FA 35 or DA 35?

nulla · 07-21-2008, 12:17 AM

Quote:

So I wonder - is the DA 35ltd really the best lens he's ever owned, or is it more
likely that the DA 35 + K20D combo is one of the best he's ever shot, and
he's attributing it all to the lens?

I would have thought that it would then be seen across the board with all DA lenses and a noticable difference in FA lenes when using the K20d.

You could be right ...though I take it for granted that such professionals would have also tested the lens on other models so as to ensure their claims on the lens are founded so to speak

ogl · 07-30-2008, 10:21 PM

FA35 is MUCH better than DA35 as walkaround lens.
Lens Comparison: DA35Ltd, FA31Ltd & FA35 (Landscape Photo, 9 imgs)): Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
As I said it before.

stevebrot · 07-30-2008, 10:38 PM

Originally posted by ogl

FA35 is MUCH better than walkaround lens.
Lens Comparison: DA35Ltd, FA31Ltd & FA35 (Landscape Photo, 9 imgs)): Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
As I said it before.

Yikes! I knew from the MTF data that the FA 35/2 is one of the better lenses in the Pentax lineup and that it performs on a par with the likes of the FA 50/1.4. I am just amazed that the visual comparison was so favorable against such formidable competition! Maybe they should make a FA* 35/2 in a metal body?

Steve

suro · 07-30-2008, 11:38 PM

Pentax FA 35mm /2.0 much better

jsherman999 · 07-31-2008, 12:22 AM

.

Oh, I'd still vote for the DA 35. FA 35 looks very nice at infinity, and is one stop
faster, but it can't do this:

And it still is no slouch at portrait/walkabout:

gkopeliadis · 07-31-2008, 12:30 AM

Originally posted by FHPhotographer

...But I'm surprised to find on other sites the general agreement that a macro lens cannot be as good from macro-to-infinity as a non-macro lens...

You should be surprised. Where on Earth did you hear such an aphorism? All the macro lenses I've ever owned or used where exactly as good at infinity as they were in macro. Most of them were better lens than their non macro counterparts.
Maybe they were refering to tubes or addons for macro...

axl · 07-31-2008, 12:33 AM

Originally posted by rparmar

Can this be true? I'd like to see references!

I know that many people use 100mm type macros for portraits and more at the long end, and that these are distortion free and sharp at any focal plane. That has been my experience, but I am not an expert, just a photographer.

It can,
but it depends, I have Sigma 105 and it performs better at close range then at close to infinity, but even then it's very good. So no problem for me there...

Originally posted by jt354

....What is the difference in focusing speed between the FA and DA 35mm? My sigma has a focus limiter which helps greatly in low light, but af is still slower than my other lenses in most instances. I've used it for shooting ski racing and basketball, the ski racing shots were excellent, basketball not so much (due to the slow af)

as far as I'm aware, DA35 doesn't have focus limiter, which means it the focusing ring has to trawel bit more... and it's one stop slower too, so in low light FA35 may focus just a bit faster...

Alan 2 · 07-31-2008, 12:33 AM

Originally posted by ogl

FA35 is MUCH better than DA35 as walkaround lens.
Lens Comparison: DA35Ltd, FA31Ltd & FA35 (Landscape Photo, 9 imgs)): Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
As I said it before.

At f8 there is almost no difference between the DA35 and the FA35 at infinity. It seems to dispel the myth that the DA35 is a bad landscape lens if you keep in mind that it may be a bit soft until at least f5.6. This falls right in place with what I've found with my copy.

ogl · 07-31-2008, 04:59 AM

it's hard to see any difference at f8 between various lenses at DSLR. even between good zooms and fixed lenses.

truonganh · 07-31-2008, 09:05 AM

the FA can be found for under $300 and it's just a beautiful lens. It's really sharp wide open, very fast focus (cuz it's so light) and as such i actually think it's a 'better' lens than my workhorse FA50f1.4.

the DA is built like a jewel. so if you got money to spent and want to macro, go for it.

the FA version gives it just a little more light. I love using it wide open, great for chasing kids indoor

FA35f2.0 at f2.0 x1/45s... now she's 2 years old...good luck trying to hold her still for a shot

... in this situation, i think the FA 35 could do this better & faster than the DA could.

jsherman999 · 07-31-2008, 12:15 PM

The f/2 is very nice, and the FA is an incredibly sharp lens, from what I've seen & read. One of the better bang-for-buckers in the lineup.

Now that I'm thinking of it, I wonder why there are no f/1.4, 1.7, 1.8 etc 35mm's?

.

deejjjaaaa · 07-31-2008, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by jsherman999

Now that I'm thinking of it, I wonder why there are no f/1.4, 1.7, 1.8 etc 35mm's?.

why not ? manual nikon 35/1.4 for example

deejjjaaaa · 07-31-2008, 01:00 PM

Originally posted by ogl

As I said it before.

Ogl to DA35 like RH to PENTAX.

jsherman999 · 07-31-2008, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by deejjjaaaa

Ogl to DA35 like RH to PENTAX.

ROFL

Actually, ogl, I admire your consistency on this issue, and you have made some good points about it...
A one-man crusade against a lens. Don Quixote?

.

deejjjaaaa · 07-31-2008, 03:24 PM

Originally posted by jsherman999

ROFL

Actually, ogl, I admire your consistency on this issue, and you have made some good points about it...
A one-man crusade against a lens. Don Quixote?

no, rather the case of "unanswered" (to put it gently) love... his advances towards getting the ultimate picture(s) of his life from that lens were ruined by the dull (c) rendering

07-30-2008, 10:21 PM	#17
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	FA35 is MUCH better than DA35 as walkaround lens. Lens Comparison: DA35Ltd, FA31Ltd & FA35 (Landscape Photo, 9 imgs)): Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review As I said it before. Last edited by ogl; 07-30-2008 at 11:44 PM.

07-31-2008, 12:22 AM	#20
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	DA is just more versatile . Oh, I'd still vote for the DA 35. FA 35 looks very nice at infinity, and is one stop faster, but it can't do this: And it still is no slouch at portrait/walkabout:

07-21-2008, 12:17 AM	#16
nulla Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 1,560	Quote: So I wonder - is the DA 35ltd really the best lens he's ever owned, or is it more likely that the DA 35 + K20D combo is one of the best he's ever shot, and he's attributing it all to the lens? I would have thought that it would then be seen across the board with all DA lenses and a noticable difference in FA lenes when using the K20d. You could be right ...though I take it for granted that such professionals would have also tested the lens on other models so as to ensure their claims on the lens are founded so to speak

07-30-2008, 10:38 PM	#18
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by ogl FA35 is MUCH better than walkaround lens. Lens Comparison: DA35Ltd, FA31Ltd & FA35 (Landscape Photo, 9 imgs)): Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review As I said it before. Yikes! I knew from the MTF data that the FA 35/2 is one of the better lenses in the Pentax lineup and that it performs on a par with the likes of the FA 50/1.4. I am just amazed that the visual comparison was so favorable against such formidable competition! Maybe they should make a FA* 35/2 in a metal body? Steve

07-30-2008, 11:38 PM	#19
suro Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Ekaterinburg Posts: 344	Pentax FA 35mm /2.0 much better

07-31-2008, 12:30 AM	#21
gkopeliadis Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: ATHENS, GREECE Posts: 308	Originally posted by FHPhotographer ...But I'm surprised to find on other sites the general agreement that a macro lens cannot be as good from macro-to-infinity as a non-macro lens... You should be surprised. Where on Earth did you hear such an aphorism? All the macro lenses I've ever owned or used where exactly as good at infinity as they were in macro. Most of them were better lens than their non macro counterparts. Maybe they were refering to tubes or addons for macro...

07-31-2008, 12:33 AM	#22
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	Originally posted by rparmar Can this be true? I'd like to see references! I know that many people use 100mm type macros for portraits and more at the long end, and that these are distortion free and sharp at any focal plane. That has been my experience, but I am not an expert, just a photographer. It can, but it depends, I have Sigma 105 and it performs better at close range then at close to infinity, but even then it's very good. So no problem for me there... Originally posted by jt354 ....What is the difference in focusing speed between the FA and DA 35mm? My sigma has a focus limiter which helps greatly in low light, but af is still slower than my other lenses in most instances. I've used it for shooting ski racing and basketball, the ski racing shots were excellent, basketball not so much (due to the slow af) as far as I'm aware, DA35 doesn't have focus limiter, which means it the focusing ring has to trawel bit more... and it's one stop slower too, so in low light FA35 may focus just a bit faster...

07-31-2008, 12:33 AM	#23
Alan 2 Forum Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Madison WI U.S.A. Posts: 60	Originally posted by ogl FA35 is MUCH better than DA35 as walkaround lens. Lens Comparison: DA35Ltd, FA31Ltd & FA35 (Landscape Photo, 9 imgs)): Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review As I said it before. At f8 there is almost no difference between the DA35 and the FA35 at infinity. It seems to dispel the myth that the DA35 is a bad landscape lens if you keep in mind that it may be a bit soft until at least f5.6. This falls right in place with what I've found with my copy.

07-31-2008, 04:59 AM	#24
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	it's hard to see any difference at f8 between various lenses at DSLR. even between good zooms and fixed lenses.

07-31-2008, 12:15 PM	#26
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	The f/2 is very nice, and the FA is an incredibly sharp lens, from what I've seen & read. One of the better bang-for-buckers in the lineup. Now that I'm thinking of it, I wonder why there are no f/1.4, 1.7, 1.8 etc 35mm's? .

07-31-2008, 12:56 PM	#27
deejjjaaaa Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: steel city / rust belt Posts: 2,043	Originally posted by jsherman999 Now that I'm thinking of it, I wonder why there are no f/1.4, 1.7, 1.8 etc 35mm's?. why not ? manual nikon 35/1.4 for example

07-31-2008, 01:00 PM	#28
deejjjaaaa Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: steel city / rust belt Posts: 2,043	Originally posted by ogl As I said it before. Ogl to DA35 like RH to PENTAX.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-31-2008, 01:07 PM	#29
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Originally posted by deejjjaaaa Ogl to DA35 like RH to PENTAX. ROFL Actually, ogl, I admire your consistency on this issue, and you have made some good points about it... A one-man crusade against a lens. Don Quixote? .

07-31-2008, 03:24 PM	#30
deejjjaaaa Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: steel city / rust belt Posts: 2,043	Originally posted by jsherman999 ROFL Actually, ogl, I admire your consistency on this issue, and you have made some good points about it... A one-man crusade against a lens. Don Quixote? no, rather the case of "unanswered" (to put it gently) love... his advances towards getting the ultimate picture(s) of his life from that lens were ruined by the dull (c) rendering