FA 120 4 macro vs FA 150 2.8 vs ?

pkr1979 · 08-13-2017, 04:52 AM

Hi all,

I know this is not the first post on this topic. I've read several of them, but I still find it very difficult to choose one of them... I do not intend to get both.

I have the 645N (just got it - love that camera) and the 45-85 and the 80-160 (both AF)... I use the later far more then the previous, but I'd like a prime. Preferably a 120-150 2.8 macro with a fast AF and nice bokeh :-)

As I understand the 120 is the sharpest, and I appreciate sharpness alot... clearly you also get closer, which I also appreciate.

While the 150 has a faster AF, shallower depth of field and nicer bokeh....

But how horrible can the bokeh on the 120 be (I will use a new lens for portraits)? And is its AF to slow?

And on the 150... do people find the near limit to be to poor for close up head shots? And is there a significant loss of sharpness on 2.8?

I did consider the 90mm macro but its out of my pricerange... also I find the focal length to be to short.

How do people feel about these lenses? And are there other options, preferably with auto focus?

Cheers
Peter

**Buffy** · 08-13-2017, 05:56 AM

I have both and if I had to choose only one it certainly would be the FA 120mm. It's sharpness is outstanding and it's bokeh pleasing enough for me.

pkr1979 · 08-13-2017, 06:42 AM

Originally posted by Buffy

I have both and if I had to choose only one it certainly would be the FA 120mm. It's sharpness is outstanding and it's bokeh pleasing enough for me.

Hi Buffy,

And thanks alot for your feedback. Did you ever miss being able to open up to 2.8 while using the 120?

Peter

**Buffy** · 08-13-2017, 08:18 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by pkr1979

Hi Buffy,

And thanks alot for your feedback. Did you ever miss being able to open up to 2.8 while using the 120?

Peter

I can honestly say no, I've never missed it. The FA 120mm is one of two lenses for the 645 that are "must-haves" for me, the other being the FA 35mm. The FA 150mm is a fine lens and worth having, but if I had to choose between it and the 120mm, I'd pick the 120mm.

LaHo · 08-13-2017, 10:01 AM - **1 Like**

I have the 645N and the A-versions of the 120mm and the 150mm lenses. I would say that if you want to do portrait photography, get the 150mm, and if you like close-up and macro work, get the 120mm. (However, I also agree with the comment above that the 120mm is a must have in the 645 system. I bought the manual focus version, as that is perfectly OK on a macro lens.)
The photo below was taken with the Pentax-A 645 150mm and the #2 extension tube - and this is as close as you can get with this combination:
Exposure: 1/1000 @ F/3.5

And this was taken with the Pentax-A 120mm F4.0 macro lens (and the optical formula of this lens should be the same as the AF lens):
Exposure: 1/350 @ F/5.6

These two photos were not taken under exactly the same conditions nor at the same aperture, but still ... the 150mm is also a cracker lens.

mikeSF · 08-13-2017, 10:18 AM

I have A120 and FA150.
FA150 is too soft wide open, IMO. needs at least f/3.5 or f/4 to catch its stride. After that, it's an excellent portrait lens.
Bokeh on 120 not nearly as pleasing as 150.
It's a real trade off.

pkr1979 · 08-14-2017, 06:38 AM

Hi all!

And thanks very much for the feedback and photos posted. I'm going for the 120... however, in time Im probably ending up with both ;-)

Cheers
Peter

08-13-2017, 04:52 AM	#1
pkr1979 Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 64	FA 120 4 macro vs FA 150 2.8 vs ? Hi all, I know this is not the first post on this topic. I've read several of them, but I still find it very difficult to choose one of them... I do not intend to get both. I have the 645N (just got it - love that camera) and the 45-85 and the 80-160 (both AF)... I use the later far more then the previous, but I'd like a prime. Preferably a 120-150 2.8 macro with a fast AF and nice bokeh :-) As I understand the 120 is the sharpest, and I appreciate sharpness alot... clearly you also get closer, which I also appreciate. While the 150 has a faster AF, shallower depth of field and nicer bokeh.... But how horrible can the bokeh on the 120 be (I will use a new lens for portraits)? And is its AF to slow? And on the 150... do people find the near limit to be to poor for close up head shots? And is there a significant loss of sharpness on 2.8? I did consider the 90mm macro but its out of my pricerange... also I find the focal length to be to short. How do people feel about these lenses? And are there other options, preferably with auto focus? Cheers Peter

08-13-2017, 10:01 AM - 1 Like	#5
LaHo Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Greater Copenhagen Area Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 430	Pentax 645N and 120mm vs. 150mm I have the 645N and the A-versions of the 120mm and the 150mm lenses. I would say that if you want to do portrait photography, get the 150mm, and if you like close-up and macro work, get the 120mm. (However, I also agree with the comment above that the 120mm is a must have in the 645 system. I bought the manual focus version, as that is perfectly OK on a macro lens.) The photo below was taken with the Pentax-A 645 150mm and the #2 extension tube - and this is as close as you can get with this combination: Exposure: 1/1000 @ F/3.5 And this was taken with the Pentax-A 120mm F4.0 macro lens (and the optical formula of this lens should be the same as the AF lens): Exposure: 1/350 @ F/5.6 These two photos were not taken under exactly the same conditions nor at the same aperture, but still ... the 150mm is also a cracker lens.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs.......	Steelski	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	2	06-28-2017 04:59 PM
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
Simple lens shootout Pentax HD DFA 150-450 vs Canon 100-400 II vs Sigma 150-600 C	beholder3	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	46	07-25-2016 12:33 AM
Pentax 645 120 A vs 120 FA … which would you keep?	hsteeves	Pentax Medium Format	13	01-12-2015 10:01 AM
fa 150 vs fa 120 macro	Domenico	Pentax Medium Format	9	12-24-2012 03:58 PM

08-13-2017, 05:56 AM	#2
Buffy Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Greater Boston area, Massachusetts Posts: 389	Re: FA 120 4 macro vs FA 150 2.8 vs ? I have both and if I had to choose only one it certainly would be the FA 120mm. It's sharpness is outstanding and it's bokeh pleasing enough for me.

08-13-2017, 06:42 AM	#3
pkr1979 Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 64 Original Poster	Originally posted by Buffy I have both and if I had to choose only one it certainly would be the FA 120mm. It's sharpness is outstanding and it's bokeh pleasing enough for me. Hi Buffy, And thanks alot for your feedback. Did you ever miss being able to open up to 2.8 while using the 120? Peter

08-13-2017, 08:18 AM - 1 Like	#4
Buffy Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Greater Boston area, Massachusetts Posts: 389	Originally posted by pkr1979 Hi Buffy, And thanks alot for your feedback. Did you ever miss being able to open up to 2.8 while using the 120? Peter I can honestly say no, I've never missed it. The FA 120mm is one of two lenses for the 645 that are "must-haves" for me, the other being the FA 35mm. The FA 150mm is a fine lens and worth having, but if I had to choose between it and the 120mm, I'd pick the 120mm.

08-13-2017, 10:18 AM	#6
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	I have A120 and FA150. FA150 is too soft wide open, IMO. needs at least f/3.5 or f/4 to catch its stride. After that, it's an excellent portrait lens. Bokeh on 120 not nearly as pleasing as 150. It's a real trade off.

08-14-2017, 06:38 AM	#7
pkr1979 Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 64 Original Poster	Hi all! And thanks very much for the feedback and photos posted. I'm going for the 120... however, in time Im probably ending up with both ;-) Cheers Peter