[tlp]

the smallest of the long focal leght lens I can think of is the A*300 - both relatively small and light for what you get - easily hand holdable and great optics although the DA 70 will be dwarft by it

[grahame]

M 100/2.8 is only 5.6cm in length, and just over 200g.
Or Takumar 200/5.6, very compact and light 200mm lens.

[dadipentak]

For telephoto, the Tamron Adaptall 300/5.6 and the Tokina 400/5.6.

[enoeske]

I love the FA77, it's relatively small and also fast.
Keep in mind that the effective FL on an APS-C crop factor camera is almost 116mm so it really gets in much closer that the DA70.

equivalent fov of 116 vs 105 isn't that big a difference.

[ChristianRock]

If you don't mind manual lenses, and want longer reach than the 135, the M 200/f4 is not that big for its reach, and can usually be had for cheap (60-70 dollars, which for the quality is a steal).
The the SMC-M 75-150mm is relatively small for its reach and versatility, but it's the same length of the M 200 - but it's smaller in a sense because it's thinner - filter size is 49!!. Here's both of these along with a 135 3.5 for reference:



Nothing will be as small as a DA 70 though, if you want REALLY small that's the one to get - it's a pancake. But it won't reach to 135, 150 or 200...

But how in the world can you beat this for a 70mm lens (center one):



Finally, the 18-135mm is quite small for its reach, I think... here's what it looks like next to a 100mm 2.8... but of course it's a superzoom so there's advantages and compromises that come with that.

[mgvh]

My smallest lens/longest fl is the excellent SUPER TAKUMAR 150mm F4
For a zoom, it's the TOKINA SZ-X 80-200mm f4.5-5.6

[UncleVanya]

I love the FA77, it's relatively small and also fast.
Keep in mind that the effective FL on an APS-C crop factor camera is almost 116mm so it really gets in much closer that the DA70.

The DA 70 is effectively a 105mm so I'm not sure that the extra 11mm is really that much of a difference. The FA77 is however a lens that works on a full frame which the DA70 cannot do. Mea culpa - both can do Full Frame.

---

Last edited by UncleVanya; 12-03-2014 at 10:40 AM.

[TomTom]

Pentax M 120mm F2.8. There's one for sale in the marketplace now. According to one reviewer, it's "much smaller & lighter than any 135/2.8".

[ChristianRock]

The DA 70 is effectively a 105mm so I'm not sure that the extra 11mm is really that much of a difference. The FA77 is however a lens that works on a full frame which the DA70 cannot do.

Yes it can... you should have checked before posting

vjacesslav: SMC PENTAX DA 70MM F2.4 LIMITED vs FULL FRAME

[UncleVanya]

Here's a comparison of my Sigma 400mm f5.6 AF (top), my FA 80-320 (fully extended), my F100 2.8 Macro, and Takumar Bayonet 135 f2.5 manual focus lens.

I think the Sigma is very small - the 80-320 is the same length when focused to infinity at 320mm and slightly longer when focused close. The Sigma does weigh more, but it is actually smaller around in the middle section of the lens than the 80-320. To me this is a very compact 400mm. But I think the 55-300 is even smaller relative to the field of view it provides.

---------- Post added 12-03-14 at 12:32 PM ----------

Yes it can... you should have checked before posting

vjacesslav: SMC PENTAX DA 70MM F2.4 LIMITED vs FULL FRAME

I've learned something new! Thanks. Surprised Pentax/Ricoh hasn't bothered to change lenses like this to a DFA rather than DA designation.