77mm vs 70mm as all-arround

selar · 03-01-2011, 08:55 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

well, his bald looks pretty purplish.

The flowers look pretty purplish as well.

andi · 03-01-2011, 09:42 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

I have both the 70 and 77.
The 70 is my go to lens when I need a short telephoto.
The 77 is my go to lens when I need a paperweight.
Sad but true, I almost never use my 77.
Didn't use it at all last year, I used it for two portrait shoots the year before that.

This is the most bizarre statement.
If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot
with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me.
It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light.

dgaies · 03-01-2011, 09:45 PM

Originally posted by andi

This is the most bizarre statement.
If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot
with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me.
It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light.

This is not going to end well.

twitch · 03-01-2011, 10:09 PM

Wheatfield is a pro photographer, if he prefers the 70 to the 77 then more power to him. What that has to do with a P&S is beyond me. I know the prevailing wisdom here is that the 70 is a poor cousin to the 77 but even photozone says...

Quote:

Now is it [DA70] a "better" lens than the FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited ? I'd be hard pressed to provided a real guidance here. Technically the DA 70mm is a bit better (more even resolution, less purple fringing) whereas the FA 77mm has a slight edge regarding the bokeh due to its larger max. aperture. Fortunately the choice is yours and not mine

Interestingly the DA70 got a 4/5 for optical quality, the 77 a 3.5/5 for the same.

Doesn't seem a slam dunk to me

selar · 03-01-2011, 10:17 PM

Originally posted by twitch

I know the prevailing wisdom here is that the 70 is a poor cousin to the 77

I suspect that this is mainly due to DA70 having less bling than FA77 (and costing about half)...

SpecialK · 03-01-2011, 10:42 PM

Originally posted by andi

This is the most bizarre statement.
If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot
with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me.
It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light.

Perhaps there was some issue with the lens and not Wheatfield.

paperbag846 · 03-01-2011, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by andi

This is the most bizarre statement.
If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot
with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me.
It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light.

The DA 70 might have less impressive bokeh but really, it's DOF control is pretty good (2.4 at 70mm is about the same as 1.7 at 50mm...

That is a far cry from using a P&S (essentially using a 24mm lens at f8 all the time).

yusuf · 03-02-2011, 04:25 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

The 77 is my go to lens when I need a paperweight.
Sad but true, I almost never use my 77.
Didn't use it at all last year, I used it for two portrait shoots the year before that.

Well, kind of true for me too...but it's more to do with my 28-75mm and 70-200mm which are almost fixed to my cams.

But whenever I use 77mm, it never failed to impress, one of the best lens I ever owned. Two casual portraits.

**Rondec** · 03-02-2011, 04:47 AM

Originally posted by andi

This is the most bizarre statement.
If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot
with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me.
It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light.

Wheatfield shoots in a studio a lot and finds that the 77 is too long on a cropped sensor for his studio work. He prefers the DA *55 and DA 70 because they are a little shorter.

I do think that the crop effects our perception of focal lengths quite a bit. 77 would definitely be more useful on film/full frame.

DaniRo · 03-02-2011, 05:07 AM

"all-arround lens" it's just an expression... does not exist, you are looking for a lens that suits your type of photography

paperbag846 · 03-02-2011, 07:56 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

DA *55

If they would make this goddamn lens with out the horrible SDM, I would snap it up in a second. It is honestly a very versatile focal length if you can learn to think in tele.

I'm not so sure about the 77 or 70 in this regard.

It's not exactly technologically advanced, but the K55 is a really nice portrait lens wide open, and good for general purpose shots as well.

Not bad for 50 bucks.

I'm wondering, if you want an "all around" tele for FA 77 money, whether you would be better off with something like a zoom in that range. The Tamron 28-75 f2.8 comes to mind.

GeneV · 03-02-2011, 08:02 AM

Originally posted by DaniRo

"all-arround lens" it's just an expression... does not exist, you are looking for a lens that suits your type of photography

Yes, I think that is the most accurate response.

farfisa · 03-02-2011, 08:23 AM

Originally posted by wlachan

0.7m is already pretty close for this FL. FA77 has 1.2m in comparison. If you want to get closer, you really should consider a macro.

Do you mean MFD? The FA77 also focuses to 0.7m, so they're the same there.

I did find that I liked the DA70 better for landscape, but I mostly shoot people (especially at this length) and preferred the bokeh of the 77.

So if by all-around, you mean to shoot landscape, people, street, flowers, whatever, I'd pick the 70.

builttospill · 03-02-2011, 08:24 AM

For some reason I've never struggled with PF on my 77. It seems common here to prefer the 43 over the 77 due to less PF. However my 43 occasionally shows PF in challenging outdoor scenarios, but the 77 never really has, so my experience is quite the opposite. Samples are below.

In reply to the OP, if you like the longer focal length my experience gives preference to the FAs. I haven't owned the 70, but after owning both the 40 and 43 during the same time, I sold the 40.

K10D, FA77, 1/4000s, f/1.8, ISO 200

FA77, f/2

In trying to get PF at f1.8 on the 77, there's a little on her watch and ring:

and a bit more on the bottom and right side, 1/160s, f/1.8, ISO 200

Wheatfield · 03-02-2011, 04:46 PM

Originally posted by andi

This is the most bizarre statement.
If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot
with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me.
It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light.

I take it you haven't used wither of the lenses in question......

Originally posted by dgaies

This is not going to end well.

I'm on a regimen of enforced niceness, so even if I wanted it to end badly, it wouldn't.

Originally posted by SpecialK

Perhaps there was some issue with the lens and not Wheatfield.

Both lenses are very good. I don't see a whole lot of image quality difference between the two in day to day usage, but I like using the 70 more.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Girl walking arround the little pool	maucardona	Monthly Photo Contests	0	10-12-2010 01:51 PM
70mm or 77mm	branphlake	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	09-18-2009 10:43 PM
DA 70mm or FA 77mm?	TheTenaciousOne	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	07-30-2009 10:18 AM
FA 77mm Ltd or DA 70mm Ltd?	lawsonstone	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	51	06-14-2009 06:10 PM

03-01-2011, 08:55 PM	#31
selar Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,042	Originally posted by Pentaxor well, his bald looks pretty purplish. The flowers look pretty purplish as well.

03-01-2011, 09:42 PM	#32
andi Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 200	Originally posted by Wheatfield I have both the 70 and 77. The 70 is my go to lens when I need a short telephoto. The 77 is my go to lens when I need a paperweight. Sad but true, I almost never use my 77. Didn't use it at all last year, I used it for two portrait shoots the year before that. This is the most bizarre statement. If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me. It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light.

03-01-2011, 09:45 PM	#33
dgaies Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Maryland / Washington DC Posts: 3,917	Originally posted by andi This is the most bizarre statement. If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me. It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light. This is not going to end well.

03-01-2011, 10:09 PM	#34
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Wheatfield is a pro photographer, if he prefers the 70 to the 77 then more power to him. What that has to do with a P&S is beyond me. I know the prevailing wisdom here is that the 70 is a poor cousin to the 77 but even photozone says... Quote: Now is it [DA70] a "better" lens than the FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited ? I'd be hard pressed to provided a real guidance here. Technically the DA 70mm is a bit better (more even resolution, less purple fringing) whereas the FA 77mm has a slight edge regarding the bokeh due to its larger max. aperture. Fortunately the choice is yours and not mine Interestingly the DA70 got a 4/5 for optical quality, the 77 a 3.5/5 for the same. Doesn't seem a slam dunk to me

03-01-2011, 10:17 PM	#35
selar Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,042	Originally posted by twitch I know the prevailing wisdom here is that the 70 is a poor cousin to the 77 I suspect that this is mainly due to DA70 having less bling than FA77 (and costing about half)...

03-01-2011, 10:42 PM	#36
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,481	Originally posted by andi This is the most bizarre statement. If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me. It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light. Perhaps there was some issue with the lens and not Wheatfield.

03-01-2011, 10:43 PM	#37
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by andi This is the most bizarre statement. If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me. It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light. The DA 70 might have less impressive bokeh but really, it's DOF control is pretty good (2.4 at 70mm is about the same as 1.7 at 50mm... That is a far cry from using a P&S (essentially using a 24mm lens at f8 all the time).

03-02-2011, 04:25 AM	#38
yusuf Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Palo Alto, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,497	Originally posted by Wheatfield The 77 is my go to lens when I need a paperweight. Sad but true, I almost never use my 77. Didn't use it at all last year, I used it for two portrait shoots the year before that. Well, kind of true for me too...but it's more to do with my 28-75mm and 70-200mm which are almost fixed to my cams. But whenever I use 77mm, it never failed to impress, one of the best lens I ever owned. Two casual portraits.

03-02-2011, 04:47 AM	#39
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,662	Originally posted by andi This is the most bizarre statement. If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me. It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light. Wheatfield shoots in a studio a lot and finds that the 77 is too long on a cropped sensor for his studio work. He prefers the DA *55 and DA 70 because they are a little shorter. I do think that the crop effects our perception of focal lengths quite a bit. 77 would definitely be more useful on film/full frame.

03-02-2011, 05:07 AM	#40
DaniRo Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Romania Posts: 102	"all-arround lens" it's just an expression... does not exist, you are looking for a lens that suits your type of photography

03-02-2011, 07:56 AM	#41
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by Rondec DA *55 If they would make this goddamn lens with out the horrible SDM, I would snap it up in a second. It is honestly a very versatile focal length if you can learn to think in tele. I'm not so sure about the 77 or 70 in this regard. It's not exactly technologically advanced, but the K55 is a really nice portrait lens wide open, and good for general purpose shots as well. Not bad for 50 bucks. I'm wondering, if you want an "all around" tele for FA 77 money, whether you would be better off with something like a zoom in that range. The Tamron 28-75 f2.8 comes to mind.

03-02-2011, 08:02 AM	#42
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by DaniRo "all-arround lens" it's just an expression... does not exist, you are looking for a lens that suits your type of photography Yes, I think that is the most accurate response.

03-02-2011, 08:23 AM	#43
farfisa Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Toronto, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,274	Originally posted by wlachan 0.7m is already pretty close for this FL. FA77 has 1.2m in comparison. If you want to get closer, you really should consider a macro. Do you mean MFD? The FA77 also focuses to 0.7m, so they're the same there. I did find that I liked the DA70 better for landscape, but I mostly shoot people (especially at this length) and preferred the bokeh of the 77. So if by all-around, you mean to shoot landscape, people, street, flowers, whatever, I'd pick the 70.

03-02-2011, 08:24 AM	#44
builttospill Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Utah, Idaho Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,398	For some reason I've never struggled with PF on my 77. It seems common here to prefer the 43 over the 77 due to less PF. However my 43 occasionally shows PF in challenging outdoor scenarios, but the 77 never really has, so my experience is quite the opposite. Samples are below. In reply to the OP, if you like the longer focal length my experience gives preference to the FAs. I haven't owned the 70, but after owning both the 40 and 43 during the same time, I sold the 40. K10D, FA77, 1/4000s, f/1.8, ISO 200 FA77, f/2 In trying to get PF at f1.8 on the 77, there's a little on her watch and ring: and a bit more on the bottom and right side, 1/160s, f/1.8, ISO 200

03-02-2011, 04:46 PM	#45
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,986	Originally posted by andi This is the most bizarre statement. If you have both and prefer 70 over 77, you can as easily shoot with the simplest P&S camera, you won't notice the difference, trust me. It will be sharp everywhere, no purple ca, and it will be really light. I take it you haven't used wither of the lenses in question...... Originally posted by dgaies This is not going to end well. I'm on a regimen of enforced niceness, so even if I wanted it to end badly, it wouldn't. Originally posted by SpecialK Perhaps there was some issue with the lens and not Wheatfield. Both lenses are very good. I don't see a whole lot of image quality difference between the two in day to day usage, but I like using the 70 more.