[Nicolas06]

I would say that I prefer the DA *55 to the FA 77 on a crop camera, due to focal length. Working distance is about perfect with the 55 and gets a little long with the 77. I guess that's for you to figure out which you prefer.

Yes the focal length you need really depend the photos you want to make and also the distance you are from subject. For headshoot outside, I'd prefer the FA77. For a full body, head and shoulders inside, or 2 people shoot I'd prefer something in the 30-50mm range... This is also personnal I guess.

Still I feel this DA*55 is unecessary big/heavy compared to the lenses that surround it in the line up and that are smaller/lighter (DA40, FA43, FA50, DA70, FA77).

Agree it is not so bad and goes by the f/1.4 apperture + SDM. When you are weight bound you prefer FA43 + FA77 than DA55 alone for similar size/weight. But that DA*55 is not that big neither, so depend what you are after.

If you want f/1.4, for sure this isn't going to cut it with the FA77 or FA43.

But this is always like that. I mean the DA70 is untouched for it performance at f/2.4 by all the other lenses here (DA*55, FA77...) and it is even smaller/lighter.. And FA77, FA43 and DA*55 tend to be near in performance on their shared appertures. so what remains is their focal length, their rendering character, they max apperture, their features, their size/weight. Their price.

---

Last edited by Nicolas06; 02-22-2015 at 05:56 AM.

[UncleVanya]

Da 70 doesn't get much love here does it.

[Nicolas06]

Da 70 doesn't get much love here does it.

I had to choose between DA70 & FA77. I didn't want 40-55mm range because I wanted longer tele. I didn't want a huge 85mm f/1.4 neither.

So it had to be between DA70 and FA77.

For the actual photo they take the main actual difference are the rendering and max apperture.

FA77 has the FA rendering, a bit warmer, a bit less contrasty, less colorfull but all is here and it post process very well. It really shine for subtle colors. The way it was design also come with nice bokeh (and obviously a bit more at f/1.8 than at f/2.4) and I think more 3D/pop than the DA.

The DA I think is tack sharp from f/2.4 even on border while the FA would benefit more to stop down a bit. Colors are more saturated, it is optimized for digital, has quick shift and is smaller.

In the end, I know that if I broutght DA70 I would always think that the FA might have been better and I would always think that I might have some use from time to time with the larger apperture. Also of the many time I was thinking of DA70 I was thinking, I have a 50-135, f/2.4 vs f/2.8 is not going to make a senssible difference at all from an f/2.8 zoom. Not a all.

This is not to say that the DA is any bad. Less expensive, smaller, sharper wide open. Very saturated colors. When I made my choice I was still thinking I would use some zoom while now I tend for using only primes. So I would appreciate more this DA70 now... Still f/2.4 is not f/1.8 and still I think I'am pleased with the FA rendering I got with the FA77.

In the end, choose what is the best compromize for you for apperture/price/rendering.

[LeRolls]

I like the DA 70 but I love the FA 77.

[Drake Avenue]

The DA* 55mm isn't all that big and heavy compared to its big brother, the FA* 85mm. Now THAT'S a big lens, even without WR and SDM. Honestly though, lens size isn't the biggest (pun intended) factor when I'm choosing a lens to take portraits with on a session. I just pick the best lens for the job.

[Rondec]

I would just say that the DA *55 isn't that much bigger than the FA 77, except for its hood, which is quite generous. The FA 77 is 7.37 cm by 4.8 cm and weighs 270 g, while the DA *55 is 7.1 cm by 6.6 cm and weighs 375 gm -- reasonable considering the DA 55 is half a stop faster.

Currently, the DA *55 is 600 dollars on B and H, while the FA 77 is 904 dollars. I think at those prices, I definitely would choose the DA 55, but that's just me.

[Driline]

Currently, the DA *55 is 600 dollars on B and H,

That is a great price for the 55. The cheapest I've seen the FA 77 is about $735 shipped NEW from Japan, but it's silver.

[wissink]

Haha I love this. Thank you everyone for your input and great images. I was going to reply to everyone individually and then there were so man that I got overwhelmed.

As was mentioned, it may be LBA, although, I am keen on having only a select few quality lenses that don't overlap in purpose too much. I mentioned the 40/43 ltds as being redundant because they are too similar in FL to my 35 ltd. If I bought either, I'd sell the 35. Also if I bought either the DA* 55, DA 70 ltd, FA 77 ltd, or even the Sigma, I'd sell the DA 50, and maybe the FA100 2.8. Heck my Sigma 100-300 f4 may be up for grabs at some point. Wildlife is really hard when you can't see them!

This would not be an impulsive buy as I"d have to sell something/save up for it. I'm really of the mindset that less is definitely more. In order to buy the DA 15/35/FA1002.8/100-300 F4, I"ve had to sell off most of my other personal valuables. I'm trying to focus on one passion. The great thing about photography is that it is mobile and if we move, it is just as capable elsewhere. I've got a few things I may be able to sell at some point. Heck my dog frequently looks at me nervously and his daily flatulence quotient has gone through the roof... our poor guests.

Speaking of selling things would a Brunton 7x42 Macroscope (close focusing monocular) be allowed on the marketplace?


My current thoughts are that once I sell/save enough, I'd sell the DA 50 and get the DA*55. My reasoning is the WR and more importantly the focal length and F1.4 may be better for indoor use while visiting family and friends. In this scenario I"d likely try and keep the the FA 100 2.8 Macro.

If I went the DA70 / FA77 route, I'd likely sell the DA 50 and FA 100 2.8. I know it's heresy to say so, but I'd probably lean more towards the DA70 because (from what I've read frequently) the DA ltd line is easier to avoid technical flaws (PF, CA, flare, etc) than the FA ltd line. Can anyone comment on this? I want this capability because I'm not likely to see (because of my eyes) these flaws and want to avoid them so others don't see them either. Maybe its just a work flow issue.

Just so you know, I don't want more lenses then I need. The only lens that is extraneous at the moment is an M50 f2 that i got for $10. I use it for something my hands can fiddle with, a basic magnifier, and as a teaching tool to show what aperture etc means.

Oh and someone mentioned a 28-70 zoom. I was debating whether to go the zoom or prime route, and I decided prime partially based on what was available when I had the money, but mostly because I want the challenge and the primes are good teachers. Besides, I just sold my 18-135 WR to buy the 35 etc.

Thanks everyone!

[Just1MoreDave]

On selling: I tested my new/used DA* 55mm f1.4 for sharpness, just to see if it worked, and immediately decided that I should sell the five lenses that I compared it to. Then I tested it against some macro lenses and added more lenses to the sell list. I'm not sure if I want to take real photos with it; I might have to sell everything else.

[Nicolas06]

Haha I love this. Thank you everyone for your input and great images. I was going to reply to everyone individually and then there were so man that I got overwhelmed.

As was mentioned, it may be LBA, although, I am keen on having only a select few quality lenses that don't overlap in purpose too much. I mentioned the 40/43 ltds as being redundant because they are too similar in FL to my 35 ltd. If I bought either, I'd sell the 35. Also if I bought either the DA* 55, DA 70 ltd, FA 77 ltd, or even the Sigma, I'd sell the DA 50, and maybe the FA100 2.8. Heck my Sigma 100-300 f4 may be up for grabs at some point. Wildlife is really hard when you can't see them!

This would not be an impulsive buy as I"d have to sell something/save up for it. I'm really of the mindset that less is definitely more. In order to buy the DA 15/35/FA1002.8/100-300 F4, I"ve had to sell off most of my other personal valuables. I'm trying to focus on one passion. The great thing about photography is that it is mobile and if we move, it is just as capable elsewhere. I've got a few things I may be able to sell at some point. Heck my dog frequently looks at me nervously and his daily flatulence quotient has gone through the roof... our poor guests.

Speaking of selling things would a Brunton 7x42 Macroscope (close focusing monocular) be allowed on the marketplace?


My current thoughts are that once I sell/save enough, I'd sell the DA 50 and get the DA*55. My reasoning is the WR and more importantly the focal length and F1.4 may be better for indoor use while visiting family and friends. In this scenario I"d likely try and keep the the FA 100 2.8 Macro.

If I went the DA70 / FA77 route, I'd likely sell the DA 50 and FA 100 2.8. I know it's heresy to say so, but I'd probably lean more towards the DA70 because (from what I've read frequently) the DA ltd line is easier to avoid technical flaws (PF, CA, flare, etc) than the FA ltd line. Can anyone comment on this? I want this capability because I'm not likely to see (because of my eyes) these flaws and want to avoid them so others don't see them either. Maybe its just a work flow issue.

Just so you know, I don't want more lenses then I need. The only lens that is extraneous at the moment is an M50 f2 that i got for $10. I use it for something my hands can fiddle with, a basic magnifier, and as a teaching tool to show what aperture etc means.

Oh and someone mentioned a 28-70 zoom. I was debating whether to go the zoom or prime route, and I decided prime partially based on what was available when I had the money, but mostly because I want the challenge and the primes are good teachers. Besides, I just sold my 18-135 WR to buy the 35 etc.

Thanks everyone!

I'am with you to think it is better to have a minimal kit that cover what one need and no more. A bigger kit mean more lenses changes, bigger/heavier bag, each lense individually less used and also more money.

So for now I have DA15, DA21, DA35 f/2.4, FA77 and that's all. I had before DA17-70, DA50-135, FA50 but sold theses.

I hesitate to replace the DA35 into something else (FA43, FA31, DA35 ltd), and think of a long lense like FA135 f/2.8. This last one not for portraiture, but for all occasions I need a long tele.

For your case, it's true that DA*55 would fit just fine between 35 and 100mm and the 3 focal length can be used just fine for portraiture while the DA*55 with it's large apperture and great bokeh and maybe less clinical rendering would do better than the other 2. But it's fine. You have a perfect lense for it in the middle, you don't need to have 10 specialized lenses for portraiture.

As long as you are perfectly satisfyied with all your existing lenses and you think 55 is a focal length you'd like that the way to go !

For me I was not satisfyed with my FA50. I had several issues. First issue is it good not before f/2.8 and great at f/4 onward only. Another issue I had with the K5 at the time was the focussing, unsure and not that precise but the K3 solved it. A third issue for me was that 50mm was simply too short many time to shoot headshoots or even to serve as a general purpose tele. FA50 was specialized but not even what I really liked.

I'am now far happier with FA77. Better rendering in particular at wide appertures, A longer focal length that help for headshoots and make it much more usefull as a general tele for landscape, street shooting...

But of course this is very personnal. I asked myself a lot between DFA100 macro and FA77. I think I'am more happy with the FA77 because 100mm alone would be too long for many cases and the rendering could be a bit too aggressive for the portrait case.

In the 35mm range, I don't know what to choose or if I should change anything at all. The 43, I fear it is a bit too near the 50mm and I'll use it not much. The 31mm, I find it expensive and I feel it is a bit too much near DA21, in particular I still hope that one day Pentax will offer a nice 24mm sharp corner to corners to replace that DA21. I would prefer this focal length. The 35 fit well many case, I don't use it that much for now, but I find I use it more lately. I'am disatisfied with the build quality and think it could be even sharper. Hence the DA35 ltd and macro. But I loose the sub f/2 apperture the other 2 provide and that would be interresting on some occasion !

So... I don't know !

[dinamojuan]

What do you all think that is better, Between a Good 50 or 55mm VS a larger zoom? like a 70-200 2,8 or similar.?

Cliff Mounter always says, 50mms are only for environmental portraits, and 70-200 for closer portraits, because of better flattering look of the face.

[clackers]

Cliff Mounter always says, 50mms are only for environmental portraits,

But he was talking about FF FoV, right?

That's the equivalent of 35mm on APS-C.

[dinamojuan]

But he was talking about FF FoV, right?

That's the equivalent of 35mm on APS-C.

I suppose he means FF.

But I was thinking to myself, that maybe the focal length changes because of the sensor size, but optical distortion of the lens stills there...

[Rondec]

What do you all think that is better, Between a Good 50 or 55mm VS a larger zoom? like a 70-200 2,8 or similar.?

Cliff Mounter always says, 50mms are only for environmental portraits, and 70-200 for closer portraits, because of better flattering look of the face.

Assuming you are looking at a crop camera, I would choose between the DA *55/FA77/DA *50-135. 70-200 would seem to be a little on the long side. The others all work nicely.

So often when people quote focal lengths, they are talking full frame equivalent. 85mm full frame (which would be a pretty typical focal length for portraits) equates to 55mm on APS-C.

[dinamojuan]

This is an interesting subject, I´m gonna do some kind of test with the three lens I have.. and compare.