[tapiolan]

Anyone who had a chance to compare FA 20 and FA 20-35mm?

I am about to buy a FA 20-35mm, just looking to hear some experience with FA 20-35mm. As far as I read so far, it looks good.
Where do you use it mostly?

Also how would you rank it among FA20, DA21, DA15 for casual use and some landscape?
I am shooting with a K20D and K-01.

Thank you.

[Dave's clichés]

Here's an old test of the lens from the FNAC, a semi serious chain of stores that publishes it's own tests of products, you should be able to gleen the results even if you cant understand French. They rate the lens!

Test Pentax-FA f/4 20-35mm

[Mike.P®]

I have the FA 20mm 2.8 and the 20-35mm (and 15mm) but unfortunately I broke my ankle in multiple places a few days after receiving the zoom so haven't been able to do any comparison shots.

[tapiolan]

... but unfortunately I broke my ankle in multiple places a few days after receiving the zoom ...

hey not helping, the zoom is cursed then!
Seriously, wish you fast recovery, hope you have a better than new ankle.
and would be amazing to see some "I'm healthy now" shots when you get well.

by the time probably I will have it, as well.

[kiwi_jono]

I have the FA 20mm 2.8 and the 20-35mm (and 15mm) but unfortunately I broke my ankle in multiple places a few days after receiving the zoom so haven't been able to do any comparison shots.

Dam! I have broken my ankle before and its not fun. Hope you are mobile again soon.

[tapiolan]

Here's an old test of the lens from the FNAC, a semi serious chain of stores that publishes it's own tests of products, you should be able to gleen the results even if you cant understand French. They rate the lens!

Test Pentax-FA f/4 20-35mm

Thank you for the link, it was very interesting. I got the comparison vs fa 20mm! some other interesting results with other lenses too, by the way.

A forum member, in fact on his site (northcoastphotographer), made a very good criticism on lens reviews that they are based only on the "measurable" parameters. and he'd praised the fa 20-35mm. That was very informative. of course the numbers do not lie but in many cases it is not possible to really observe those small differences, for me at least.

Checking some other lenses from the link, it seems fa 20-35mm is a solid lens, distortion at 20mm being more or less the only issue.

Thanks again.

[rrstuff]

I would rate FA 20-35mm at 9.24 and FA 20mm at 9.67. i.e. I would check the reviews, because these two are popular enough to be reviewed here. Seems like people like both.

SMC Pentax-FA 20-35mm F4 AL Reviews - FA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
SMC Pentax-FA 20mm F2.8 Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

[hoopsontoast]

I have the FA20-35 and its a lovely lens, a nice normal walk around on APS-C (30mm -52mm roughly) but it really shines on Film/FF.










And on Digital:




I would love a FA20 but they dont crop up as often.

[rrstuff]

it really shines on Film/FF.

Nice contrast on film! What kind of film was that?

(looked up onflickr, it's velvia 50).

[tapiolan]

Nice contrast on film! What kind of film was that?

(looked up onflickr, it's velvia 50).

Yes, what a contrast!

ok Fa 20-35mm seems a good idea, decision made, here goes the money!

I read the reviews in the forum database, too. they both are good performers indeed.

[pinholecam]

The FA20 is a nice small lens.

Here it is compared to a Canon FD20 (roughly same lineage type lens) and the size difference is apparent.


and we are not even talking A20 or M20 here.

1 filter size smaller a lens.
Goes to show off the design considerations Pentax always gave to its lenses in terms of optical performance and lower encumbrance.

I've also compared these 2 lenses (on FF A7).
Pentax has more field curature.
Thats good and bad.
Good in the sense that images esp with the wider apertures have more gradual fall off between in/out of focus.
More dimensional.
Bad in that as flat field lens, care must be taken to get things 'all sharp'.
The FA20 also has more contrast and a 'pop' to it because of it.
Better richer colors too.


The thing about it is field curvature.
On FF (at least on a A7 with think sensor stack well documented to be problematic ), the edges will be much worse than the center.
I basically needed a f11 (or f9, f10) and focus using the off center to make sure everything was a sharp as possible.

Here is the trial shot at f11 and focused off centre.
Larger size sample on the flickr.




Its a nice lens for sure.
I don't know about the FA20-35.
But I am certainly thinking of the FA,A,M20 to add to the collection.

[tapiolan]

The FA20 is a nice small lens.

that's a nice insight.
Actually I was first thinking about FA20 and in fact there is one on sale in the marketplace. I was really curious after reading the very positive reviews on it.

I have DA40, FA31, DA10-17. I love them all, but I just wanted a bit all rounder at the wide end, ok cropped it won;t be that wide, but still. plus thinking of a "casual" lens for landscapes for instance zoom seemed good for it.
most importantly, i read some really positive opinions and saw some great images for the 20-35.

hope it works out. but you are right FA20 is charmingly compact.

[Ash]

I'm contemplating the same options at the moment and am just looking at IQ between the FA 20 and FA 20-35 on a FF format. Anyone got any feedback on the comparison of these two lenses at 20mm?
If the FA 20 needs stopping down to f/11 for edge to edge sharpness, how about the FA 20-35?

[Abbazz]

I have the FA20-35 and its a lovely lens, a nice normal walk around on APS-C (30mm -52mm roughly) but it really shines on Film/FF.

+1. It has quickly turned into my most used lens on full-frame, mainly because it's a light and compact zoom with a very useful range which delivers great pictures with lots of contrast and beautiful colors at any focal or aperture. There are certainly prime lenses that are sharper in the corners at F/4, but this tiny jewel trumps them all when it comes to packing a lot of punch in a small package.

There are so many beautiful pictures taken with this lens on this forum, like these, which were posted recently:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/287219-comp...ml#post3170061

I would love a FA20 but they dont crop up as often.

IMHO the 20-35 is a more useful lens because it has better flare resistance and constantly delivers better colors, even though the FA 20 does have the lead in pure resolution until F/5.6. I have posted a few quick comparison shots taken on a full frame camera here:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/287925-ff-u...ml#post3169656

Cheers!

Abbazz

[Ash]

I have the DA 12-24 because it allows for a wider FOV than the DA 15. That has come in handy for me on the APS-C format.
But with the prospect of a FF dSLR, the FA 20 and 20-35 can only give 20mm at their widest. So I'm looking for a favoured lens in IQ only (not in versatility or weight or looks or whatever else).
So let's say we're just looking at IQ at 20mm. At f/5.6-f/8, why does the 20-35 trump the 20?
I've responded to the above thread asking this a different way as I'm keen to pick up a copy of a FF UWA lens and tossing up between the two. Thanks.