Why is the FA*28-70 so expensive?

Pentaxor · 06-14-2011, 06:50 PM

Originally posted by EsBee

If a lens sells for the asking price within an acceptable time-frame, it is evident that there is at least ONE buyer willing to pay the asking price.

And how is that opposite to, "there seems to be more demand than the supply"?

well, if one is really that in demand regardless of the price, they should be goners by now. the last time I checked eBay, there were 3 of them sitting with a BIN option. one of them has been sitting there since March and is priced the same as the other two.

Pentaxor · 06-14-2011, 06:53 PM

Originally posted by frank

Actually the price for FA*2870 is only around or even lower than $1000 nowadays, at least from the fleabay. If it's over $1100, it's pretty hard to sale. That's my observation

right, if it's really a hard sell since it makes to sense to price such lens for the purpose of using it. again, the use factor, not the collector's item factor.

LFLee · 06-15-2011, 08:21 AM

I remember there is a thread comparing FA*28-70 with the 3 FA ltd lenses, and shows that the FA* 28-70 is really sharp. That thread have me look into the FA*28-70 ever since...

edit: Here is the comparison:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/100771-fa*28-7...upwarning.html

Lee

Blue · 06-15-2011, 11:17 AM

There is always the other FA 28-70/4 AL for $69.

It is pretty good optically for the money.

Pentaxor · 06-15-2011, 12:51 PM

Originally posted by Blue

There is always the other FA 28-70/4 AL for $69.

It is pretty good optically for the money.

except for the durability issue.

Blue · 06-15-2011, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

except for the durability issue.

Ever dropped an FA* 28-70/2.8?

I bet it would be an ugly scene.

DanielT74 · 06-15-2011, 07:24 PM

I've got both the DA*16-50mm and the FA*28-70mm (planning to sell one of them eventually) and the big thing between them, as far as I can tell, is the bokeh. It also has a somewhat different colour rendition but I can't quite put my finger on it. Overall, from my experience it delivers significantly better images, especially when shooting portraits.

Two shots in poor lighting (guess which is which):

(the first is the FA*)

mikeSF · 08-23-2011, 02:45 PM

I just rented this lens over the weekend for an event shoot and really found it to be a great performer. My thumb is still sore from holding my camera all weekend, and i know the weight of the FA*28-70 did not help matters, however, the IQ was just spot on. I found myself mostly shooting at f/2.8-f/4 with very high ISO and slow shutter, but even so, the lens was good at 2.8 and great at f/4.

I could seriously get used to the power zoom, though in a quiet spot, i had to use the quiet/slow setting because the quick zoom is very loud. I prefer to manually focus in dim light and would've liked a little more throw on the focus ring, but it was sufficient with steady hands.

here is a sample:

I wont post it, but i switched to one of my favorite manual fast 50's and took this shot and there was just no comparison, the FA* whipped it good...at any rate, this lens is out of my budget so I will take my bag of fast 50's and go home now.

DanielT74 · 08-23-2011, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by Blue

Ever dropped an FA* 28-70/2.8?

I bet it would be an ugly scene.

Well I recently had the misfortune of my DA*50-135 hitting the concrete from a serious height. I thought it would shatter into lots of little bits and was afraid to look. It was still intact. One element had gone loose inside and the focus was a bit jammed (worked in some distances). Amazingly I could still take reasonable pics with it in some situations.

I am waiting on a quote to fix it. But I suspect even these current plastic lenses are tougher than we think. And the FA* range would be even tougher.

**Ron Boggs** · 08-23-2011, 07:56 PM

Many on this forum like to test and compare at wide open apertures...the FA*'s including the 28-70 have fantastic sharpness at tiny apertures. Don't know if Pentax moves the blades forward to reduce diffraction or does something else? When you compare the FA*'s in landscape situations with tight fstop for deep depth of field you'll find little issue with diffraction and thus great landscape results.
The color issue is like having a saturation slider bumped up a couple notches for the FA* lenses. Editors LOVE the results from the 28-70!

**Thomas Backa** · 08-24-2011, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by Asahiflex

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.

I had the same experience with the same lens last week, it was really cheap in a good used condition so I bought it after just a few minutes of testing. It was when I came home later and put it and the K-5 on the tripod I noticed I couldn't dial out the horrible back focus on it and that the images were just as unsharp on f9.0 as they were on f2.8. Luckily I was able to return the lens for a full refund.

Should have realized that for 320€ I was buying a dud. It's still for sale afaik.

DanielT74 · 08-25-2011, 11:31 PM

Found another pic from the FA*28-70mm the like of which (in quality) I was never able to get with the DA*16-50. Does anyone with the DA* have a rival?

08-25-2011, 11:31 PM	#57
DanielT74 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,377	Found another pic from the FA28-70mm the like of which (in quality) I was never able to get with the DA16-50. Does anyone with the DA* have a rival? Last edited by DanielT74; 08-26-2011 at 12:48 AM.

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 & K-5 II	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

06-14-2011, 06:50 PM	#46
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by EsBee If a lens sells for the asking price within an acceptable time-frame, it is evident that there is at least ONE buyer willing to pay the asking price. And how is that opposite to, "there seems to be more demand than the supply"? well, if one is really that in demand regardless of the price, they should be goners by now. the last time I checked eBay, there were 3 of them sitting with a BIN option. one of them has been sitting there since March and is priced the same as the other two.

06-14-2011, 06:53 PM	#47
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by frank Actually the price for FA2870 is only around or even lower than $1000 nowadays, at least from the fleabay. If it's over $1100, it's pretty hard to sale*. That's my observation right, if it's really a hard sell since it makes to sense to price such lens for the purpose of using it. again, the use factor, not the collector's item factor.

06-15-2011, 08:21 AM	#48
LFLee Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,292	I remember there is a thread comparing FA28-70 with the 3 FA ltd lenses, and shows that the FA 28-70 is really sharp. That thread have me look into the FA28-70 ever since... edit: Here is the comparison: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/100771-fa28-7...upwarning.html Lee

06-15-2011, 11:17 AM	#49
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	There is always the other FA 28-70/4 AL for $69. It is pretty good optically for the money.

06-15-2011, 12:51 PM	#50
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Blue There is always the other FA 28-70/4 AL for $69. It is pretty good optically for the money. except for the durability issue.

06-15-2011, 12:57 PM	#51
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Pentaxor except for the durability issue. Ever dropped an FA* 28-70/2.8? I bet it would be an ugly scene.

06-15-2011, 07:24 PM	#52
DanielT74 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,377	I've got both the DA16-50mm and the FA28-70mm (planning to sell one of them eventually) and the big thing between them, as far as I can tell, is the bokeh. It also has a somewhat different colour rendition but I can't quite put my finger on it. Overall, from my experience it delivers significantly better images, especially when shooting portraits. Two shots in poor lighting (guess which is which): (the first is the FA*)

08-23-2011, 02:45 PM	#53
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	I just rented this lens over the weekend for an event shoot and really found it to be a great performer. My thumb is still sore from holding my camera all weekend, and i know the weight of the FA28-70 did not help matters, however, the IQ was just spot on. I found myself mostly shooting at f/2.8-f/4 with very high ISO and slow shutter, but even so, the lens was good at 2.8 and great at f/4. I could seriously get used to the power zoom, though in a quiet spot, i had to use the quiet/slow setting because the quick zoom is very loud. I prefer to manually focus in dim light and would've liked a little more throw on the focus ring, but it was sufficient with steady hands. here is a sample: I wont post it, but i switched to one of my favorite manual fast 50's and took this shot and there was just no comparison, the FA whipped it good...at any rate, this lens is out of my budget so I will take my bag of fast 50's and go home now.

08-23-2011, 04:40 PM	#54
DanielT74 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,377	Originally posted by Blue Ever dropped an FA* 28-70/2.8? I bet it would be an ugly scene. Well I recently had the misfortune of my DA50-135 hitting the concrete from a serious height. I thought it would shatter into lots of little bits and was afraid to look. It was still intact. One element had gone loose inside and the focus was a bit jammed (worked in some distances). Amazingly I could still take reasonable pics with it in some situations. I am waiting on a quote to fix it. But I suspect even these current plastic lenses are tougher than we think. And the FA range would be even tougher.

08-23-2011, 07:56 PM	#55
Ron Boggs Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: MT Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,349	Many on this forum like to test and compare at wide open apertures...the FA's including the 28-70 have fantastic sharpness at tiny apertures. Don't know if Pentax moves the blades forward to reduce diffraction or does something else? When you compare the FA's in landscape situations with tight fstop for deep depth of field you'll find little issue with diffraction and thus great landscape results. The color issue is like having a saturation slider bumped up a couple notches for the FA* lenses. Editors LOVE the results from the 28-70!

08-24-2011, 02:51 PM	#56
Thomas Backa Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Turku, Finland Photos: Gallery Posts: 38	Originally posted by Asahiflex 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. I had the same experience with the same lens last week, it was really cheap in a good used condition so I bought it after just a few minutes of testing. It was when I came home later and put it and the K-5 on the tripod I noticed I couldn't dial out the horrible back focus on it and that the images were just as unsharp on f9.0 as they were on f2.8. Luckily I was able to return the lens for a full refund. Should have realized that for 320€ I was buying a dud. It's still for sale afaik.