Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-11-2011, 12:10 PM   #46
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Quebec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 210
Seriously, I don't want to start an argument about the inherent qualities of these two lens. However, and this is something that has been bugging me for a long time, I don't understand why many people don't seem to consider FOV equivalence important. Birders seems to consider this issue very seriously when they discuss the pros and cons of APS-C. They often mention their 500mm f4 become 750mm f4 when used on APS-C (advantage). Landscapers also make this conversion very often and talk about their 20mm lens becoming 30mm on APS-C (disadvantage). However, this logic doesn't apply to 70-200mm zooms since they are still very popular on APS-C and few lens manufacturers offer their equivalent. Only Pentax with it's 50-135mm and Sigma with the 50-150 do as far as I know. Intriguing?

02-11-2011, 01:00 PM   #47
Loyal Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,376
QuoteOriginally posted by SylBer Quote
However, this logic doesn't apply to 70-200mm zooms since they are still very popular on APS-C and few lens manufacturers offer their equivalent. Only Pentax with it's 50-135mm and Sigma with the 50-150 do as far as I know. Intriguing?
I see your point and perhaps that explains why I'm probably in the minority regarding the 50-135mm.
02-12-2011, 12:50 AM   #48
Veteran Member
wlachan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,626
With fast standard zooms cover up to 50/55mm, the gap between 50/55 and 70mm is not that huge in practice. Make sense?
02-12-2011, 01:35 AM   #49
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 484
QuoteOriginally posted by ShowMeTheMoney Quote
I'd go for the 77, simply because of size.

+1 to the disagreement about 50-135 being a useless zoom range on APS-C. For my purposes, I'd take a 50-135 over a 70-200 (105-300mm equivalent) lens on APS-C any day.

In fact, I pity all the CaNikon APS-C shooters who have to use a huge 70-200 VR/IS Full Frame lens, unless they take the Sigma 50-150 or other 3rd party options.
You mean you pity the C/N guys who can get exactly the same lens (Tokina), only cheaper and with a more reliable focusing system?

Joking, of course, they loose weather-sealing, SMC coating and shake reduction, but still...

02-12-2011, 02:31 AM   #50
Veteran Member
philippe's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Flanders Fields
Posts: 463
What about the D FA 100 mm Macro WR? Very workable for portrait and it is a moderate tele too, macro till 1:1, well build, high IQ and not overly expensive compared to the 77 mm. The down side is the F 1:2.8, but with the K5 not a real problem when shooting at high ASA...
02-12-2011, 05:58 AM   #51
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,993
QuoteOriginally posted by SylBer Quote
Seriously, I don't want to start an argument about the inherent qualities of these two lens. However, and this is something that has been bugging me for a long time, I don't understand why many people don't seem to consider FOV equivalence important. Birders seems to consider this issue very seriously when they discuss the pros and cons of APS-C. They often mention their 500mm f4 become 750mm f4 when used on APS-C (advantage). Landscapers also make this conversion very often and talk about their 20mm lens becoming 30mm on APS-C (disadvantage). However, this logic doesn't apply to 70-200mm zooms since they are still very popular on APS-C and few lens manufacturers offer their equivalent. Only Pentax with it's 50-135mm and Sigma with the 50-150 do as far as I know. Intriguing?
I think that a lot of people feel like they are getting a 200mm f2.8 lens on the cheap. They don't necessarily think about the wide side of things on the lens. Also, with Canon and Nikon, camera bodies are so big that adding a huge lens to the mix doesn't bother anyone, it just gets you noticed more.

As far as Canon and Nikon's perspective, their goal is to get photographers to move up to full frame and they do so by making their top end lenses full frame compatible and with focal lengths that are traditional 35mm focal lengths. That way, they sell as many D3s and 5Ds as possible, even to people who would probably be fine with APS-C.
02-12-2011, 09:33 PM   #52
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NH
Posts: 40
QuoteOriginally posted by EricT Quote
You mean you pity the C/N guys who can get exactly the same lens (Tokina), only cheaper and with a more reliable focusing system?
The Tokina is discontinued. I was actually looking at getting a D7000 and that lens and found out the only way to get it is from dodgy sellers. The Sigma 50-150 is the only option now, and the new version is apparently and quite bizarrely in the exact same body as their 70-200.

Let me thrown in another wrinkle... 77 limited or 100 wr macro?
02-12-2011, 11:27 PM   #53
Site Supporter
NeverSatisfied's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: S.E. Michigan
Posts: 666
QuoteOriginally posted by krtwood Quote
The Sigma 50-150 is the only option now, and the new version is apparently and quite bizarrely in the exact same body as their 70-200.
Are you sure? The nice thing about the 50-135 (50-150) "class" is the manageable size compared to the 70-200's. Yes my Tamron 70-200 has more reach, but it's so doggone big & heavy that 9 times out of 10 I'd rather grab the 50-135. Besides, I thought Sigma's new 50-150 was only just announced, not yet available for any mount, let alone Pentax... although that is a lens that has my interest.

02-13-2011, 09:15 AM   #54
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NH
Posts: 40
QuoteOriginally posted by NeverSatisfied Quote
Are you sure? The nice thing about the 50-135 (50-150) "class" is the manageable size compared to the 70-200's. Yes my Tamron 70-200 has more reach, but it's so doggone big & heavy that 9 times out of 10 I'd rather grab the 50-135. Besides, I thought Sigma's new 50-150 was only just announced, not yet available for any mount, let alone Pentax... although that is a lens that has my interest.
The size was given in the announcement but not the weight. The dimensions are identical and the pictures are the same except the 50-150 doesn't have the tripod mount. It doesn't make any sense, especially since it's still an APS only lens.

I've changed my mind: Nikon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
02-13-2011, 06:13 PM   #55
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Quebec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 210
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I think that a lot of people feel like they are getting a 200mm f2.8 lens on the cheap.
I have the DA*50-135 and the DA*200. Most 70-200mm are superb lens, but they cannot touch my DA*200
02-13-2011, 06:42 PM   #56
Pentaxian
panoguy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington, D.C.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,290
I faced this exact dilemma a few years ago. Borrowed an FA77, and then bought the 50-135 sight unseen (aside from photos and raves hereabouts). Reason: both are quite sharp, but sometimes I can't "zoom with my feet" (and removing the purple-fringes from the 77 shots was agonizing!).
02-13-2011, 07:40 PM   #57
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,545
77, cause I have the 50-150mm zoom range covered.

However, if I had no lens and had to choose one it would still be the 77. Pixie dust is just too cool... (it's subjective)
02-14-2011, 06:32 PM   #58
JHD
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by panoguy Quote
...both are quite sharp, but sometimes I can't "zoom with my feet" (and removing the purple-fringes from the 77 shots was agonizing!).
Excellent summery. Purple fringing from an expensive prime = deal breaker.
02-14-2011, 07:02 PM   #59
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by JHD Quote
Purple fringing from an expensive prime = deal breaker.
Odd that I take pictures with this lens every day and maybe twice a year have a shot affected by this "deal-breaker" deficiency. Then I spend two minutes in PP and fix it.
02-14-2011, 08:18 PM   #60
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,470
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
Odd that I take pictures with this lens every day and maybe twice a year have a shot affected by this "deal-breaker" deficiency. Then I spend two minutes in PP and fix it.
I think people who get PF must have utterly different ideas of proper exposure from me. They kept telling me my little Lumix bridge would PF all over the place, and I'd have trouble getting any.

Needless to say, it's me: I'd take the 77 in a cold second.
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!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: DA* 16-50mm, DA* 50-135mm, B+W 77mm CP frostugh Sold Items 17 09-17-2009 07:59 AM
For Sale - Sold: CLA'd LX w/ accessories, FA 77mm ltd, M 135mm 3.5 CSoars Sold Items 4 08-05-2009 06:36 PM
Comparitive images from 77mm and 50-135mm? jfsavage Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 02-08-2009 07:26 PM
Opinions - 50-135mm f2.8 or 77mm f1.8 jfsavage Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 02-05-2009 11:58 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:00 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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