Experienced with FA20/2.8 please step in...

**todd** · 11-20-2015, 02:30 PM

I have a line out on a possible acquisition of this lens... Asking $450 firm but it seems to be a rare lens on the market so I won't have any problem breaking my LBA freeze that has been in effect since March. My only WA prime is DA15 which I love but as an aspiring full framer this definitely caught my attention...

Anyhow, I know it only has six blades but I like to shoot into the light a lot and wondering how it handles flare... I have only found a few shots online and none of them dealing with any direct sunlight.

bertwert · 11-20-2015, 02:35 PM

I haven't read this (nor do I own the lens) but this might help: Pentax-FA 20mm F2.8 Review - Review | PentaxForums.com Reviews
And here: SMC Pentax-FA 20mm F2.8 Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

**pepperberry farm** · 11-20-2015, 02:36 PM

couple of Flickr searches:

https://www.flickr.com/groups/1130513@N21/

https://www.flickr.com/search/?tags=smcpfa20mmf28

**todd** · 11-20-2015, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by pepperberry farm

couple of Flickr searches:

Yeah I saw those... Seems to be about all there is on flickr... Thanks

Originally posted by bertwert

I haven't read this (nor do I own the lens) but this might help

Aha yes that first link does help a lot thanks!

robthebloke · 11-20-2015, 03:00 PM

I've got the older A version. I was never very impressed with it - I prefer the 18mm K3.5 - although both are blown out the water by the 21mm and 15mm DA ltds. I've heard people rave about the FA20, much like I've heard people rave about the 'A' version. But on a K-3, the A20 is quite weak, lacks contrast, and doesn't compare well against the 18-55 kit lens wrt sharpness.

I'd hope that the FA version fares better, but it just seems to be its rarity that keeps the price high imho. (Probably too high when compared to the DA21). My 2 cents.

**todd** · 11-20-2015, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by robthebloke

I've got the older A version.

For me, if it performs like the A version, I will be stoked! Rod Single In Challenged it back in July and I was loving the results.

**pasorro** · 11-20-2015, 04:01 PM

Mine is excellent

**carlb** · 11-20-2015, 06:09 PM

I had one and loved it. Selling it is one of my biggest photographic regrets, but I was still using film and manual focussing and couldn't take full advantage of it's capabilities. It just had something special. If you can get one, go for it.

rrstuff · 11-20-2015, 06:45 PM

Photozone said that it's comparable to DA21,but more pricey. So if you want to stick with APS-C, just get the HD21 limited. You can't go wrong with that lens!

lytrytyr · 11-20-2015, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by robthebloke

I've got the older A version. I was never very impressed with it - I prefer the 18mm K3.5 - although both are blown out the water by the 21mm and 15mm DA ltds. I've heard people rave about the FA20, much like I've heard people rave about the 'A' version. But on a K-3, the A20 is quite weak, lacks contrast, and doesn't compare well against the 18-55 kit lens wrt sharpness.

I'd hope that the FA version fares better, but it just seems to be its rarity that keeps the price high imho. (Probably too high when compared to the DA21). My 2 cents.

My experience with the A 20/2.8 has been similar.
You can pimp its pale images with PP,
but there are better choices out there.

LHK · 11-21-2015, 03:45 AM

I have both the FA and A versions of the 20/2.8, along with the 15 mm limited. Optically A and FA are the same, while A is more sturdy in built I'd prefer the FA for having AF.

Compared to the 15 limited flare resistance is worse, but not bad. Distorsion is wave-like and not too bad for a 20. All in all this lens is rated as a good performer among 20 mm prime lenses. On APC-C, however, the 21 is smaller and certainly a tick better. Not that it matters much with the upcoming FF.
Sharpness is absolutely perfect with the 15 mm and perfect with both 20 mm, but only in the center, because the wider you get in focal length the softer the image becomes in the corners, where both 20 mm lenses are better than the 15 mm, but I don't use the term "sharp" here. I keep wondering how these lenses will perform on the FF. Maybe there will be a couple of new FF-lenses next year optimized for today's challenges. Hopefully normal good workhorses, compact size, and no expensive heavy artsy ones.

Lutz

fwcetus · 11-21-2015, 08:40 AM

Originally posted by LHK

I have both the FA and A versions of the 20/2.8, along with the 15 mm limited. Optically A and FA are the same, while A is more sturdy in built I'd prefer the FA for having AF.

My limited experience with both lenses is similar (having had/have both), except for these disclaimers:

1. I owned the A way back in "Ye Olde Film Days of Yore", and used it mostly on an LX, and have never used it on a DSLR.

2. I only recently picked up a nice copy of the FA version, and thus have been using it for only a short time, and only on an APS-C K-3.

3. I don't have a whole lot of wide-angle experience anyway, so my opinions comparing them to other wide angles wouldn't count for much, but I can at least (sort of) compare the A 20/2.8 with the FA 20/2.8.

I'd say that the build quality is pretty similar -- I am pleased to report that the FA's MF focus feel is pretty good (despite the fact that the FA is a wee bit stingy with the size of its non-knobby focus ring) -- the FA's MF feel is only slightly more "mechanical" than the way the A lens focusing felt (and with less "whirring" than some other F and FA lenses "feature"). I detect no overt annoying "AF build sloppiness" in the FA (and I can't say that about all the F and FA lenses I've handled). The barrel of the FA seems a little "chunkier" in appearance, so that the filter thread mount "flaring" is less obvious on the FA than on the A, and, to my eyes, the A is a nicer looking lens.

I'd say that the two lenses (under these unscientific, multiple-variables conditions), were/are pretty similar optically. I have a few nice prints taken with the A that still look pretty good nowadays, and some recent K-3 test shots with the FA seem about the same (except, of course, that they have more of a 28-ish "look" to them).

Sharpness, color rendition, and contrast seem decent enough (and pretty similar) with both 20/2.8 versions (but these were judged with my more-tele-familiar eyes). It's not overly difficult to get some flare thanks to Our Mister Sun with either lens, and there is a bit of barrel distortion with both lenses (I can still remember trying to be careful to keep the horizon centered vertically in some ol' A ocean shots).

In any event, I'm liking my new FA (and its AF convenience) quite a bit.

**todd** · 11-21-2015, 11:31 AM

thanks for the input guys. taking a look at it this afternoon and most likely bagging it.

Abbazz · 11-22-2015, 10:57 PM

I have the FA 20/2.8. It's not a bad lens when you consider the field of view on full-frame (doesn't make sense to use it on crop-format as it's only marginally better than the kit lens at 20mm). The main drawbacks IMHO are a tendency to flare when the sun or brightly lit areas are in the frame, as well as purple fringing on contrasted edges between F/2.8 and F/5.6.

Cheers!

Abbazz

**todd** · 11-23-2015, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by Abbazz

(doesn't make sense to use it on crop-format as it's only marginally better than the kit lens at 20mm).

It seems better than that to me from my shooting with it so far, but you sound like you've analyzed this pretty well... I'm compelled to conduct my own little comparison with DA15, DA18-55 Kit (@20mm), and FA20 (on crop).

A couple from last night... (Not the best examples because both are hand-held five shot hdr's, because I'm also testing out a new to me K-3)

11-20-2015, 02:30 PM	#1
todd Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,791	Experienced with FA20/2.8 please step in... I have a line out on a possible acquisition of this lens... Asking $450 firm but it seems to be a rare lens on the market so I won't have any problem breaking my LBA freeze that has been in effect since March. My only WA prime is DA15 which I love but as an aspiring full framer this definitely caught my attention... Anyhow, I know it only has six blades but I like to shoot into the light a lot and wondering how it handles flare... I have only found a few shots online and none of them dealing with any direct sunlight.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Anyone experienced with Eneloop XX 2500mAh batteries?	OldNoob	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	10	03-03-2014 08:26 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA 40 2.8 xs lens, with 27-49 step ring. $150	grahame	Sold Items	4	11-10-2013 04:38 PM
The future Perfect Lens Kit? Advice from more experienced Pentaxians please	Loren E	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	10-29-2010 12:45 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax FA20 2.8 smc	Oneeye	Sold Items	11	10-31-2008 02:31 AM

11-20-2015, 02:35 PM	#2
bertwert Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Golden, BC Posts: 15,173	I haven't read this (nor do I own the lens) but this might help: Pentax-FA 20mm F2.8 Review - Review \| PentaxForums.com Reviews And here: SMC Pentax-FA 20mm F2.8 Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

11-20-2015, 02:36 PM	#3
pepperberry farm amateur dirt farmer Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: probably out in a field somewhere... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 41,678	couple of Flickr searches: https://www.flickr.com/groups/1130513@N21/ https://www.flickr.com/search/?tags=smcpfa20mmf28

11-20-2015, 02:41 PM	#4
todd Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,791 Original Poster	Originally posted by pepperberry farm couple of Flickr searches: Yeah I saw those... Seems to be about all there is on flickr... Thanks Originally posted by bertwert I haven't read this (nor do I own the lens) but this might help Aha yes that first link does help a lot thanks!

11-20-2015, 03:00 PM	#5
robthebloke Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 844	I've got the older A version. I was never very impressed with it - I prefer the 18mm K3.5 - although both are blown out the water by the 21mm and 15mm DA ltds. I've heard people rave about the FA20, much like I've heard people rave about the 'A' version. But on a K-3, the A20 is quite weak, lacks contrast, and doesn't compare well against the 18-55 kit lens wrt sharpness. I'd hope that the FA version fares better, but it just seems to be its rarity that keeps the price high imho. (Probably too high when compared to the DA21). My 2 cents.

11-20-2015, 03:49 PM	#6
todd Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,791 Original Poster	Originally posted by robthebloke I've got the older A version. For me, if it performs like the A version, I will be stoked! Rod Single In Challenged it back in July and I was loving the results.

11-20-2015, 04:01 PM	#7
pasorro Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 132	Mine is excellent

11-20-2015, 06:09 PM	#8
carlb Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 1,162	I had one and loved it. Selling it is one of my biggest photographic regrets, but I was still using film and manual focussing and couldn't take full advantage of it's capabilities. It just had something special. If you can get one, go for it.

11-20-2015, 06:45 PM	#9
rrstuff Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Pasadena, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,126	Photozone said that it's comparable to DA21,but more pricey. So if you want to stick with APS-C, just get the HD21 limited. You can't go wrong with that lens!

11-20-2015, 07:20 PM	#10
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by robthebloke I've got the older A version. I was never very impressed with it - I prefer the 18mm K3.5 - although both are blown out the water by the 21mm and 15mm DA ltds. I've heard people rave about the FA20, much like I've heard people rave about the 'A' version. But on a K-3, the A20 is quite weak, lacks contrast, and doesn't compare well against the 18-55 kit lens wrt sharpness. I'd hope that the FA version fares better, but it just seems to be its rarity that keeps the price high imho. (Probably too high when compared to the DA21). My 2 cents. My experience with the A 20/2.8 has been similar. You can pimp its pale images with PP, but there are better choices out there.

11-21-2015, 03:45 AM	#11
LHK New Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 9	I have both the FA and A versions of the 20/2.8, along with the 15 mm limited. Optically A and FA are the same, while A is more sturdy in built I'd prefer the FA for having AF. Compared to the 15 limited flare resistance is worse, but not bad. Distorsion is wave-like and not too bad for a 20. All in all this lens is rated as a good performer among 20 mm prime lenses. On APC-C, however, the 21 is smaller and certainly a tick better. Not that it matters much with the upcoming FF. Sharpness is absolutely perfect with the 15 mm and perfect with both 20 mm, but only in the center, because the wider you get in focal length the softer the image becomes in the corners, where both 20 mm lenses are better than the 15 mm, but I don't use the term "sharp" here. I keep wondering how these lenses will perform on the FF. Maybe there will be a couple of new FF-lenses next year optimized for today's challenges. Hopefully normal good workhorses, compact size, and no expensive heavy artsy ones. Lutz

11-21-2015, 08:40 AM	#12
fwcetus Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New England Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,286	Originally posted by LHK I have both the FA and A versions of the 20/2.8, along with the 15 mm limited. Optically A and FA are the same, while A is more sturdy in built I'd prefer the FA for having AF. My limited experience with both lenses is similar (having had/have both), except for these disclaimers: 1. I owned the A way back in "Ye Olde Film Days of Yore", and used it mostly on an LX, and have never used it on a DSLR. 2. I only recently picked up a nice copy of the FA version, and thus have been using it for only a short time, and only on an APS-C K-3. 3. I don't have a whole lot of wide-angle experience anyway, so my opinions comparing them to other wide angles wouldn't count for much, but I can at least (sort of) compare the A 20/2.8 with the FA 20/2.8. I'd say that the build quality is pretty similar -- I am pleased to report that the FA's MF focus feel is pretty good (despite the fact that the FA is a wee bit stingy with the size of its non-knobby focus ring) -- the FA's MF feel is only slightly more "mechanical" than the way the A lens focusing felt (and with less "whirring" than some other F and FA lenses "feature"). I detect no overt annoying "AF build sloppiness" in the FA (and I can't say that about all the F and FA lenses I've handled). The barrel of the FA seems a little "chunkier" in appearance, so that the filter thread mount "flaring" is less obvious on the FA than on the A, and, to my eyes, the A is a nicer looking lens. I'd say that the two lenses (under these unscientific, multiple-variables conditions), were/are pretty similar optically. I have a few nice prints taken with the A that still look pretty good nowadays, and some recent K-3 test shots with the FA seem about the same (except, of course, that they have more of a 28-ish "look" to them). Sharpness, color rendition, and contrast seem decent enough (and pretty similar) with both 20/2.8 versions (but these were judged with my more-tele-familiar eyes). It's not overly difficult to get some flare thanks to Our Mister Sun with either lens, and there is a bit of barrel distortion with both lenses (I can still remember trying to be careful to keep the horizon centered vertically in some ol' A ocean shots). In any event, I'm liking my new FA (and its AF convenience) quite a bit.

11-21-2015, 11:31 AM	#13
todd Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,791 Original Poster	thanks for the input guys. taking a look at it this afternoon and most likely bagging it.

11-22-2015, 10:57 PM	#14
Abbazz Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Jakarta Posts: 667	I have the FA 20/2.8. It's not a bad lens when you consider the field of view on full-frame (doesn't make sense to use it on crop-format as it's only marginally better than the kit lens at 20mm). The main drawbacks IMHO are a tendency to flare when the sun or brightly lit areas are in the frame, as well as purple fringing on contrasted edges between F/2.8 and F/5.6. Cheers! Abbazz

11-23-2015, 10:38 AM	#15
todd Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,791 Original Poster	Originally posted by Abbazz (doesn't make sense to use it on crop-format as it's only marginally better than the kit lens at 20mm). It seems better than that to me from my shooting with it so far, but you sound like you've analyzed this pretty well... I'm compelled to conduct my own little comparison with DA15, DA18-55 Kit (@20mm), and FA20 (on crop). A couple from last night... (Not the best examples because both are hand-held five shot hdr's, because I'm also testing out a new to me K-3)