FA VS D FA 100mm macro comparison

creampuff · 05-12-2011, 02:17 AM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

I would say the shell is different from the normal FA lens. it's a bit more durable, IMO.

It is also dead easy for the FA Macro to pick up scratches on the surface. That's why it is very difficult to find an unblemished scratch-free copy. One of the reasons why I switched to the current DFA WR, the other being the noticeable weight savings and invaluable Quick Shift.

bdery · 05-12-2011, 06:27 AM

Originally posted by Donkeypunch

You also need to take into account there are more reviews on the D-FA vs. the FA, so that alone will drive the review average down a bit more on the D-FA.

Originally posted by djc737

I am trying to decide weather to get a FA version for about $400 or a new D FA WR for about $630.

If you're ready to shell that price, go for the newer, WR version. If you find a solid deal on the older FA (I got my FA50 macro for 150$) then consider the older model.

jjdgti · 05-12-2011, 07:56 AM

I had the F and the FA at some point. Both performed the same except the FA has a limiter. The D FA (I borough one from my fried) gave me similar results. It is light and easy to handle. The Newest WR is nice and you will have no worries shooting in wet conditions.
Go for the D FA WR one IMHO.

djc737 · 05-12-2011, 08:49 AM - **1 Like**

Well after reading all of your well thought out replies, I am going to get the 100 WR. Best match for my K-5 and keeps my belly pack nice and light. Thanks again for all the input, Dave

**Roland303** · 05-12-2011, 11:37 AM

Consider that I have the FA 100 currently, if I was starting over again and had to buy a 100mm macro, I'd buy the 100WR. I find that I don't use the limiter and clamp very often since I MF most of the time doing macros, but I would find the metal construction and WR enjoyable and useful. Image quality wise, any of the 100s are outstanding.

Eder · 02-20-2014, 04:28 PM

does anyone knows if filter is special or is normal for D-FA. Cuz i read on a page that filter is non-rotating for this lens, is this true or not
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/129-pentax-smc-d-fa-100mm-f28-macro-review--test-report

Can i use a std 49mm fitler or must be non rotating?

bdery · 02-21-2014, 05:44 AM

Hello Eder,

I'm not sure I understand your question. I think you wonder if any filter will fit on the DFA WR macro lens. If so, the answer is yes, as long as it's 49mm. When people say a lens is non-rotating, it means that the front element of the lens does not rotate as you zoom or focus. So you can use a polarizing filter (which must be rotated to do its work) without worrying about loosing your settings.

Eder · 02-21-2014, 10:01 AM

Originally posted by bdery

Hello Eder,

I'm not sure I understand your question. I think you wonder if any filter will fit on the DFA WR macro lens. If so, the answer is yes, as long as it's 49mm. When people say a lens is non-rotating, it means that the front element of the lens does not rotate as you zoom or focus. So you can use a polarizing filter (which must be rotated to do its work) without worrying about loosing your settings.

Hi bdery thanks for you answer. Pentax user's manual says that when using autofocus, lens do not rotate. so this means that i need a non-rotating polarizer filter when i use autofocus?

bdery · 02-21-2014, 11:27 AM

Originally posted by Eder

Hi bdery thanks for you answer. Pentax user's manual says that when using autofocus, lens do not rotate. so this means that i need a non-rotating polarizer filter when i use autofocus?

You got this backward a bit.

Independent of any filter, a lens's front element might rotate or not, depending on the design of the lens. Cheaper lenses will often have a rotating front element.

Now most filters are fixed (UV, ND, coloured, etc). However, some filter types, among them polarizers, have a rotating element. This is part of how they operate, not related to their quality or anything else. Again taking a polarizer as example, it needs to rotate to adjust its effect in relation to surrounding conditions.

Now, imagine you set your polarizer by rotating it, then you focus your lens and the front element rotates, messing up with how you adjusted your polarizer. That,s annoying... This is why most manufacturers will see "non rotating front elements" as perks and will list that feature on spec sheets.

That's all there is to it.

Transit · 02-21-2014, 12:23 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by djc737

While studying the various versions of the Pentax 100mm macro, I came accross a strange anomoly. In the D FA 100 macro review, it states that all the Pentax 100mm macro models use the same tried and true formula. My question is how this can be true when the FA version weights almost twice as much as the D FA versions. 600 grams vs 340 grams The newer versions are also shorter and from reviews, not as sharp as the older version.

Thanks, Dave

Dave I think the FA what I call 'the beer can' was designed to disable assailants when swung
as well as serve up some of the sweetest colours and tones we could wish for
presumably design requirements shifted from personal safety with the D-FA's

Pete with the FA 100 and 50

arkav · 02-21-2014, 02:22 PM

Originally posted by Roland303

Consider that I have the FA 100 currently, if I was starting over again and had to buy a 100mm macro, I'd buy the 100WR. I find that I don't use the limiter and clamp very often since I MF most of the time doing macros, but I would find the metal construction and WR enjoyable and useful. Image quality wise, any of the 100s are outstanding.

I've got the 100WR, and as I walk around in the bush with it on my camera, I have to say that the large lens hood, attached to the outer barrel, is a boon for protecting the inner barrel from bumps. I guess the earlier non-WR DFA lens had the same arrangement.

jddwoods · 02-24-2014, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by Roland303

Consider that I have the FA 100 currently, if I was starting over again and had to buy a 100mm macro, I'd buy the 100WR. I find that I don't use the limiter and clamp very often since I MF most of the time doing macros, but I would find the metal construction and WR enjoyable and useful. Image quality wise, any of the 100s are outstanding.

I have the DFA 100 WR and could not be happier with it. It is a little long for botanicals (that is where 35 Limited comes in) but it is perfect for butterflies, dragonflies, hummingbirds and moderate telephoto. I don't miss that there is no limiter or clamp. Quick Shift is one of the best features of the newer versions. My one complaint was that while the outer barrel is solid metal construction, the inner barrel is plastic. That is OK but the filter threads seem thin and potentially easily damaged. I put on a digital ultra clear filter and now don't worry about that anymore. Now the most vulnerable part of the inner barrel is also metal. Also the hood is very convenient, lightweight and adds a measure of protection. Sharpness? I cannot imagine anything better. It is my sharpest lens and I have some sharp lenses 21, 25 and 70 mm limiteds.

02-21-2014, 10:01 AM	#23
Eder Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 95	Autofocus non-rotating Originally posted by bdery Hello Eder, I'm not sure I understand your question. I think you wonder if any filter will fit on the DFA WR macro lens. If so, the answer is yes, as long as it's 49mm. When people say a lens is non-rotating, it means that the front element of the lens does not rotate as you zoom or focus. So you can use a polarizing filter (which must be rotated to do its work) without worrying about loosing your settings. Hi bdery thanks for you answer. Pentax user's manual says that when using autofocus, lens do not rotate. so this means that i need a non-rotating polarizer filter when i use autofocus? Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Comparison of photographs. DA 18-135mm/3.5-5.6 , DA 70mm, Carl Zeiss 28, 50, 100mm	Mr. A.S.	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	35	12-06-2010 08:29 AM
A quick comparison Tak 100mm F4 vs Tak 105mm 2.8	eccs19	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	09-19-2010 06:06 AM
100mm f2.8 macro FA vs new 100mm mavro f2.8 DA	stemked	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	08-23-2010 01:34 PM
Streets My first Macro lens, the DFA 100mm Macro WR. Here are my 1st few shots with it!	aaronius	Post Your Photos!	4	04-30-2010 07:23 PM
For Sale - Sold: [Worldwide] Promaster 100mm F3.5 Macro with 1:1 Macro Adaptor	dgaies	Sold Items	7	02-13-2010 05:37 PM

05-12-2011, 02:17 AM	#16
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	Originally posted by Pentaxor I would say the shell is different from the normal FA lens. it's a bit more durable, IMO. It is also dead easy for the FA Macro to pick up scratches on the surface. That's why it is very difficult to find an unblemished scratch-free copy. One of the reasons why I switched to the current DFA WR, the other being the noticeable weight savings and invaluable Quick Shift.

05-12-2011, 06:27 AM	#17
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,360	Originally posted by Donkeypunch You also need to take into account there are more reviews on the D-FA vs. the FA, so that alone will drive the review average down a bit more on the D-FA. Originally posted by djc737 I am trying to decide weather to get a FA version for about $400 or a new D FA WR for about $630. If you're ready to shell that price, go for the newer, WR version. If you find a solid deal on the older FA (I got my FA50 macro for 150$) then consider the older model.

05-12-2011, 07:56 AM	#18
jjdgti Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: NJ Posts: 1,824	I had the F and the FA at some point. Both performed the same except the FA has a limiter. The D FA (I borough one from my fried) gave me similar results. It is light and easy to handle. The Newest WR is nice and you will have no worries shooting in wet conditions. Go for the D FA WR one IMHO.

05-12-2011, 08:49 AM - 1 Like	#19
djc737 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: South jersey outside of Philly Posts: 281 Original Poster	Well after reading all of your well thought out replies, I am going to get the 100 WR. Best match for my K-5 and keeps my belly pack nice and light. Thanks again for all the input, Dave

05-12-2011, 11:37 AM	#20
Roland303 Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Alberta, Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 61	Consider that I have the FA 100 currently, if I was starting over again and had to buy a 100mm macro, I'd buy the 100WR. I find that I don't use the limiter and clamp very often since I MF most of the time doing macros, but I would find the metal construction and WR enjoyable and useful. Image quality wise, any of the 100s are outstanding.

02-20-2014, 04:28 PM	#21
Eder Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 95	does anyone knows if filter is special or is normal for D-FA. Cuz i read on a page that filter is non-rotating for this lens, is this true or not http://www.photozone.de/pentax/129-pentax-smc-d-fa-100mm-f28-macro-review--test-report Can i use a std 49mm fitler or must be non rotating?

02-21-2014, 05:44 AM	#22
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,360	Hello Eder, I'm not sure I understand your question. I think you wonder if any filter will fit on the DFA WR macro lens. If so, the answer is yes, as long as it's 49mm. When people say a lens is non-rotating, it means that the front element of the lens does not rotate as you zoom or focus. So you can use a polarizing filter (which must be rotated to do its work) without worrying about loosing your settings.

02-21-2014, 11:27 AM	#24
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,360	Originally posted by Eder Hi bdery thanks for you answer. Pentax user's manual says that when using autofocus, lens do not rotate. so this means that i need a non-rotating polarizer filter when i use autofocus? You got this backward a bit. Independent of any filter, a lens's front element might rotate or not, depending on the design of the lens. Cheaper lenses will often have a rotating front element. Now most filters are fixed (UV, ND, coloured, etc). However, some filter types, among them polarizers, have a rotating element. This is part of how they operate, not related to their quality or anything else. Again taking a polarizer as example, it needs to rotate to adjust its effect in relation to surrounding conditions. Now, imagine you set your polarizer by rotating it, then you focus your lens and the front element rotates, messing up with how you adjusted your polarizer. That,s annoying... This is why most manufacturers will see "non rotating front elements" as perks and will list that feature on spec sheets. That's all there is to it.

02-21-2014, 12:23 PM - 1 Like	#25
Transit Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Whanganui NZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,624	Originally posted by djc737 While studying the various versions of the Pentax 100mm macro, I came accross a strange anomoly. In the D FA 100 macro review, it states that all the Pentax 100mm macro models use the same tried and true formula. My question is how this can be true when the FA version weights almost twice as much as the D FA versions. 600 grams vs 340 grams The newer versions are also shorter and from reviews, not as sharp as the older version. Thanks, Dave Dave I think the FA what I call 'the beer can' was designed to disable assailants when swung as well as serve up some of the sweetest colours and tones we could wish for presumably design requirements shifted from personal safety with the D-FA's Pete with the FA 100 and 50

02-21-2014, 02:22 PM	#26
arkav Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 366	Originally posted by Roland303 Consider that I have the FA 100 currently, if I was starting over again and had to buy a 100mm macro, I'd buy the 100WR. I find that I don't use the limiter and clamp very often since I MF most of the time doing macros, but I would find the metal construction and WR enjoyable and useful. Image quality wise, any of the 100s are outstanding. I've got the 100WR, and as I walk around in the bush with it on my camera, I have to say that the large lens hood, attached to the outer barrel, is a boon for protecting the inner barrel from bumps. I guess the earlier non-WR DFA lens had the same arrangement.

02-24-2014, 04:17 PM	#27
jddwoods Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Newark, Delaware Posts: 1,035	Originally posted by Roland303 Consider that I have the FA 100 currently, if I was starting over again and had to buy a 100mm macro, I'd buy the 100WR. I find that I don't use the limiter and clamp very often since I MF most of the time doing macros, but I would find the metal construction and WR enjoyable and useful. Image quality wise, any of the 100s are outstanding. I have the DFA 100 WR and could not be happier with it. It is a little long for botanicals (that is where 35 Limited comes in) but it is perfect for butterflies, dragonflies, hummingbirds and moderate telephoto. I don't miss that there is no limiter or clamp. Quick Shift is one of the best features of the newer versions. My one complaint was that while the outer barrel is solid metal construction, the inner barrel is plastic. That is OK but the filter threads seem thin and potentially easily damaged. I put on a digital ultra clear filter and now don't worry about that anymore. Now the most vulnerable part of the inner barrel is also metal. Also the hood is very convenient, lightweight and adds a measure of protection. Sharpness? I cannot imagine anything better. It is my sharpest lens and I have some sharp lenses 21, 25 and 70 mm limiteds.