry, both eyes in focus but only if the person is looking straight ahead kind of shot. I love the 77, but it's an ackward length for portraits on digital, for me. But frankly, so is the 70. I'm used to using a 90 f 2.4 on film.
It's all about angle. This is uncropped, wide open at f/1.8 with the 77:



I'll also leave that image up as an example of how sharp this lens is wide open, when you've angled your subject enough to pull the fuzziness of shallow DOF out of the equation.
04-04-2011, 05:50 PM   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by v5planet Quote
It's all about angle. This is uncropped, wide open at f/1.8 with the 77:



I'll also leave that image up as an example of how sharp this lens is wide open, when you've angled your subject enough to pull the fuzziness of shallow DOF out of the equation.
Nice job.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
cameras, da, fa, k-mount, lenses, limiteds, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Using old lenses on new digital camera sissy64sonny Welcomes and Introductions 9 06-05-2010 10:03 AM
Heads-up: Two Silver FA LTD's on Keh joeyc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 03-13-2010 08:26 AM
New to digital, what lenses to purchase houstonmacgregor Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 07-10-2008 06:34 AM
FA ltd's vs DA ltd's? beaumont Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 05-17-2008 09:48 PM
ME Super lenses with a digital body? - Is it possible? Max Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 04-03-2008 06:04 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:20 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top