[cali92rs]

So the new Pentax D FA 70-200 is almost 4 pounds? 61.9oz or 3.86lbs? I'm going to have to think about this.........

Yup...the weight difference is not negligible at all.
I lugged around the 70-200 for a day. It is doable, but not something I would want to do except in rare circumstances.

[clackers]

Well, that's what pros do - carry highly corrected glass around, even travel or wildlife photographers. Big boy lenses on big boy cameras. 😀

In Pentaxland, our thinking has been heavily influenced by the Limiteds/APS-C combination. Bless. 😀

[rrstuff]

So the new Pentax D FA 70-200 is almost 4 pounds? 61.9oz or 3.86lbs? I'm going to have to think about this.........

All 70-200 F2.8s are heavy and huge. At least it's not white like canon's, so it won't attract as much attention. You always wonder what do people mean that primes are 'less obtrusive' than zooms, but it is very true for the Canon 70-200. I always have random people commenting on it when I walk with one of these.

[normhead]

All 70-200 F2.8s are heavy and huge. At least it's not white like canon's, so it won't attract as much attention. You always wonder what do people mean that primes are 'less obtrusive' than zooms, but it is very true for the Canon 70-200. I always have random people commenting on it when I walk with one of these.

Those random people should just mind their own business.

[rrstuff]

Those random people should just mind their own business.

Some just stare, others just say 'damn, that's a huge lens', and the third kind of people come up ask if you are a paparazzo...

[normhead]

Some just stare, others just say 'damn, that's a huge lens', and the third kind of people come up ask if you are a paparazzo...

My favourite was the time and the couple came up to me and asked what I was shooting, one was shooting Nikon and one was shooting Canon. I said "Pentax" Total disappointment. I din't break the tie... next question. "Is that a Full Frame" Answer no, again, total disappointment. I guess to some, I'm just a disappointing kind of guy.

---------- Post added 09-29-16 at 09:36 AM ----------

So the new Pentax D FA 70-200 is almost 4 pounds? 61.9oz or 3.86lbs? I'm going to have to think about this.........

Since most days I won't even carry my 60-250, my guess is, if I do end up with a K-1 it will be 28-105, 200 and TCs for my normal kit.

[UncleVanya]

MY favourite was the time and the couple came up to me one was shooting Nikon and one was shooting Canon. I said "Pentax" Total disappointment. I din't break the tie... next question. "Is that a Full Frame" Answer no, again, total disappointment. I guess to some, I'm just a disappointing kind of guy.

---------- Post added 09-29-16 at 09:36 AM ----------



Since most days I won't even carry my 60-250, my guess is, if I do end up with a K-1 it will be 28-105, 200 and TCs for my normal kit.

Ditto both. I have been there, and I find the 60-250 large myself.

[normhead]

Ditto both. I have been there, and I find the 60-250 large myself.

It's the 60-250 which is lighter than any 70-200 2.8, that convinced me I would never carry a 70-200.

[UncleVanya]

It's the 60-250 which is lighter than any 70-200 2.8, that convinced me I would never carry a 70-200.

Amen! Although an f4 70-200 might work. This is assuming Pentax doesn't just revamp the 60-250 for DFA designation.

[skierd]

With my K-30, I absolutely love my DA*50-135. It is by far my most used lens, so if I were to get a K1 the DFA 70-200 would be the natural choice and my suggestion despite the weight.

I'd like to add a DA*200 f2.8 to my current aps-c kit along with 1.4x and 2x TC's, so for full frame I'd be looking at a 300mm f2.8 to complement.

[builttospill]

Even the FA* 80-200 outperformes the DA* 200. That's not a knock on the 200. The extra glass and increased cost and weight allow for different design decisions. People who assume primes are always superior are just plain wrong.

This shouldn't be a surprise. In my experience, all FA*/FA Limited give better results than DA*/DA Limited lenses.

[normhead]

This shouldn't be a surprise. In my experience, all FA*/FA Limited give better results than DA*/DA Limited lenses.

Those FA limiteds all have a story. the 31 a joint design with Zeis I think, the 77 Jun Hirakawa's masterpiece. The DA ltd are nice, but as far as I know, there's nothing special about them in terms of design philosophy or anything else.

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

Those FA limiteds all have a story. the 31 a joint design with Zeis I think, the 77 Jun Hirakawa's masterpiece. The DA ltd are nice, but as far as I know, there's nothing special about them in terms of design philosophy or anything else.

You are mixing things up. The 31ltd is a pure pentax patent by Takayuki Ito and Murata Masayuki. Jun Hirakawa originally desined a slower 31mm f2.4, but Pentax wanted a faster lens and gave the task to Ito and Masayuki.

The 77/1.8 ltd was not a new design. It uses the same optical design as the A*85/1.4 by Ogawa Ryota. They just cut down the speed and gave it autofocus. The A*85 is anyway soft at f1.4.

Don't diss the DA limiteds. My two favorits among them are the 21ltd and 70ltd, both designed by Masakazu Saori...the same guy who designed the DFA* 70-210mm f2.8, currently the chief lens designer at Pentax.

through the viewfinder: Known Pentax lens designs and designers

[rrstuff]

Those FA limiteds all have a story. the 31 a joint design with Zeis I think, the 77 Jun Hirakawa's masterpiece. The DA ltd are nice, but as far as I know, there's nothing special about them in terms of design philosophy or anything else.

Field curvature of DA15 makes it a very unusual lens. It results in huge depth of field the foreground in grand landscapes (i.e. ones pointed down, close to the ground), giving a sharp, contrasty landscapes from top to bottom. I don't know if that was an intention, but it sure feels like it was. The others I think are just are very nice and small general use lenses.

---------- Post added 09-29-16 at 05:37 PM ----------

My favourite was the time and the couple came up to me and asked what I was shooting, one was shooting Nikon and one was shooting Canon. I said "Pentax" Total disappointment. I din't break the tie... next question. "Is that a Full Frame" Answer no, again, total disappointment. I guess to some, I'm just a disappointing kind of guy. [COLOR="Silver"]

That's a very funny encounter. If you had a Sigma SD1, you could even disappoint Pentaxians with their 'mainstream' dSLRs .

[normhead]

You are mixing things up. The 31ltd is a pure pentax patent by Takayuki Ito and Murata Masayuki. Jun Hirakawa originally desined a slower 31mm f2.4, but Pentax wanted a faster lens and gave the task to Ito and Masayuki.

The 77/1.8 ltd was not a new design. It uses the same optical design as the A*85/1.4 by Ogawa Ryota. They just cut down the speed and gave it autofocus. The A*85 is anyway soft at f1.4.

Don't diss the DA limiteds. My two favorits among them are the 21ltd and 70ltd, both designed by Masakazu Saori...the same guy who designed the DFA* 70-210mm f2.8, currently the chief lens designer at Pentax.

through the viewfinder: Known Pentax lens designs and designers

Having read different, I'm interested in your source.

Based on the renditions of images seen on the forum, I find the 77 and 31 both amazing lenses, though as a mainly wildlife/ landscape photographer who uses zooms in the wide end, I'd have little use for either. I own the 21 and have seen many DA 70 images. The DA 70, IMHO the only reason to take it over the 77 is price, and while the 21 is a great lens on APS-c, my take would be the 31 on FF is much better, and faster.

But then, my philosophy has always been cover your range w it 3.5-4.6 zooms and fill in with primes where you need speed. The 77, 31 and 43 are al 1.8 sub ƒ2 lenses. The DA limited, not so much. That being said, I put the 21 ltd on the camera whenever I can. It's the only limited I own, and I just reach for it whenever possible.