Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-01-2013, 04:27 AM   #31
Pentaxian
wildman's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Flyover America
Posts: 4,314
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
The FA 35 is one of the true stars of that era.
QuoteOriginally posted by snake Quote
As it was to me.
For me there is a certain level of optical performance where enough is enough and the FA 35 is enough.
I don't care if I ever have a lens that exceeds the optical performance of the FA 35. My pics may have problems but they are problems not solved by a $1000 lens.

By the way the focus ring is perfect for me - light to the touch and close to hand and can be controlled by only one finger. I don't loose a firm grip on the camera body with my left hand which is important when taking slow available light shots.

03-01-2013, 07:35 AM   #32
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,765
QuoteOriginally posted by wildman Quote
For me there is a certain level of optical performance where enough is enough and the FA 35 is enough.
I don't care if I ever have a lens that exceeds the optical performance of the FA 35. My pics may have problems but they are problems not solved by a $1000 lens.

By the way the focus ring is perfect for me - light to the touch and close to hand and can be controlled by only one finger. I don't loose a firm grip on the camera body with my left hand which is important when taking slow available light shots.
The focus works for me, too, though I do have a place in my heart for the workings of the old K and M series. However, those series never offered anything like the performance of the FA 35 at large apertures. (IMHO, those lenses did not have the level of performance where enough was enough at F2) If this design had been the basis for those lenses and resulted in that level of performance, I'd have one of them. I might have passed on the AF version (to my loss).

BTW, a fast 35 was something I always coveted. I never tried a ~35mm lens for my K mount SLR back then which I liked enough better than the Olympus XA to be worth the size.

Last edited by GeneV; 03-01-2013 at 07:47 AM.
03-01-2013, 07:59 AM   #33
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
Like others said, it's pretty much up to the individual lens. For example, the FA 50 1.4 sure is a nice example of enormous bang for the buck. Small, light, fast, extremely affordable, focusses very fast, and feels surprisingly well built and sturdy, for a plastic FA. It's softish wide-open, as a portrait lens should be, and very sharp from 2.8 onwards. And that sharpness is corner to corner on APS-C.
03-01-2013, 12:17 PM   #34
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,289
Original Poster
While there are certainly good performers in both ranges it does seem the FA series has a higher percentage of poor lenses. Maybe that was just due to the length of time the range was produced or that Pentax was at that time also trying to cover the lower end and compete on price with some really inexpensive lenses. Or maybe QC just got sloppy.

Anyway, I'm glad we have forum review database to give guidance. It may not be perfect but it is far better than nothing.

03-01-2013, 08:00 PM   #35
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,233
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
Or maybe QC just got sloppy.
The late 1980s ushered in the era of the cheap consumer zoom. A wide to normal was bundled with the camera and you could upgrade to complete the kit with the normal to long version of cheap. Add in a super-zoom to take to Europe with you and you have a full set. Those are the "bad" FA and F lenses.


Steve
03-01-2013, 08:39 PM   #36
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,309
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Those are the "bad" FA and F lenses.


Steve
There's only one really terrible F zoom...the 35-80. There's only one really outstanding F zoom, but the rest are very good to good...
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!
da, difference between fa, fa, fa and da, improvement, k-mount, lenses, pentax lens, quality, reviews, series, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What's the difference between DA and FA? gabro822 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 22 05-27-2012 03:47 PM
What is difference between D FA Lenses and FA Lenses koponmi Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 6 10-17-2011 04:19 PM
Photo quality difference between DA Star 55mm F1.4 vs FA 31mm F1. 8 Limited tin008 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 07-04-2010 02:36 PM
Difference between Pentax DA and FA lens chaminda_jay Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 08-06-2009 03:07 PM
Difference between F and FA lenses?? mr tibbs Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 4 04-17-2009 09:50 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:20 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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