Pentax FA135 2.8 vs. F135 2.8

**UncleVanya** · 03-12-2015, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by waterfall

OP's second post specifically referenced an offer to buy an A135. My reply was to his post with quoted price.

Yes - it was an honestly confusing thread. Here's where he corrected that info.

Originally posted by zeitlos

I'm sorry, I've made a mistake too!

It's not FA135 2.8 vs. A135... it's vs. F135 2.8

So, same question, just different lens!

Sorry if I caused you any inconveniences.

'

Post 9. He mislead by mistake. The lens for sale was in fact an F - and he has purchased it.

**jatrax** · 03-12-2015, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by zeitlos

Okay, I have to be precise. I was offered the FA 135 2.8 two weeks ago for 275

That is a fair price for that lens, either the F or the FA. I spent almost a year looking for an F 135mm before I got one, and I paid more than that. I prefer the F for build but I think optically they are identical although the FA may have newer coatings. At any rate either is an excellent lens and you got very good pricing so enjoy.

waterfall · 03-12-2015, 03:31 PM

I agree with jatrax about price. Very competitive price for an F or FA 135. Nice to have AF with them, my A 135 was MF and I loved it. If AF is as good as reviews on the F and FA copies, you will be happy. But I still find the A100 just right for me.

Stavri · 03-12-2015, 05:37 PM

The -F vs FA argument is pointless, they're essentially the same lens. The only difference is the "warmth" which they render images, -F has warmer colors, FA has slightly more neutral, true to life ones. THAT'S ALL.
Like jatrax said, $275 is as low as they go so be glad and take lots of pictures with it.

**UncleVanya** · 03-12-2015, 08:18 PM

Originally posted by Stavri

The -F vs FA argument is pointless, they're essentially the same lens. The only difference is the "warmth" which they render images, -F has warmer colors, FA has slightly more neutral, true to life ones. THAT'S ALL.
Like jatrax said, $275 is as low as they go so be glad and take lots of pictures with it.

I think many will argue that the build quality on the F series is better. The FA series is actually lighter due to the use of more plastic. My FA 80-320 which I babied eventually died due to plastic internal parts (loss of A and Autofocus due to loss of communication with body).

pinholecam · 03-13-2015, 12:04 AM

FA and F are the same lens except for cosmetics.

FA135 is a very nice lens.
Sharp, very contrasty.
Rich rendering.
Also very fast AF (really fast)
Main problem is the weakness to CA.
Another issue is the poor MF damping and very short focus throw (that's if you do MF)

zeitlos · 03-13-2015, 02:23 AM

Thank you all for your enlightening comments and sorry for the confusion!

My copy of the F135 will arrive today, so I will be able to compare them. I assume there won't be anything spectacular to find out, so I will probably stick with my FA copy. If it also got a more modern coating, this one should be first choice.

Thanks for the pictures! Nice!

Nicolas06 · 03-14-2015, 05:07 AM

Originally posted by zeitlos

Thank you all for your enlightening comments and sorry for the confusion!

My copy of the F135 will arrive today, so I will be able to compare them. I assume there won't be anything spectacular to find out, so I will probably stick with my FA copy. If it also got a more modern coating, this one should be first choice.

Thanks for the pictures! Nice!

Let us know if you see visible difference or not ! And if there is, don't forget to post photos!

zeitlos · 03-16-2015, 08:16 AM

As far as I can see, I'd say no real visual differences to be made out. Might be that different coating can be an issue under certain circumstances.

I've still not made up my mind which one to keep, probably I'll go for the F135 since it feels more solid. And maybe my FA need a little bit of AF-Correction.
On the other hand, the FA came along with packaging, manual... rather rare I'd say. Both of them almost look like new. You have to examine it thoroughly to make out traces of usage. Well, I'm not in a hurry. So far I have two copies of almost the same lens.

Stavri · 03-16-2015, 06:48 PM

These lenses are both mint, It's good to be spoiled for choice, Both lenses are excellent whichever way you go. Sell the other one and share the bounty with your fellow pentaxians.

**UncleVanya** · 03-16-2015, 06:56 PM

I know it is silly... but I prefer the cosmetics of the F series. I like the way they look and feel in my hand.

Stavri · 03-16-2015, 07:02 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

I know it is silly... but I prefer the cosmetics of the F series. I like the way they look and feel in my hand.

That's a sentiment that's shared by many...

**jatrax** · 03-17-2015, 08:10 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by UncleVanya

I know it is silly... but I prefer the cosmetics of the F series. I like the way they look and feel in my hand.

Originally posted by Stavri

That's a sentiment that's shared by many...

Me too

Stavri · 03-17-2015, 08:59 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

Me too

I always smile when you post this picture Jatrax, on looks alone -F 100 is my favorite, than the -F 50 f2.8, -F 135 f2.8, -F 85 and on... They clearly dropped the ball on the -F 17-28 though, the black sheep of the series. Some intern must have designed the shell of that one. (optically is a great lens)

Marktax · 03-17-2015, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by Stavri

17-28 though, the black sheep of the series. Some intern must have designed the shell of that one.

The fisheye zoom received the design of several of the FA-series lenses, those with the ovals on the rubber zoom ring and the rubber but non-textured focusing ring as on the FA 135mm in the picture above. It was late in the F-series run (introduced 1995), and the newer design was already in play. The FA series ended up with a couple of different textures on the rubber rings. I thought the ovals looked nice, and they were as tactile as any.

03-16-2015, 08:16 AM	#24
zeitlos Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: In the middle of Bavaria - Germany Posts: 282 Original Poster	As far as I can see, I'd say no real visual differences to be made out. Might be that different coating can be an issue under certain circumstances. I've still not made up my mind which one to keep, probably I'll go for the F135 since it feels more solid. And maybe my FA need a little bit of AF-Correction. On the other hand, the FA came along with packaging, manual... rather rare I'd say. Both of them almost look like new. You have to examine it thoroughly to make out traces of usage. Well, I'm not in a hurry. So far I have two copies of almost the same lens. Last edited by zeitlos; 03-02-2016 at 12:59 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Tie-breaker: M 85/2 vs M 100/2.8 vs FA 645 120/4 Macro vs FA* 28-70/2.8	Adam	Pentax Forums Giveaways	11	10-19-2016 06:02 AM
For Sale - Sold: Primes: F300/4.5, A300/4, FA35/2, Viv 105/2.5 Macro, A28/2.8, A135/2.8 (Worl	thirdofthree	Sold Items	5	10-23-2010 04:40 PM
Pentax DFA 100mm f/2.8 Macro vs Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG vs Tamron AF 90mm f/2.8 Di SP	dyusem	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	02-13-2010 08:11 PM

03-12-2015, 03:10 PM	#16
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,445	Originally posted by waterfall OP's second post specifically referenced an offer to buy an A135. My reply was to his post with quoted price. Yes - it was an honestly confusing thread. Here's where he corrected that info. Originally posted by zeitlos I'm sorry, I've made a mistake too! It's not FA135 2.8 vs. A135... it's vs. F135 2.8 So, same question, just different lens! Sorry if I caused you any inconveniences. ' Post 9. He mislead by mistake. The lens for sale was in fact an F - and he has purchased it.

03-12-2015, 03:22 PM	#17
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by zeitlos Okay, I have to be precise. I was offered the FA 135 2.8 two weeks ago for 275 That is a fair price for that lens, either the F or the FA. I spent almost a year looking for an F 135mm before I got one, and I paid more than that. I prefer the F for build but I think optically they are identical although the FA may have newer coatings. At any rate either is an excellent lens and you got very good pricing so enjoy.

03-12-2015, 03:31 PM	#18
waterfall Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Northern Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,812	I agree with jatrax about price. Very competitive price for an F or FA 135. Nice to have AF with them, my A 135 was MF and I loved it. If AF is as good as reviews on the F and FA copies, you will be happy. But I still find the A100 just right for me.

03-12-2015, 05:37 PM	#19
Stavri Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: at a Bean & Leaf Photos: Albums Posts: 1,832	The -F vs FA argument is pointless, they're essentially the same lens. The only difference is the "warmth" which they render images, -F has warmer colors, FA has slightly more neutral, true to life ones. THAT'S ALL. Like jatrax said, $275 is as low as they go so be glad and take lots of pictures with it.

03-12-2015, 08:18 PM	#20
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,445	Originally posted by Stavri The -F vs FA argument is pointless, they're essentially the same lens. The only difference is the "warmth" which they render images, -F has warmer colors, FA has slightly more neutral, true to life ones. THAT'S ALL. Like jatrax said, $275 is as low as they go so be glad and take lots of pictures with it. I think many will argue that the build quality on the F series is better. The FA series is actually lighter due to the use of more plastic. My FA 80-320 which I babied eventually died due to plastic internal parts (loss of A and Autofocus due to loss of communication with body).

03-13-2015, 12:04 AM	#21
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,709	FA and F are the same lens except for cosmetics. FA135 is a very nice lens. Sharp, very contrasty. Rich rendering. Also very fast AF (really fast) Main problem is the weakness to CA. Another issue is the poor MF damping and very short focus throw (that's if you do MF)

03-13-2015, 02:23 AM	#22
zeitlos Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: In the middle of Bavaria - Germany Posts: 282 Original Poster	Thank you all for your enlightening comments and sorry for the confusion! My copy of the F135 will arrive today, so I will be able to compare them. I assume there won't be anything spectacular to find out, so I will probably stick with my FA copy. If it also got a more modern coating, this one should be first choice. Thanks for the pictures! Nice!

03-14-2015, 05:07 AM	#23
Nicolas06 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 4,854	Originally posted by zeitlos Thank you all for your enlightening comments and sorry for the confusion! My copy of the F135 will arrive today, so I will be able to compare them. I assume there won't be anything spectacular to find out, so I will probably stick with my FA copy. If it also got a more modern coating, this one should be first choice. Thanks for the pictures! Nice! Let us know if you see visible difference or not ! And if there is, don't forget to post photos!

03-16-2015, 06:48 PM	#25
Stavri Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: at a Bean & Leaf Photos: Albums Posts: 1,832	These lenses are both mint, It's good to be spoiled for choice, Both lenses are excellent whichever way you go. Sell the other one and share the bounty with your fellow pentaxians.

03-16-2015, 06:56 PM	#26
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,445	I know it is silly... but I prefer the cosmetics of the F series. I like the way they look and feel in my hand.

03-16-2015, 07:02 PM	#27
Stavri Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: at a Bean & Leaf Photos: Albums Posts: 1,832	Originally posted by UncleVanya I know it is silly... but I prefer the cosmetics of the F series. I like the way they look and feel in my hand. That's a sentiment that's shared by many...

03-17-2015, 08:10 AM - 1 Like	#28
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by UncleVanya I know it is silly... but I prefer the cosmetics of the F series. I like the way they look and feel in my hand. Originally posted by Stavri That's a sentiment that's shared by many... Me too

03-17-2015, 08:59 AM	#29
Stavri Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: at a Bean & Leaf Photos: Albums Posts: 1,832	Originally posted by jatrax Me too I always smile when you post this picture Jatrax, on looks alone -F 100 is my favorite, than the -F 50 f2.8, -F 135 f2.8, -F 85 and on... They clearly dropped the ball on the -F 17-28 though, the black sheep of the series. Some intern must have designed the shell of that one. (optically is a great lens)

03-17-2015, 12:15 PM	#30
Marktax Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Washington DC Photos: Albums Posts: 610	Originally posted by Stavri 17-28 though, the black sheep of the series. Some intern must have designed the shell of that one. The fisheye zoom received the design of several of the FA-series lenses, those with the ovals on the rubber zoom ring and the rubber but non-textured focusing ring as on the FA 135mm in the picture above. It was late in the F-series run (introduced 1995), and the newer design was already in play. The FA series ended up with a couple of different textures on the rubber rings. I thought the ovals looked nice, and they were as tactile as any.