[Gooshin]

There isn't really a huge amount of overlap

Pentax Lenses

and these are just the Pentax made ones..... lets not forget Sigma, Tokina, Voitalnger (spelling), Chinon, Sears and so forth.

Short Prime Lenses
(SMC K-Mount)

15 mm f/3.5
15 mm f/3.5 A
18 mm f/3.5 20 mm f/2.8 A
20 mm f/2.8 FA
20 mm f/4.0
20 mm f/4.0 M 24 mm f/2.0 FA AL(IF)
24 mm f/2.8
24 mm f/2.8 A
24 mm f/3.5
Best 28mm
28 mm f/2.0
28 mm f/2.0 M
28 mm f/2.0 A
28 mm f/2.8 M
28 mm f/2.8 A
28 mm f/2.8 F
28 mm f/2.8 FA AL
28 mm f/3.5
28 mm f/3.5 M
28 mm f/3.5 Shift 30 mm f/2.8
31mm f/ 1.8 FANew! Best 35mm?
35 mm f/2.0
35 mm f/2.0 M
35 mm f/2.0 A
35 mm f/2.0 FA AL (New)
35 mm f/2.8 M
35 mm f/2.8 A
35 mm f/3.5

Normal Prime Lenses
(SMC K-Mount)

40 mm f/ 2.8 M
43 mm f/1.9 FA Limited Best Normal ? 50 mm f/1.2
50 mm f/1.2 A 50 mm f/1.4
50 mm f/1.4 M
50 mm f/1.4 A
50 mm f/1.4 F
50 mm f/1.4 FA 50 mm f/1.7 M
50 mm f/1.7 A
50 mm f/1.7 F
50 mm f/1.7 FA 50 mm f/2.0 M
50 mm f/2.0 A 50 mm f/2.8 A Macro
50mm f/2.8 FA Macro
50 mm f/4.0 Macro 55 mm f/1.8
55 mm f/2.0 Long Prime Lenses
(SMC K-Mount) Portrait Lenses
77mm f/1.8 Limited (New)
Best 85mm?
85 mm f/1.4 A*
85 mm f/1.4 FA* (IF)
85 mm f/1.8
85 mm f/2.0 M
85mm f/2.2 (soft)
85 mm f/2.8 (soft) 100 mm f/2.8 M
100 mm f/2.8 A
100 mm f/2.8 A Macro
100 mm f/2.8 F Macro
100 mm f/2.8 FA Macro
100 mm f/4.0 macro M
100 mm f/4.0 Bellows
105 mm f/2.8
120mm f/2.8
120mm f/2.8 M Best 135 mm
135 mm f/1.8 A*
135 mm f/2.5
135 mm f/2.8 A
135 mm f/2.8 F (IF)
135 mm f/2.8 FA (IF)
135 mm f/3.5
135 mm f/3.5 M 150 mm f/3.5 M
150 mm F/4.0 200 mm f/2.5
200 mm f/2.8 A* ED
200 mm f/2.8 FA* ED (IF)
200 mm f/4.0
200 mm f/4.0 M
200 mm f/4.0 A
200mm f/4.0 A* ED Macro
200/4 Macro FA* ED IF [New] 300mm Summary
300 mm f/2.8 A*
300 mm f/2.8 FA* ED (IF)
300 mm f/4.0
300 mm f/4.0 M*
300 mm f/4.0 A*
300 mm f/4.5 F* ED (IF)
300 mm f/4.5 FA* ED (IF) 400 mm f/2.8 A* ED (IF)
400 mm f/5.6
400 mm f/5.6 M
400 mm f/5.6 A
400 mm f/5.6 FA* ED (IF) 500 mm f/4.5 600 mm f/4.0 F* ED (IF)
600 mm f/4.0 FA* ED (IF)
600 mm f/5.6 A* 1000 mm f/8.0
1000 mm f/11 1200 mm f/8.0 A* ED (IF) 2000 mm f/13.5
2000 mm f/13.5 M

[Gooshin]

ohh and lets not forget the M42 possibilities!

M42 is a site dedicated to M42 adaptator lenses. You will find here tests, from argentic to numeric cameras and oldest to newest M42 lenses. Members described their work and the used lens. Oldies, but goldies!

[AVANT]

the resolution however is something that photoshop cannot fix, and technically the 77 will have better sharpness than the 70.

is it worth the price? only if you're making money from photography, or if you're simply rich, then just buy it because its the best.

also from personal experience, i tend to change my photographs so drastically in photoshop that it really doesnt matter how they started off to begin with

contrary to how most people feel about image programs, ie, consider them a chore, i think its the greatest thing since sliced bread, and i enjoy working with photoshop/lightroom immensely.

You're not what I'd consider a "classic" photographer where they pride themselves on getting the shot right the moment they take it, where the less editing required, the better.

I'm placing these two quotes because it sounds like you prefer editing over original composition. If those are the reasons for your conclusion that the 77ltd lens is not worth buying unless he/she is rich or is a paid photographer, then I would advise the "classic" photographers (a boat that I'm on) out there to take his advice with a grain of salt.

[AVANT]

Pentax Lenses

and these are just the Pentax made ones..... lets not forget Sigma, Tokina, Voitalnger (spelling), Chinon, Sears and so forth.

Short Prime Lenses
(SMC K-Mount)

15 mm f/3.5
15 mm f/3.5 A
18 mm f/3.5 20 mm f/2.8 A
20 mm f/2.8 FA
20 mm f/4.0
20 mm f/4.0 M 24 mm f/2.0 FA AL(IF)
24 mm f/2.8
24 mm f/2.8 A
24 mm f/3.5
Best 28mm
28 mm f/2.0
28 mm f/2.0 M
28 mm f/2.0 A
28 mm f/2.8 M
28 mm f/2.8 A
28 mm f/2.8 F
28 mm f/2.8 FA AL
28 mm f/3.5
28 mm f/3.5 M
28 mm f/3.5 Shift 30 mm f/2.8
31mm f/ 1.8 FANew! Best 35mm?
35 mm f/2.0
35 mm f/2.0 M
35 mm f/2.0 A
35 mm f/2.0 FA AL (New)
35 mm f/2.8 M
35 mm f/2.8 A
35 mm f/3.5

Normal Prime Lenses
(SMC K-Mount)

40 mm f/ 2.8 M
43 mm f/1.9 FA Limited Best Normal ? 50 mm f/1.2
50 mm f/1.2 A 50 mm f/1.4
50 mm f/1.4 M
50 mm f/1.4 A
50 mm f/1.4 F
50 mm f/1.4 FA 50 mm f/1.7 M
50 mm f/1.7 A
50 mm f/1.7 F
50 mm f/1.7 FA 50 mm f/2.0 M
50 mm f/2.0 A 50 mm f/2.8 A Macro
50mm f/2.8 FA Macro
50 mm f/4.0 Macro 55 mm f/1.8
55 mm f/2.0 Long Prime Lenses
(SMC K-Mount) Portrait Lenses
77mm f/1.8 Limited (New)
Best 85mm?
85 mm f/1.4 A*
85 mm f/1.4 FA* (IF)
85 mm f/1.8
85 mm f/2.0 M
85mm f/2.2 (soft)
85 mm f/2.8 (soft) 100 mm f/2.8 M
100 mm f/2.8 A
100 mm f/2.8 A Macro
100 mm f/2.8 F Macro
100 mm f/2.8 FA Macro
100 mm f/4.0 macro M
100 mm f/4.0 Bellows
105 mm f/2.8
120mm f/2.8
120mm f/2.8 M Best 135 mm
135 mm f/1.8 A*
135 mm f/2.5
135 mm f/2.8 A
135 mm f/2.8 F (IF)
135 mm f/2.8 FA (IF)
135 mm f/3.5
135 mm f/3.5 M 150 mm f/3.5 M
150 mm F/4.0 200 mm f/2.5
200 mm f/2.8 A* ED
200 mm f/2.8 FA* ED (IF)
200 mm f/4.0
200 mm f/4.0 M
200 mm f/4.0 A
200mm f/4.0 A* ED Macro
200/4 Macro FA* ED IF [New] 300mm Summary
300 mm f/2.8 A*
300 mm f/2.8 FA* ED (IF)
300 mm f/4.0
300 mm f/4.0 M*
300 mm f/4.0 A*
300 mm f/4.5 F* ED (IF)
300 mm f/4.5 FA* ED (IF) 400 mm f/2.8 A* ED (IF)
400 mm f/5.6
400 mm f/5.6 M
400 mm f/5.6 A
400 mm f/5.6 FA* ED (IF) 500 mm f/4.5 600 mm f/4.0 F* ED (IF)
600 mm f/4.0 FA* ED (IF)
600 mm f/5.6 A* 1000 mm f/8.0
1000 mm f/11 1200 mm f/8.0 A* ED (IF) 2000 mm f/13.5
2000 mm f/13.5 M

Wow... just wow... someone's clearly talking about the recent models and you counter with a list of lens that goes as far back as the pentax stone ages That's just funny.

[benplaut]

Sure, but you can't really include legacy glass in that list (IE, anything not available at B&H or direct through pentax) if you consider that the primary competition in this regard changed mount fairly recently (EF Mount). I'd even consider this to be a good thing--Pentax is a company actively making new prime lenses, instead of only focusing on zooms!

[Gooshin]

You're not what I'd consider a "classic" photographer where they pride themselves on getting the shot right the moment they take it, where the less editing required, the better.

I'm placing these two quotes because it sounds like you prefer editing over original composition. If those are the reasons for your conclusion that the 77ltd lens is not worth buying unless he/she is rich or is a paid photographer, then I would advise the "classic" photographers (a boat that I'm on) out there to take his advice with a grain of salt.

composition and sharpness is one thing

colour and lighting control is a different matter all together.


i dont know which boat you can put me into, classical or digiage, up to you, but i value a photograph for composition and clarity (or more specificaly sharpness)

colour and contrast in a modern age are a moot point, because these things can be played around with till the cows come home.

the former is reliant entirely on photographer skill and quality of glass, photoshop will never help you there, and even though i love playing in photoshop, cropping is something i try to avoid heavily.

but the latter? Paying top dollar for a lens just because it gets the colours right, in the digital age, is really silly.


again, if i had the cash, i would get the 77 (and the 31) right here right now, i'm not denying the power of these lenses. But for someone who is not after the absolute best, a DA 70 will more than happily fullfill their needs.


personal note: i keep alternating between an FA35 and a FA43, and honest to god i cant make up my mind, the 43 in no way 'blows the 35 out of the water' in terms of quality.

also a personal note, a tripod and careful planning can really smear the difference between these top tier lens qualities.

i did a test awhile ago of a Chinon 50mm lens, that cost me 5 dollars and for some reason has a problem focusing to infinity, and my FA43, in my "controlled" tests i made the results of the two indistinguishable.... but thats not the point.

the point is how good are your skills and how demanding is your photography that would justify the need to buy top end technology?

[Gooshin]

Wow... just wow... someone's clearly talking about the recent models and you counter with a list of lens that goes as far back as the pentax stone ages That's just funny.

i'm just saying

ebay is a powerful tool, plus you keep hearing of all these random people "stumbling" on estate sales or "my friend has his grandma find this box in the attic"

and people always fight over the M/A/FA 50's always trading the 1.4 for the 1.7 and vice versa.

or take the FA20 f2.8, id gladly take that lens over the DA21 f3.2, and they do spring up once in awhile.

[AVANT]

i'm just saying

ebay is a powerful tool, plus you keep hearing of all these random people "stumbling" on estate sales or "my friend has his grandma find this box in the attic"

and people always fight over the M/A/FA 50's always trading the 1.4 for the 1.7 and vice versa.

or take the FA20 f2.8, id gladly take that lens over the DA21 f3.2, and they do spring up once in awhile.

While I do find the ability to use the arsenal of old lens as a great attribute to our Pentax cameras, I don't see how being able to source out old lens is a good counter argument for someone stating there isn't much overlap in the current lens line up. However, it really doesn't matter, so I won't be talking about this moot point anymore.

[tux08902]

The DA 70/2.4 and FA 77/1.8 are different lenses. They render differently. The DA 70 is very light and considerably smaller than the FA 77. However, the FA 77 is about a stop faster than the DA 70. It's all about what you want. I want both, haha! Just remember, they both have amazing optics.

[Mike Cash]

For the OP.....You know, if you really don't like prime lenses and don't see any advantage to them, you don't have to buy them. If you like zooms, there are plenty out there. And many of them are very fine indeed. Fortunately the industry caters to both the prime lovers and the zoom lovers, so we can all find the tools we each like to enjoy our shared hobby in our own preferred manner.

[Canada_Rockies]

For the OP.....You know, if you really don't like prime lenses and don't see any advantage to them, you don't have to buy them. If you like zooms, there are plenty out there. And many of them are very fine indeed. Fortunately the industry caters to both the prime lovers and the zoom lovers, so we can all find the tools we each like to enjoy our shared hobby in our own preferred manner.

IMHO this is the post with the most sense in this thread. Well said, Mike.

[FastPhotography]

I asked the same questions when I saw these primes of similar focal lengths first time in pentax catalogue. After owning quite a few of these lenses, they all behave differently. Eventhough I thought pentax could be stupid here but these lens options are really great for "something different". For example, 31 mm ltd renders something different for protrait. 43mm ltd gives rather interesting mood around f2.2 to f4. Da 40mm gives you that thin pancake build for light weight.

Da* 30 is hopefully intended to be aimed at f1.4 or maybe f1.8 to replace Fa 31 ltd. Da 35mm f2.8 macro is for copy work. They all have their intended purposes and targeted users.

For landscape, it is not always about how wide you can go. The wider the harder to get a good landscape. Limited crop with some tighter lens can be of use too. Recently I have used Fa 31 ltd to get the following shots (no crop at all)

Regarding how fa 31 ltd could be used in a landscape shots. These are taken in a day's trip. It is not bad at all!









The fun is that fa 31 ltd is small. Usuaully I take 2 primes for a small trip. It lightens the load and gives you the flexibility to adapt to a range of apertures.

Oh definitely, I agree with you, the 31 ltd is a very nice lens. But my question is, why get that over a zoom that would cover more area for more flexibility for landscapes? Like a 12-24 or 10-20? Or even a 16-45 or something?

[roentarre]

Oh definitely, I agree with you, the 31 ltd is a very nice lens. But my question is, why get that over a zoom that would cover more area for more flexibility for landscapes? Like a 12-24 or 10-20? Or even a 16-45 or something?

Again, this is all about personal preference. Zooms or primes can be all versatile and useful.

Primes can be more convinient than zooms when you decide to render bokeh to isoate the subject even with landscape. It can be lighter and better build, more consistent performance and reliability.

When I started photography as a hobby, I owned zooms only and covered all focal ranges. Slowly, I do discover that I often use one particular focal length with each zoom. The shots are more ordinary since there is less thinking involved in composition. Slowly over the years, I started to appreciate primes a lot more.

I think primes are all considered as "specialty" lenses, for a specific group of photographers that want certain features. Regardless for weight, image rendering ability, build quality, bright aperture or bokeh, the primes are there specific for people who appreciate these qualities.

I love many pentax primes for reasons not appreciated by a lot of people. For example, my mum thinks the images all look the same and bokeh are such a disgusting thing to appear in the photos. But these primes work for me and they all have personalities


If you do have a chance and use only a specific wavelength for any assignments, the struggle is definitely there getting the right shots. However, when you get the shot, it is usually a winner. If you feel uncomfortable to use prime, stick with a zoom until you know what you want and what style of photography is intended. Then a search will continue. Hence the LBA for what you want to do with your photography style

[wiyum]

For my money, and my method, the primes vs zooms issue is moot. I like to keep a fast wide-tele zoom in my kit for days or events when carrying primes will be difficult or impossible. When I'm not shooting medium format, I like to travel mean and lean, and a good versatile zoom lens that never has to leave the camera body is the best way to do that. Then I attempt (usually futilely) to use the zoom as a variable prime and find the best focal length and the best place to stand to get the shot right, rather than use the zoom to get lazy.

But for me, the photographic process is usually different. In the best of situations, I work the same way that I work with medium format... I walk around until I see the subject that I want to shoot, I think about what lens is going to work best for that subject, put it up, and usually only have to move a couple of feet to find the right framing. You get to know how your primes see, and that takes a long time. But once you do, you'll have a good idea what the angle of view is before you put the lens up.

This isn't to say that this is the only approach. I have friends that only use zooms and get excellent results consistently. But for what I like to do, and for the things that I enjoy about the hobby, that's how I work it. Horses for courses, etc etc.

Will

[barondla]

After Pentax runs an ad campaign, that champions the 31 limited as one of the best lenses ever, it would be a CRIME to discontinue it. Find it hard to believe that photoshop can mimic the way the 31 renders things. It just has a different look (like the 77) than other good lenses.
I like primes because they allow me to work differently. They have dof scales, Don't zoom creep when holding lens tight( in low light) or pointing up or down. They don't change aperture when zooming (there are constant aperture zooms that manage this too). Primes have a certain purity of use. I like them. Also have a few zooms (10-17, 16-45, A70-210).
thanks
barondla