[skyer]

I saw some charts where it is shown that D FA* 70-200/2.8 is much sharper than FA* 80-200/2.8. However, it seems to me that either the test was incorrect or the copy of FA* 80-200 was damaged. Can anyone who owns both FA* and D FA* tell their own opinion on this topic?
I look at images from my FA* 80-200 and don't quite understand how can a D FA* 70-200 be much sharper? Here is a sample from my K-1 + FA* 80-200 @200mm and f2.8. https://cloud.mail.ru/public/6XmE/GWPu6n2qT

[Rondec]

If you are happy with your copy of the FA * lens, then what does it matter?

[willeisner]

I have a fa * 28 70 I think very sharpen , serves me perfectly, and have the advantage of not worry if one day the engine will die .

[Sandy Hancock]

That's a fairly decent shot.

The DFA*70-200 can do this wide open. I'm not sure how to compare. Pigeons vs cats - who knows?

[skyer]

If you are happy with your copy of the FA * lens, then what does it matter?

I'm almost sure that FA* is a better all-round lens. It has a very special colour rendition. I also think that it is a rather sharp lens. However one should always have an open mind. It's interesting to me wether D FA* is really better or it is not.

[shaolen]

If you are happy with your copy of the FA * lens, then what does it matter?

Pentax lenses. How could it not matter? :P

[skyer]

That's a fairly decent shot.
The DFA*70-200 can do this wide open. I'm not sure how to compare. Pigeons vs cats - who knows?

Thank you for your samples, Sandy! The fur of your cat looks sharp. However, our subjects really differ. Also, I noticed that your image was shot on K-3, not K-1.

Actually, I'm looking forward to owner's reviews of both lenses not just one of them. In my opinion, only such people can know all the nuances of each lens.

[Wild Mark]

I will test my FA*80-200 on the K1 when it arrives.

Meanwhile, I have to say, that I am stunned with the FA*'s performance on the K3 - stunned. I cannot see how a lens can be any better.

---------- Post added 07-05-16 at 11:19 PM ----------

image has had no PPing at all. jpeg with medium size straight from the camera. I could easily sharpen this up by either PPing the RAW and/ or selecting higher sharpen in jpg output + larger file size.

---------- Post added 07-05-16 at 11:23 PM ----------

OK calling for a shooting partner to put this debate to the test. Is there a PF member near Newcastle with a DFA* 70-200/2.8? I can supply FA*80-200 and K1 (soon - when it arrives).

My FA* is a very good copy! Shot below was taken from the stands you can see the coin.

[noelpolar]

Why bother.....you want a new high end 70-200 for your Pentax ....there's really only one option.... and it costs. Everything else is a compromise .... though not necessarily a bad choice (I chose the last Sigma APO EX DG OS HSM). Interestingly, the Sigma and old Pentax both get about 9.5 user ratings here....which suggests they are well thought off by their owners.

The review on this forum back in 2011 rated the Tamron and Sigma a bit higher then the Pentax as well... https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/sports-lenses-pentax-70-200mm/sigma-tamr....html?src=lrdb

[blan01]

If you already have FA* I don't think you need to upgrade. Both lenses are great,the D FA* is a bit sharper in the corner, the FA* color rendition is just special.

[Wild Mark]

If you already have FA* I don't think you need to upgrade. Both lenses are great,the D FA* is a bit sharper in the corner, the FA* color rendition is just special.

That appraisal is most likely the core difference between the lenses. My individual taste is to accept softer corners (not the focus of an image anyway) with special colour rendition. The colours are definitely special - nicely saturated.

[skyer]

I will test my FA*80-200 on the K1 when it arrives.
My FA* is a very good copy! Shot below was taken from the stands you can see the coin.

With all my respect, I suppose, almost any lens would let you see a coin in such magnification. I guees, the difference in sharpness between FA* and D FA* will be only visible in 50-100% magnification.

If you already have FA* I don't think you need to upgrade. Both lenses are great,the D FA* is a bit sharper in the corner, the FA* color rendition is just special.

I agree with you, especially when one consider the difference in their prices. Nevertheless, a comparison of a good copy of FA* and D FA* will be interesting for many pentaxians. It's like comparing FA77 and FA*85

---------- Post added 07-05-16 at 05:01 PM ----------

That appraisal is most likely the core difference between the lenses. My individual taste is to accept softer corners (not the focus of an image anyway) with special colour rendition. The colours are definitely special - nicely saturated.

Also, it seems to me that the bokeh of D FA* maybe smoother than FA*'s but at the same time it looks a bit "too digital".

[Wild Mark]

With all my respect, I suppose, almost any lens would let you see a coin in such magnification. I guees, the difference in sharpness between FA* and D FA* will be only visible in 50-100% magnification.

Not with the sharpness at distance at f2.8 under lights. Those conditions are quite demanding.

Also, it seems to me that the bokeh of D FA* maybe smoother than FA*'s but at the same time it looks a bit "too digital".

It will depend on how distant the background is from the in focus subject AND the FL used.

[kenspo]

70-200 is newer, faster, has better glass + + +

Its a no-brainer.

But you can still get good shots with 80-200 too..But its not on the 70-200 level...

[Wild Mark]

70-200 is newer, faster, has better glass + + +

Its a no-brainer.

But you can still get good shots with 80-200 too..But its not on the 70-200 level...

I would love to see comparisons, side by side, to see the differences.