[Mystic]

what should I do?

I want to buy a new lense.

I have an opportunity to buy one of them used.
while DA70mm would be more expensive by some 100$ than the DA 10-17mm

As i work in a nightclub as a photographer, for what I could be using fisheye rather then Dj shots and shots of crowds?

Which would be a better investment?

Currently I have one ultra wide - DA12-24mm will fisheye by something similar or totally different?

Recently I bought my first prime that's DAL 35mm f/2.4 I liked its performance, however its bokeh isn't too exiting.. will DA70mm be something extraordinary in IQ and bokeh department?

I work in a nightclub as a photographer, will DA70mm be useful for candid portraits in a nightclub? I tried FA50, but it's focus was too slow, and reach wasn't enough for candid portraits.. will DA70m be quicker in focus department?

Will bokeh be something to adore?

What about DA70mm contrasts, aren't shadows too dark? because I had a dream in which they seemed very dark and I couldn't take a good picture with that lens while DA10-17 in a dream was superior in IQ and every picture that I took was great.. should I trust my dream? or my logic?

Sorry to put so strange dillema onto you, but any thoughts would be very appreciated.

[SpecialK]

The 10-17 is very wide so there is a big difference in the type of shots you get with it compared to a 70mm, which is good for portraits. The fisheye gets the whole crowd.

[paperbag846]

In a crowd the DA 70 is going to be useless, in a sparse nightclub it should be ok but you are going to need the K5 paired with it.

I think most nightclub photogs use a wide angle lens and flash, get up close and personal. I could be wrong.

[elho_cid]

I like the fisheye a lot... for its purposes. You would probably like it in the nightclub more than the DA12-24. The fisheye or the DA14 for its speed. DA12-24 is more a landscape specialist.
I had the DA70 borrowed and found the DOF too deep for my intended portrait application. As I do not mind the bulk, I chose to buy FA*85 instead.
But when portability matters, DA70 is awesome.

[interested_observer]

To get a better idea of the lenses, the 10-17FE has a field of view of 180 to 100 degrees wide. The 12-24 has an field of view of 99 to 60 degrees. You are going to get distortion at the 10mm end which is reduced when its 17mm, however its still there. The eye will detect the distortion as it know what a room looks like - you will get a bend in the image somewhere depending on how it is framed. Also, folks on the edges or boarders will be distorted also to some degree.

It might fit well, or might not depending on how you use it and the shots you take with it. If you do get it, I would pick it up from somewhere where you can return it - if you do not like the results. Either that or try renting one for a few days....

The 12-24 is not a fisheye, but it is wide.

The DA 70 is f2.4, the FA 77 Ltd is f1.8. The FA 50 is f1.4 or f1.7 or 2.8 macro. If the FA 50/f1.4/1.7 was not fast enough, then none of the other lenses will be fast enough either.

[twitch]

You have a 12-24 and a 35. You found the FA50 too slow focusing and slightly short? Then the DA70 is the logical choice. It's the fastest focusing prime above 40mm Pentax makes, it is slightly longer than 50mm which you found too short, and it's f/2.4 which is "kind of" fast. Question for you is whether 2.4 is fast enough, only you can answer that as we don't know the lighting conditions you face. Mind you, it's fast than the 12-24 which you use.

I think the DA70 has the best IQ of the DA limiteds I own. It's bokeh is very good, but a notch below the FA77.

[Mystic]

The 10-17 is very wide so there is a big difference in the type of shots you get with it compared to a 70mm, which is good for portraits. The fisheye gets the whole crowd.

well I'm not that new, that I wouldn't understand the fact that fish eye is wider than DA70 anyway thanks for your reply.

I like the fisheye a lot... for its purposes. You would probably like it in the nightclub more than the DA12-24. The fisheye or the DA14 for its speed. DA12-24 is more a landscape specialist.
I had the DA70 borrowed and found the DOF too deep for my intended portrait application. As I do not mind the bulk, I chose to buy FA*85 instead.
But when portability matters, DA70 is awesome.

I use Kr so the speed of focusing is roughly the same as K5.. yet I can only use kr up to 1600 ISO. so far 12-24 served me quite well for being quick in focusing department. its aperture not big, but it's ok.
I do doubt, that DA70's DOF will be too deep too.. so in the end I will not have the desired bokeh..

To get a better idea of the lenses, the 10-17FE has a field of view of 180 to 100 degrees wide. The 12-24 has an field of view of 99 to 60 degrees. You are going to get distortion at the 10mm end which is reduced when its 17mm, however its still there. The eye will detect the distortion as it know what a room looks like - you will get a bend in the image somewhere depending on how it is framed. Also, folks on the edges or boarders will be distorted also to some degree.

It might fit well, or might not depending on how you use it and the shots you take with it. If you do get it, I would pick it up from somewhere where you can return it - if you do not like the results. Either that or try renting one for a few days....

The 12-24 is not a fisheye, but it is wide.

The DA 70 is f2.4, the FA 77 Ltd is f1.8. The FA 50 is f1.4 or f1.7 or 2.8 macro. If the FA 50/f1.4/1.7 was not fast enough, then none of the other lenses will be fast enough either.

I'm not talking about aperture size (speed) i'm talking about focusing speed (quick)
I do not have the possibility to rent, I'd have to buy.

You have a 12-24 and a 35. You found the FA50 too slow focusing and slightly short? Then the DA70 is the logical choice. It's the fastest focusing prime above 40mm Pentax makes, it is slightly longer than 50mm which you found too short, and it's f/2.4 which is "kind of" fast. Question for you is whether 2.4 is fast enough, only you can answer that as we don't know the lighting conditions you face. Mind you, it's fast than the 12-24 which you use.

I think the DA70 has the best IQ of the DA limiteds I own. It's bokeh is very good, but a notch below the FA77.

well.. i checked your gallery that's done with DA70
I liked one shot the most

Untitled | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

here the bokeh and IQ is great.
I also checked pentaxforums gallery done with both lenses and I liked DA10-17 pictures more..

I think I'll go with the fisheye..

and someday will get some equvalent of 85mm 1.4

thanks for your ideas.

[SpecialK]

wide angle lens and flash, get up close and personal. I could be wrong.

I hope so. It is a nice way to make friends with drunks :-)

[SpecialK]

well I'm not that new, that I wouldn't understand the fact that fish eye is wider than DA70 anyway thanks for your reply.

Of course, but you were asking about two very different lenses that produced very different results. It was not like asking about a 70 and 77 :-)

The fisheye is great, though I'm not sure how it will work in your situation.

[harmonica2]

I own both lenses, so I feel qualified to weigh in here. I like taking the DA 70 to night clubs because it is unusually small for a medium telephoto lens and doesn't bring much attention to itself. The built-in hood also protects it from glare from stage lights. It's very sharp at f2.4, so I have captured many beautiful shots of my friends performing in dark night clubs that other cameras could not touch.

The DA 10-17 FE produces great images, but I have had the best luck outdoors, or at least during the day. It is the size of a kit lens and fish-eyes in general are not very flattering to those on the edge of the frame, so consider that. It is flexible in that it can give you a rectilinear 17 mm shot, but your DA 12-24 will be superior at 17mm.

I really like my 10-17, but I don't own a 12-24 like you. In your situation, I would look into the Sigma or Samayang Fish Eyes. They are primes, so they are faster in low light, and won't overlap with your 12-24.

[RioRico]

Get both, of course.
Otherwise, if you need portraits, get the 70.
Otherwise, if you need to capture small spaces, get the 10-17.
This isn't apples and oranges. This is plums and possums.
The only similarity is the PENTAX name on the lenses.
And the 10-17 is one of the all-time-great lenses.

I'm not real big on glass in the ~70mm neighborhood. I *am* big on wide wide glass. The 10-17 is the lens that drove me to Pentax in the first place. It complements your 12-24, not overlapping it. If satanic forces limiited me to only three lenses of what I have, they'd be my Tammy 10-24, my DA10-17, and my DA18-250. Yes, I'd sell 190+ other lenses in order to keep the 10-17.

[Chex]

You might want to look just look into a decent flash if you don't already have one. Or maybe start trying to find a 28mm or maybe the 31mm Ltd for a good close range portrait. Not sure about AF speeds but the 31 is plenty fast @ f1.8. If your locked into your current selection, I would go with the fisheye and use it extensively at the 17mm end. Most people don't like they way they look through a fish eye lens.

[Mystic]

Of course, but you were asking about two very different lenses that produced very different results. It was not like asking about a 70 and 77 :-)

The fisheye is great, though I'm not sure how it will work in your situation.

oh my.. I'm not sure either.

I own both lenses, so I feel qualified to weigh in here. I like taking the DA 70 to night clubs because it is unusually small for a medium telephoto lens and doesn't bring much attention to itself. The built-in hood also protects it from glare from stage lights. It's very sharp at f2.4, so I have captured many beautiful shots of my friends performing in dark night clubs that other cameras could not touch.

The DA 10-17 FE produces great images, but I have had the best luck outdoors, or at least during the day. It is the size of a kit lens and fish-eyes in general are not very flattering to those on the edge of the frame, so consider that. It is flexible in that it can give you a rectilinear 17 mm shot, but your DA 12-24 will be superior at 17mm.

I really like my 10-17, but I don't own a 12-24 like you. In your situation, I would look into the Sigma or Samayang Fish Eyes. They are primes, so they are faster in low light, and won't overlap with your 12-24.

It would be very interesting to see some sample images of DA70 in the club.. if you'd provide the link that'd be great.

I'll consider other options, but so far I had bad luck with my 17-70mm sigma to focus in a nightclub.

Get both, of course.
Otherwise, if you need portraits, get the 70.
Otherwise, if you need to capture small spaces, get the 10-17.
This isn't apples and oranges. This is plums and possums.
The only similarity is the PENTAX name on the lenses.
And the 10-17 is one of the all-time-great lenses.

I'm not real big on glass in the ~70mm neighborhood. I *am* big on wide wide glass. The 10-17 is the lens that drove me to Pentax in the first place. It complements your 12-24, not overlapping it. If satanic forces limiited me to only three lenses of what I have, they'd be my Tammy 10-24, my DA10-17, and my DA18-250. Yes, I'd sell 190+ other lenses in order to keep the 10-17.

yeah I know that the question I ask is very extreme. So I wonder which lens would be a better investment.. I could use 10-17mm for video purposes also..

You might want to look just look into a decent flash if you don't already have one. Or maybe start trying to find a 28mm or maybe the 31mm Ltd for a good close range portrait. Not sure about AF speeds but the 31 is plenty fast @ f1.8. If your locked into your current selection, I would go with the fisheye and use it extensively at the 17mm end. Most people don't like they way they look through a fish eye lens.

well here's what I already done..

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-r-forum/136569-million-kr-photo-samples.html

of course I own several flashes and some other lenses but for clubbing I use only two. that's 35mm and 12-24

and my dream is 31mm however I'm not sure whether I'll be able to afford it.
I could go with sigma 30 1.4 but I believe it won't focus properly and therefore will not be useful.

[paperbag846]

Sounds like you need more than one focal length.

Do yourself a favour and get a zoom. The "fast aperture" of a prime isn't going to save you, you *will* need a diffused flash and high ISO on your side.

I saw a tutorial a while back, the guy was using k7 and da* 16-50.

[harmonica2]

Here's an example of the DA70 at the very dark Foundation Room of House of Blues Los Angeles with no post production. If you can forgive the motion blur, the sharpness in the "still" areas is good, and the color rendition for that situation is excellent. A friend who shoots Canon also took some pictures that night, and his shots were flat and washed out.



To see the rest of the images, go here:

GwenHOB - Page 1