Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-12-2011, 01:01 PM   #16
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Clinton Quote
This is at the heart of my point. I can buy a new DA* 16-50 from Adorama for $822. or I can go to fleabay and procure one for a cool $1500 or $1200. :P
I agree with you, at $1200+ I feel the FA*28-70 is are over-priced. Obviously I felt it wasn't quite worth $800 either, based on my choice to sell it

06-12-2011, 01:03 PM   #17
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by Clinton Quote
This is at the heart of my point. I can buy a new DA* 16-50 from Adorama for $822. or I can go to fleabay and procure one for a cool $1500 or $1200. :P
They are currently $899, but will it auto focus? The FA* 28-70mm had a special feature in which the lens could auto focus.



j/k, wouldn't bay more than $500 for the FA*.
06-12-2011, 01:04 PM   #18
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
They are currently $899, but will it auto focus? The FA* 28-70mm had a special feature in which the lens could auto focus.
Well for $1200-1500, you can get a DA*16-50 with several spare SDM motors, so that should keep you focusing for at least a little while
06-12-2011, 01:09 PM   #19
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
Well for $1200-1500, you can get a DA*16-50 with several spare SDM motors, so that should keep you focusing for at least a little while
Its hard to focus when your lens is in Colorado!

06-12-2011, 01:14 PM   #20
Veteran Member
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
I have to admit that the FA* 28-70 was my first and only dud I ever bought (and the most expensive, ouch!)

I bought it (minty) but forgot to check it extensively. It appears that the lens has a few optical flaws (probably a defective hybrid element) which prevents it from delivering sharp photos. This is most apparent at 70mm, where the lens shows some sort of ghosting around contrast transitions.

So I now have a minty lens that is unusable. I still hope to find a badly worn example to use as a donor for my minty dud
06-12-2011, 01:25 PM   #21
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Its hard to focus when your lens is in Colorado!
Maybe for $1500 you could get a DA*16-50, 3 motors and a 1-2 hour training session so you could do the motor swaps yourself
06-12-2011, 01:36 PM   #22
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Best to compare with comparable glass from competitors.

Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM 8014A002
06-12-2011, 01:38 PM   #23
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
Best to compare with comparable glass from competitors.

Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM 8014A002
I alluded to that in a previous post (post 12).

06-12-2011, 09:19 PM   #24
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Israel
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 933
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
I owned the FA*28-70 in question. There's no question that softness wide open, specifically at or above 50mm, is probably this lens Achilles Heel (that and the hide price tag). It was a hard lens for my to judge because shoot test shots against the Tamron, the FA* wasn't as sharp, but the final output of a lot of similar shots I took with both lenses, I did end up preferring the output of the FA*.

All that said, I both bought and sold mine for around $800. They seems to be going for even more money now, which would only make me more likely to go for a Sigma 24-60 or Tamron 28-75 if I were choosing again.
Indeed. I chose Sigma over Tamron mostly because of extra 4 mm on the wide end. Also Sigma seems to render the OOF areas somewhat smoother than Tamron. Tamron in turn has more pleasing color rendering to my eyes. But either lens costs way less than half the price of FA*28-70 these days, your offer, being most attractive one I have seen for quite some time now.
06-13-2011, 10:12 AM - 1 Like   #25
Pentaxian
Cambo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 864
Yeah, you're right, this lens sucks...

QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
I believe it's the same hood as the FA*80-200.

I think I'd agree with that. Compared to my Tamron 28-75, the FA*28-70 felt too heavy and the sharpness wide open above 50mm wasn't nearly as good as the Tamron (see next comment). Sure the build was better in that it felt more solid and was mostly metal, but not to the point where it was worth anywhere near the premium (to me).

I owned the FA*28-70 in question. There's no question that softness wide open, specifically at or above 50mm, is probably this lens Achilles Heel (that and the hide price tag). It was a hard lens for my to judge because shoot test shots against the Tamron, the FA* wasn't as sharp, but the final output of a lot of similar shots I took with both lenses, I did end up preferring the output of the FA*.

All that said, I both bought and sold mine for around $800. They seems to be going for even more money now, which would only make me more likely to go for a Sigma 24-60 or Tamron 28-75 if I were choosing again.
The softness wide open help you to use it as a portrait lens...it sharpens up like crazy at F=4.

QuoteOriginally posted by Clinton Quote
This is at the heart of my point. I can buy a new DA* 16-50 from Adorama for $822. or I can go to fleabay and procure one for a cool $1500 or $1200. :P
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
Best to compare with comparable glass from competitors.

Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM 8014A002
A friend of mine has one of those...distortion magnitudes worse than the Pentax FA*, and the colour rendition is very, very hot and unnatural, especially skin-tones...she's got shots of the Taj Mahal that have SO much distortion, it looks like it was designed by Picasso....

QuoteOriginally posted by Boris Quote
Indeed. I chose Sigma over Tamron mostly because of extra 4 mm on the wide end. Also Sigma seems to render the OOF areas somewhat smoother than Tamron. Tamron in turn has more pleasing color rendering to my eyes. But either lens costs way less than half the price of FA*28-70 these days, your offer, being most attractive one I have seen for quite some time now.
Are those full-frame lenses? Probably not. Compare apples with apples, etc...

Here's what it does...second one's a little over-processed, but that was on my old CRT monitor setup.





Both of these look stunning at 13"x19" - tack sharp from front to back, very natural yet bold colours, with very high contrast.

Yeah, I can't understand WHY this rare, handmade, full-frame discontinued lens is worth so much...:>)

Cheers,
Cameron

Last edited by Cambo; 06-13-2011 at 10:19 AM.
06-13-2011, 11:32 AM   #26
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Cambo Quote
The softness wide open help you to use it as a portrait lens...it sharpens up like crazy at F=4.
Well I can only judge it by the copy I had and while the 50-70mm range was certainly a lot sharper at f/4 than f/2.8, I would not descrtibe the lens as very sharp at f/4 (both in absolute terms and in comparison to the Tamron 28-75, which is a full-frame lens).
06-13-2011, 12:04 PM   #27
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,237
QuoteOriginally posted by Cambo Quote
The softness wide open help you to use it as a portrait lens...it sharpens up like crazy at F=4.





A friend of mine has one of those...distortion magnitudes worse than the Pentax FA*, and the colour rendition is very, very hot and unnatural, especially skin-tones...she's got shots of the Taj Mahal that have SO much distortion, it looks like it was designed by Picasso....



Are those full-frame lenses? Probably not. Compare apples with apples, etc...

Here's what it does...second one's a little over-processed, but that was on my old CRT monitor setup.





Both of these look stunning at 13"x19" - tack sharp from front to back, very natural yet bold colours, with very high contrast.

Yeah, I can't understand WHY this rare, handmade, full-frame discontinued lens is worth so much...:>)

Cheers,
Cameron
I think the Tamron and Sigma that are being discussed as options are both full frame compatible.
06-13-2011, 12:10 PM   #28
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I think the Tamron and Sigma that are being discussed as options are both full frame compatible.
That is correct; the Tamron 28-75, Sigma 24-60 and Sigma 24-70 are all FF compatible lenses.

The Tamron/Sigma 17-50/18-50 are APSc version of those lenses.
06-13-2011, 02:54 PM   #29
Pentaxian
Cambo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 864
Well, let's see some pics...

QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
Well I can only judge it by the copy I had and while the 50-70mm range was certainly a lot sharper at f/4 than f/2.8, I would not descrtibe the lens as very sharp at f/4 (both in absolute terms and in comparison to the Tamron 28-75, which is a full-frame lens).
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I think the Tamron and Sigma that are being discussed as options are both full frame compatible.
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
That is correct; the Tamron 28-75, Sigma 24-60 and Sigma 24-70 are all FF compatible lenses.

The Tamron/Sigma 17-50/18-50 are APSc version of those lenses.
and show us how they blow the FA* away at F=2.8.



Cheers,
Cameron
06-13-2011, 03:03 PM   #30
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Cambo Quote
and show us how they blow the FA* away at F=2.8.



Cheers,
Cameron
I don't recall anyone saying the images from either the Tamron or Sigma would "blow away" the FA*, nor did I ever imply the lens "sucks", I just feel that the Tamron 28-75 is a good bit sharper than the Pentax at 50-70mm at f/2.8. Certainly sharpness isn't the only important attribute of a lens, but at the price point of the FA* many people (including myself) expected more. If I still have the tests shots saved when I compared the Tamron against the FA* I would be happy to post them for you.

edit: can't find the comparison shots I took between the Tamron and FA*, but I found the set of FA*28-70 shots I took for Boris last fall (link). There are 27 shots; 3 focal lengths, 3 focal distances and 3 apertures (f/2.8, f/5.6 and f/11). These obviously won't be helpful in terms of a comparison to the Sigma or Tamron, but just in case anyone was interested.

Last edited by dgaies; 06-13-2011 at 05:06 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, lens, pentax lens, price, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
World's most expensive K-5 Jun Park General Talk 4 12-02-2010 01:41 PM
Filters too expensive? soppy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 38 11-16-2010 08:36 AM
Pentax K-5 in US is more expensive than in... LFLee Pentax K-5 10 10-31-2010 08:01 AM
Expensive is relative gebco Photographic Technique 8 05-21-2010 04:29 AM
Is it me, or is used glass getting expensive GregK8 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 68 04-22-2010 07:05 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top