My next lens purchase should be?

Chex · 03-21-2011, 08:16 AM

When it comes down to it, I actually would like to try a DA Ltd and see if I like what I can get from it. I'm hoping my cousin has a DA Ltd I can try. I really would love to get the 31mm too, but IMO its too close to the 43 and I would probably be better off with a 21 or even 15.

paperbag846 · 03-21-2011, 08:28 AM

Originally posted by DogLover

Look, the 70 is a great lens, I wouldn't fault anyone for choosing it over the 77, unless you already know that you like the FA Ltd. style of rendering. That is the most important difference between the two, and for those of us who have been bitten by the FA Ltd. bug, that difference is well worth every extra penny that it costs.

My subjective review of the FA 77 style of rendering:

1) Really sharp wide open.
2) Nice colours but lower constrast than DA. Easier to make the DA look like the FA in post than the other way around in this respect.
3) The extra stop is nice, but at 77mm, it's thin enough that I mostly shoot at 2.2, which isn't too far off from the 70.
4) Flare rejection is not good on a digital camera. Maybe it's just due to the hood, maybe the rear element is not ideal for a digital camera.
5) Bokeh is very smooth, but be prepared for psychedelic bokeh full of colourful fringing. I know that this is common with fast lenses, but it's not exactly desirable, and it does not vanish until about f4. Really hard to deal with in post without desaturating whole colour channels.

In other words, it gets some 10's and some 7's. At the asking price I would not fall over myself to recommend it to someone.

And from my experience with ANY of the limiteds, I must say, that this pixie dust nonsense should stop because it is simply not true. The FA / DA limiteds render very nicely, but the magic is in the photographer (who could also take a magical picture with an FA 50).

On the other hand I think the macro would be nice for the OP to have because it would serve a dual purpose, and for portraits, 2.8 is plenty at 100mm.

DogLover · 03-21-2011, 08:37 AM

Originally posted by Chex

When it comes down to it, I actually would like to try a DA Ltd and see if I like what I can get from it. I'm hoping my cousin has a DA Ltd I can try. I really would love to get the 31mm too, but IMO its too close to the 43 and I would probably be better off with a 21 or even 15.

It's a personal decision many have had to make whether the 31 is too close to the 43 or not, some feel it is, some don't.

The IQ of the 21 is generally considered to be no better than a good quality zoom. The advantage of it, then, is the size and weight. Many feel that it is the weakest limited. Of course, that's like saying "the poorest millionaire."

paperbag846 · 03-21-2011, 08:44 AM

Originally posted by DogLover

The IQ of the 21 is generally considered to be no better than a good quality zoom. The advantage of it, then, is the size and weight. Many feel that it is the weakest limited. Of course, that's like saying "the poorest millionaire."

Many feel the same way about the DA 15. All of the limiteds are about size, really. You pay a lot for the privilege.

DogLover · 03-21-2011, 08:51 AM

Originally posted by paperbag846

And from my experience with ANY of the limiteds, I must say, that this pixie dust nonsense should stop because it is simply not true.

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

Perhaps not true for you (and wheatfield!), but the vast majority would disagree with you.

Chex · 03-21-2011, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by DogLover

It's a personal decision many have had to make whether the 31 is too close to the 43 or not, some feel it is, some don't.

I guess I'll have to take shots with my 18-135 @ 31mm and see if I like the results.. then I would just think of how nice it would be for it to be crisp and rendered much better.. like saving 15 min of PP work per shot. As for size between limiteds.. yes the super small pancake lenses are nice, but the 15/31/77 are not that large I'm just not a fan of the built in hoods.

DogLover · 03-21-2011, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by Chex

I'm just not a fan of the built in hoods.

Yeah, a lot of people feel that way. I'm not one of them, though. I love the convenience of the built-in hoods and only rarely find them inadequate.

Chex · 03-21-2011, 09:18 AM

I just think that a bit longer full hood might work better for flare on lenses like the 77 since it gets enough light at wide open anyways you could probably have a very long hood on it..

DogLover · 03-21-2011, 09:27 AM

It's actually the 31's hood that gets the most maligning. The 77, not so much. Lots of folks use stacked filter rings (glass removed) or accessory hoods on the 31.

Chex · 03-21-2011, 09:49 AM

The 77mm also has 49mm thread, so all my 43mm filters/hoods would fit it too..
Non price oriented advantages I see as...
77 = rendering +1, filter thread size +1, overall size +1
100 = Macro +1, Range +1, WR +1
With price in mind, it would probably be a 77 -1, 100 +1 at almost 1/2 the price.

paperbag846 · 03-21-2011, 09:56 AM

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1352215-post28.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1385278-post54.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1393733-post68.html

DogLover · 03-21-2011, 10:03 AM

I wouldn't try to talk you out of the 100WR. It's a great lens and a screaming bargain. I had one briefly and reluctantly sold it to purchase something else because I almost never shoot anything at 1:1. I'll probably re-buy it again someday. But I also think that you're still going to end up with a 77 eventually!

Also, the price difference at B&H is "only" $175.

Chex · 03-21-2011, 10:24 AM

hmm around here the 77 is around $1100 or so, and the 100 is about $650 maybe I'll have to do some more price checking

Chex · 03-24-2011, 11:08 PM

Wow.. ok se what I've seen recently the 100 macro is only $100-$150 cheaper.. the one I saw before was not the WR model. Sure makes deciding tough..

DogLover · 03-25-2011, 08:31 AM

Originally posted by Chex

Wow.. ok se what I've seen recently the 100 macro is only $100-$150 cheaper.. the one I saw before was not the WR model. Sure makes deciding tough..

You're not gonna go wrong either way, and you'll probably end up with both eventually, so it's really more of a question of which one do you want to get first?

I saw someone else post this recently. Flip a coin with heads being one lens, tails being the other. Flip it in the air. The one you're hoping it lands on while it's in the air is the one you should get. I'm sure that's not exactly right, but that's the gist of it.

View Poll Results: Which lens would you get next if you only had a 43mm Ltd
FA 77mm Ltd f1.8	21	47.73%
D FA 100mm f2.8 Macro	17	38.64%
DA 70mm Ltd. f2.4	1	2.27%
Other - please list below!	5	11.36%
Voters: 44. You may not vote on this poll

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Russian Lens Purchase	swglera	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	01-19-2011 09:45 PM
little help on lens purchase...	96p993	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	12	08-08-2010 10:54 AM
Lens Purchase Suggestions	patriotap	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	07-26-2010 04:25 PM
Worried about a lens purchase...	Anemos	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	4	07-13-2010 09:44 AM
Lens purchase on the bay	Deiberson	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	02-02-2010 10:20 AM

03-21-2011, 08:16 AM	#31
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678 Original Poster	When it comes down to it, I actually would like to try a DA Ltd and see if I like what I can get from it. I'm hoping my cousin has a DA Ltd I can try. I really would love to get the 31mm too, but IMO its too close to the 43 and I would probably be better off with a 21 or even 15.

03-21-2011, 08:28 AM	#32
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by DogLover Look, the 70 is a great lens, I wouldn't fault anyone for choosing it over the 77, unless you already know that you like the FA Ltd. style of rendering. That is the most important difference between the two, and for those of us who have been bitten by the FA Ltd. bug, that difference is well worth every extra penny that it costs. My subjective review of the FA 77 style of rendering: 1) Really sharp wide open. 2) Nice colours but lower constrast than DA. Easier to make the DA look like the FA in post than the other way around in this respect. 3) The extra stop is nice, but at 77mm, it's thin enough that I mostly shoot at 2.2, which isn't too far off from the 70. 4) Flare rejection is not good on a digital camera. Maybe it's just due to the hood, maybe the rear element is not ideal for a digital camera. 5) Bokeh is very smooth, but be prepared for psychedelic bokeh full of colourful fringing. I know that this is common with fast lenses, but it's not exactly desirable, and it does not vanish until about f4. Really hard to deal with in post without desaturating whole colour channels. In other words, it gets some 10's and some 7's. At the asking price I would not fall over myself to recommend it to someone. And from my experience with ANY of the limiteds, I must say, that this pixie dust nonsense should stop because it is simply not true. The FA / DA limiteds render very nicely, but the magic is in the photographer (who could also take a magical picture with an FA 50). On the other hand I think the macro would be nice for the OP to have because it would serve a dual purpose, and for portraits, 2.8 is plenty at 100mm.

03-21-2011, 08:37 AM	#33
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by Chex When it comes down to it, I actually would like to try a DA Ltd and see if I like what I can get from it. I'm hoping my cousin has a DA Ltd I can try. I really would love to get the 31mm too, but IMO its too close to the 43 and I would probably be better off with a 21 or even 15. It's a personal decision many have had to make whether the 31 is too close to the 43 or not, some feel it is, some don't. The IQ of the 21 is generally considered to be no better than a good quality zoom. The advantage of it, then, is the size and weight. Many feel that it is the weakest limited. Of course, that's like saying "the poorest millionaire."

03-21-2011, 08:44 AM	#34
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by DogLover The IQ of the 21 is generally considered to be no better than a good quality zoom. The advantage of it, then, is the size and weight. Many feel that it is the weakest limited. Of course, that's like saying "the poorest millionaire." Many feel the same way about the DA 15. All of the limiteds are about size, really. You pay a lot for the privilege.

03-21-2011, 08:51 AM	#35
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by paperbag846 And from my experience with ANY of the limiteds, I must say, that this pixie dust nonsense should stop because it is simply not true. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt. Perhaps not true for you (and wheatfield!), but the vast majority would disagree with you.

03-21-2011, 08:52 AM	#36
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678 Original Poster	Originally posted by DogLover It's a personal decision many have had to make whether the 31 is too close to the 43 or not, some feel it is, some don't. I guess I'll have to take shots with my 18-135 @ 31mm and see if I like the results.. then I would just think of how nice it would be for it to be crisp and rendered much better.. like saving 15 min of PP work per shot. As for size between limiteds.. yes the super small pancake lenses are nice, but the 15/31/77 are not that large I'm just not a fan of the built in hoods.

03-21-2011, 09:02 AM	#37
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by Chex I'm just not a fan of the built in hoods. Yeah, a lot of people feel that way. I'm not one of them, though. I love the convenience of the built-in hoods and only rarely find them inadequate.

03-21-2011, 09:18 AM	#38
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678 Original Poster	I just think that a bit longer full hood might work better for flare on lenses like the 77 since it gets enough light at wide open anyways you could probably have a very long hood on it..

03-21-2011, 09:27 AM	#39
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	It's actually the 31's hood that gets the most maligning. The 77, not so much. Lots of folks use stacked filter rings (glass removed) or accessory hoods on the 31.

03-21-2011, 09:49 AM	#40
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678 Original Poster	The 77mm also has 49mm thread, so all my 43mm filters/hoods would fit it too.. Non price oriented advantages I see as... 77 = rendering +1, filter thread size +1, overall size +1 100 = Macro +1, Range +1, WR +1 With price in mind, it would probably be a 77 -1, 100 +1 at almost 1/2 the price.

03-21-2011, 09:56 AM	#41
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1352215-post28.html https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1385278-post54.html https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1393733-post68.html

03-21-2011, 10:03 AM	#42
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	I wouldn't try to talk you out of the 100WR. It's a great lens and a screaming bargain. I had one briefly and reluctantly sold it to purchase something else because I almost never shoot anything at 1:1. I'll probably re-buy it again someday. But I also think that you're still going to end up with a 77 eventually! Also, the price difference at B&H is "only" $175.

03-21-2011, 10:24 AM	#43
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678 Original Poster	hmm around here the 77 is around $1100 or so, and the 100 is about $650 maybe I'll have to do some more price checking

03-24-2011, 11:08 PM	#44
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678 Original Poster	Wow.. ok se what I've seen recently the 100 macro is only $100-$150 cheaper.. the one I saw before was not the WR model. Sure makes deciding tough..

03-25-2011, 08:31 AM	#45
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by Chex Wow.. ok se what I've seen recently the 100 macro is only $100-$150 cheaper.. the one I saw before was not the WR model. Sure makes deciding tough.. You're not gonna go wrong either way, and you'll probably end up with both eventually, so it's really more of a question of which one do you want to get first? I saw someone else post this recently. Flip a coin with heads being one lens, tails being the other. Flip it in the air. The one you're hoping it lands on while it's in the air is the one you should get. I'm sure that's not exactly right, but that's the gist of it.