77mm vs 70mm as all-arround

DogLover · 03-02-2011, 05:27 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by paperbag846

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.

That's really a weak reason for rejecting the DA*55. I don't ever recall hearing of one of these failing (not saying it hasn't happened, but certainly not enough to be an issue). To me, the only possible weakness of this lens is the less-than-speedy AF, but that still doesn't keep me from loving it dearly. You are cheating yourself if that is your only reason to deny yourself this jewel.

Pentaxor · 03-02-2011, 08:50 PM

Originally posted by paperbag846

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.

actually it is the only SDM lens that doesn't have a notorious failure reputation. it's a fantastic lens. truly quiet and truly sharp, especially at f2.8 where it gets razor thin sharp. my only complaint about it is that I can't use it for action photography or anything that requires a quick snapshot. but if you are concerned with SDM reliability, the Sigma 50 would be a great alternative.

paperbag846 · 03-02-2011, 09:03 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

it for action photography or anything that requires a quick snapshot.

this would be my concern.

and as for the sigma... well it looks really nice. but I want 55

. Call me picky, I really prefer 55 for portraits.

The k55 works for now.

andi · 03-02-2011, 09:33 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

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

Au contraire. I bought all the DA and FA Limited lenses and decided which ones
I want to keep. Did some extensive tests and have a very clear idea about
the differences. I'm gonna repeat what I said - if you don't see the difference,
you might as well shoot with something much simpler.
Check my website for my credentials please, what's yours?

Andrew

paperbag846 · 03-02-2011, 09:52 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by andi

Au contraire. I bought all the DA and FA Limited lenses and decided which ones
I want to keep. Did some extensive tests and have a very clear idea about
the differences. I'm gonna repeat what I said - if you don't see the difference,
you might as well shoot with something much simpler.
Check my website for my credentials please, what's yours?

Andrew

Andy your photography does not make your opinion fact, nor does it give you a license to be rude. Wheatfield knows his stuff, better than most of us.

dgaies · 03-02-2011, 09:57 PM

Originally posted by andi

Au contraire. I bought all the DA and FA Limited lenses and decided which ones
I want to keep. Did some extensive tests and have a very clear idea about
the differences. I'm gonna repeat what I said - if you don't see the difference,
you might as well shoot with something much simpler.
Check my website for my credentials please, what's yours?

Andrew

Originally posted by paperbag846

Andy your photography does not make your opinion fact, nor does it give you a license to be rude. Wheatfield knows his stuff, better than most of us.

Furthermore, what Wheatfield wrote was that he owns both, prefers the 70 to the 77, and therefore uses the 70 the vast majority of the time. I don't see what the issue is, nor do I see why he "might as well shoot with something much simpler". That statement is both illogical and comes off as rude and condescending.

I've owned both and prefer the 77 to the 70. That is my personal preference, but I have no issues with those who feel differently. For what it's worth, I have no "credentials", nor am I a photographer by any stretch of the word. That said, I am fully capable of recognizing when someone is being rude and obnoxious. So I suppose if that was your goal, mission accomplished.

twitch · 03-02-2011, 10:07 PM

Anyone not a photography enthusiast would find it hilarious that 2 lenses as good as the 70 & 77, and as close to each other in performance, could be the subject of arguments and insults.

Can't we all just get along

Jewelltrail · 03-02-2011, 10:13 PM

Originally posted by twitch

Anyone not a photography enthusiast would find it hilarious that 2 lenses as good as the 70 & 77, and as close to each other in performance, could be the subject of arguments and insults.

Can't we all just get along

+1 Twitch! As a friend said to me yesterday, "It is easy to understand all the fighting in the Middle East which is centered upon religion, after watching all the fighting that ensues @ forums over simple talk about lenses."

Jewelltrail · 03-02-2011, 10:27 PM

Quote:

paperbag846: I really, really, want them to release the DA* 55 in a non WR non SDM limited package. It would be a phenomenal little lens.

This is the first time I've read this idea &, you know, it makes a lot of sense. I agree it is a great lens, but dropping SDM would kill 2 birds as they say: faster AF & no more mandatory extended warranties. Couple SDM removal with WR removal, and the price drops, while demand is likely to soar. I really like the shots I have seen with this lens, and was considering it in my current quest for an excellent AF portrait. But to shoot portraits of my family, I do not need slow AF, SDM failures, or WR--no Eskimos in the family line.

jsherman999 · 03-02-2011, 10:58 PM

Originally posted by twitch

Anyone not a photography enthusiast would find it hilarious that 2 lenses as good as the 70 & 77, and as close to each other in performance, could be the subject of arguments and insults.

Can't we all just get along

.

dj_saunter · 03-02-2011, 11:33 PM

I shoot film and digital.

That solves the problem for me easily.

Full-frame 77mm for the win!

andi · 03-03-2011, 12:51 AM

Originally posted by paperbag846

nor does it give you a license to be rude. Wheatfield knows his stuff, better than most of us.

Why is my post more rude than his accusation that I'm talking BS
without trying neither lens out? Seriously.
Look, I think both lenses are good. Like most lenses out there.
But 77 and 43 are by far the best lenses Pentax make. Most people are
happy with any average lens out there. Most Canon users are happy with Canon
lenses. But if a Canon user has ever tried a Zeiss lens and still thinks his
Canon lens is the best, that means he doesn't see the difference.
The same here. If you don't see the difference (not a bad thing, most people don't),
that means you can be happy shooting something simpler - you won't see
the difference. How complicated is this? And why is this obvious statement rude?

Class A · 03-03-2011, 01:52 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

I've only ever sold a few lenses, and I miss them all terribly.

Would you miss not using the FA 77 for a year?

Nice cartoon, Jay!

The FA 77 wins the beauty pageant, doesn't it?
I'd love to have one of these (while Wheatfield let's his copy collect dust...

).

heasley · 03-03-2011, 01:57 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.

The FA77 has a 0.7m min focus distance. I have the FA77 and my brother-in-law has the DA70. I think they're both very good but quite different. Its a little subjective but I much prefer the 77mm.

If you're purchasing go to the FA and DA club threads and see which you prefer.

Andi, I checked out your web site and you have some fantastic shots! Which one's are with the FA77 and FA43 (I have both).

pentup · 03-03-2011, 02:59 AM

Originally posted by andi

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.

I don't trust you, actually.

Even if one could say one of these lenses was objectively superior to the other, any given photographer could have a preference based on subjective criteria, or features. Quick shift could make the difference for one person, or the 77 being faster, for another. Never tried the 70; I had a 77 for a while. It was wonderful to use, but for some reason I was much happier with pictures shot indoors than outdoors. The hood is way too short for a crop sensor, and I disliked the fact that it's built-in. Anyway, I returned mine because the focusing ring was horribly loose, and for the money, I wasn't that impressed with the build quality. It was assembled in Vietnam; I don't know if that was part of the problem. I'd really like to have a 70. For portraits it's fast enough for me.

03-02-2011, 10:58 PM	#55
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	P.D. Originally posted by twitch Anyone not a photography enthusiast would find it hilarious that 2 lenses as good as the 70 & 77, and as close to each other in performance, could be the subject of arguments and insults. Can't we all just get along . .

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

03-02-2011, 05:27 PM - 2 Likes	#46
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by paperbag846 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. That's really a weak reason for rejecting the DA*55. I don't ever recall hearing of one of these failing (not saying it hasn't happened, but certainly not enough to be an issue). To me, the only possible weakness of this lens is the less-than-speedy AF, but that still doesn't keep me from loving it dearly. You are cheating yourself if that is your only reason to deny yourself this jewel.

03-02-2011, 08:50 PM	#47
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by paperbag846 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. actually it is the only SDM lens that doesn't have a notorious failure reputation. it's a fantastic lens. truly quiet and truly sharp, especially at f2.8 where it gets razor thin sharp. my only complaint about it is that I can't use it for action photography or anything that requires a quick snapshot. but if you are concerned with SDM reliability, the Sigma 50 would be a great alternative.

03-02-2011, 09:03 PM	#48
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by Pentaxor it for action photography or anything that requires a quick snapshot. this would be my concern. and as for the sigma... well it looks really nice. but I want 55 . Call me picky, I really prefer 55 for portraits. The k55 works for now.

03-02-2011, 09:33 PM	#49
andi Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 200	Originally posted by Wheatfield I take it you haven't used wither of the lenses in question...... Au contraire. I bought all the DA and FA Limited lenses and decided which ones I want to keep. Did some extensive tests and have a very clear idea about the differences. I'm gonna repeat what I said - if you don't see the difference, you might as well shoot with something much simpler. Check my website for my credentials please, what's yours? Andrew

03-02-2011, 09:52 PM - 2 Likes	#50
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by andi Au contraire. I bought all the DA and FA Limited lenses and decided which ones I want to keep. Did some extensive tests and have a very clear idea about the differences. I'm gonna repeat what I said - if you don't see the difference, you might as well shoot with something much simpler. Check my website for my credentials please, what's yours? Andrew Andy your photography does not make your opinion fact, nor does it give you a license to be rude. Wheatfield knows his stuff, better than most of us.

03-02-2011, 09:57 PM	#51
dgaies Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Maryland / Washington DC Posts: 3,917	Originally posted by andi Au contraire. I bought all the DA and FA Limited lenses and decided which ones I want to keep. Did some extensive tests and have a very clear idea about the differences. I'm gonna repeat what I said - if you don't see the difference, you might as well shoot with something much simpler. Check my website for my credentials please, what's yours? Andrew Originally posted by paperbag846 Andy your photography does not make your opinion fact, nor does it give you a license to be rude. Wheatfield knows his stuff, better than most of us. Furthermore, what Wheatfield wrote was that he owns both, prefers the 70 to the 77, and therefore uses the 70 the vast majority of the time. I don't see what the issue is, nor do I see why he "might as well shoot with something much simpler". That statement is both illogical and comes off as rude and condescending. I've owned both and prefer the 77 to the 70. That is my personal preference, but I have no issues with those who feel differently. For what it's worth, I have no "credentials", nor am I a photographer by any stretch of the word. That said, I am fully capable of recognizing when someone is being rude and obnoxious. So I suppose if that was your goal, mission accomplished.

03-02-2011, 10:07 PM	#52
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Anyone not a photography enthusiast would find it hilarious that 2 lenses as good as the 70 & 77, and as close to each other in performance, could be the subject of arguments and insults. Can't we all just get along

03-02-2011, 10:13 PM	#53
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180	Originally posted by twitch Anyone not a photography enthusiast would find it hilarious that 2 lenses as good as the 70 & 77, and as close to each other in performance, could be the subject of arguments and insults. Can't we all just get along +1 Twitch! As a friend said to me yesterday, "It is easy to understand all the fighting in the Middle East which is centered upon religion, after watching all the fighting that ensues @ forums over simple talk about lenses."

03-02-2011, 10:27 PM	#54
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180	Quote: paperbag846: I really, really, want them to release the DA* 55 in a non WR non SDM limited package. It would be a phenomenal little lens. This is the first time I've read this idea &, you know, it makes a lot of sense. I agree it is a great lens, but dropping SDM would kill 2 birds as they say: faster AF & no more mandatory extended warranties. Couple SDM removal with WR removal, and the price drops, while demand is likely to soar. I really like the shots I have seen with this lens, and was considering it in my current quest for an excellent AF portrait. But to shoot portraits of my family, I do not need slow AF, SDM failures, or WR--no Eskimos in the family line.

03-02-2011, 11:33 PM	#56
dj_saunter Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 209	I shoot film and digital. That solves the problem for me easily. Full-frame 77mm for the win!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-03-2011, 12:51 AM	#57
andi Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 200	Originally posted by paperbag846 nor does it give you a license to be rude. Wheatfield knows his stuff, better than most of us. Why is my post more rude than his accusation that I'm talking BS without trying neither lens out? Seriously. Look, I think both lenses are good. Like most lenses out there. But 77 and 43 are by far the best lenses Pentax make. Most people are happy with any average lens out there. Most Canon users are happy with Canon lenses. But if a Canon user has ever tried a Zeiss lens and still thinks his Canon lens is the best, that means he doesn't see the difference. The same here. If you don't see the difference (not a bad thing, most people don't), that means you can be happy shooting something simpler - you won't see the difference. How complicated is this? And why is this obvious statement rude?

03-03-2011, 01:52 AM	#58
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by Wheatfield I've only ever sold a few lenses, and I miss them all terribly. Would you miss not using the FA 77 for a year? Nice cartoon, Jay! The FA 77 wins the beauty pageant, doesn't it? I'd love to have one of these (while Wheatfield let's his copy collect dust... ).

03-03-2011, 01:57 AM	#59
heasley Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Brisbane Posts: 99	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. The FA77 has a 0.7m min focus distance. I have the FA77 and my brother-in-law has the DA70. I think they're both very good but quite different. Its a little subjective but I much prefer the 77mm. If you're purchasing go to the FA and DA club threads and see which you prefer. Andi, I checked out your web site and you have some fantastic shots! Which one's are with the FA77 and FA43 (I have both).

03-03-2011, 02:59 AM	#60
pentup Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Flushing NY Photos: Albums Posts: 413	Originally posted by andi 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. I don't trust you, actually. Even if one could say one of these lenses was objectively superior to the other, any given photographer could have a preference based on subjective criteria, or features. Quick shift could make the difference for one person, or the 77 being faster, for another. Never tried the 70; I had a 77 for a while. It was wonderful to use, but for some reason I was much happier with pictures shot indoors than outdoors. The hood is way too short for a crop sensor, and I disliked the fact that it's built-in. Anyway, I returned mine because the focusing ring was horribly loose, and for the money, I wasn't that impressed with the build quality. It was assembled in Vietnam; I don't know if that was part of the problem. I'd really like to have a 70. For portraits it's fast enough for me.