Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-27-2008, 03:28 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 197
F135 f/2.8 vs. DA 50-135 f/2.8

Hello,

I'v got a F135 an it's one of my favourite lenses.
However LBA is pushing me to the 50-135, but is it of the same optical quality as the F?
I've held it and it feels good, but i really wonder if it has got the same IQ as the F, especially wide open.

09-27-2008, 04:51 AM   #2
Site Supporter
maxwell1295's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Long Island, New York
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,704
I've only had this lens for a little over a week, but I can't find a reason not to use it wide open at any focal length. Other than situations where the shutter would shoot past 1/4000 @ ISO100 on a really bright day (very rare) or when shooting landscapes, I've pretty much kept it at F2.8 from the minute I got it. It's very sharp and the DOF is perfect for my use. If I'm shooting something close up and want more of the scene focus, I'll stop it down a bit to maybe F5.6. Other than that, it stays at F2.8. For example, both of these shots were taken wide open:



09-27-2008, 05:39 AM   #3
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Erasmo Quote
Hello,

I'v got a F135 an it's one of my favourite lenses.
However LBA is pushing me to the 50-135, but is it of the same optical quality as the F?
I've held it and it feels good, but i really wonder if it has got the same IQ as the F, especially wide open.
Erasmo, you should definately post some shots here taken with the F 135 f2.8,
I'm sure many would like to see.

The 50-135 is very sharp wide open, and stopped down one it can be incredible.

This was shot through smudgy plexiglass (cropped):

09-27-2008, 06:04 AM   #4
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
The DA* 50-135 is certainly a good lens and being a zoom it is versatile but I wouldn't discount the 135mm f/2.8 prime one bit. In fact, there are occasions where I feel the prime may have a definite edge.

Firstly, the 135mm is a small lens that's much smaller and lighter to carry about. I dare say it is easier to handhold and avoid handshake with it. Much more unobtrusive and easier to carry, which is good if you want to shoot candids and street yet remain discreet. I have had instances where people become very conscious when I tote the DA* 50-135 with the hood on.

Of course the DA* focuses quietly due to the SDM but I hardly think it make too much difference. The other big difference is the minimum focusing distance with the prime. Mate an extension tube to the 135mm and you can get pretty good macro too.

09-27-2008, 07:17 AM   #5
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
The DA* 50-135 is certainly a good lens and being a zoom it is versatile but I wouldn't discount the 135mm f/2.8 prime one bit. In fact, there are occasions where I feel the prime may have a definite edge.

Firstly, the 135mm is a small lens that's much smaller and lighter to carry about. I dare say it is easier to handhold and avoid handshake with it. Much more unobtrusive and easier to carry, which is good if you want to shoot candids and street yet remain discreet. I have had instances where people become very conscious when I tote the DA* 50-135 with the hood on.

Of course the DA* focuses quietly due to the SDM but I hardly think it make too much difference. The other big difference is the minimum focusing distance with the prime. Mate an extension tube to the 135mm and you can get pretty good macro too.

This is a good point, and is the reason I often like to take my M or Super Tak
135's along vs. the 50-135 when I want to take advantage of the size disparity.

I'd like to own the F or FA 135 for this reason, but I wouldn't be able to justify it.
(that doesn't always stop me, though

Aside from size, the 50-135 is more versatile - at 50-90mm, it's a wonderful
portrait length.

09-27-2008, 11:11 AM   #6
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 197
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by maxwell1295 Quote
I've only had this lens for a little over a week, but I can't find a reason not to use it wide open at any focal length. Other than situations where the shutter would shoot past 1/4000 @ ISO100 on a really bright day (very rare) or when shooting landscapes, I've pretty much kept it at F2.8 from the minute I got it. It's very sharp and the DOF is perfect for my use. If I'm shooting something close up and want more of the scene focus, I'll stop it down a bit to maybe F5.6. Other than that, it stays at F2.8. For example, both of these shots were taken wide open:



Looks quite good at wide open indeed.

QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Erasmo, you should definately post some shots here taken with the F 135 f2.8,
I'm sure many would like to see.

The 50-135 is very sharp wide open, and stopped down one it can be incredible.

This was shot through smudgy plexiglass (cropped):

Here the come, i've ran into my garden and shot the first things that is saw

Only converted and resized them:













QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
The DA* 50-135 is certainly a good lens and being a zoom it is versatile but I wouldn't discount the 135mm f/2.8 prime one bit. In fact, there are occasions where I feel the prime may have a definite edge.

Firstly, the 135mm is a small lens that's much smaller and lighter to carry about. I dare say it is easier to handhold and avoid handshake with it. Much more unobtrusive and easier to carry, which is good if you want to shoot candids and street yet remain discreet. I have had instances where people become very conscious when I tote the DA* 50-135 with the hood on.

Of course the DA* focuses quietly due to the SDM but I hardly think it make too much difference. The other big difference is the minimum focusing distance with the prime. Mate an extension tube to the 135mm and you can get pretty good macro too.
For streetshooting i have my trusty pancakes

QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
This is a good point, and is the reason I often like to take my M or Super Tak
135's along vs. the 50-135 when I want to take advantage of the size disparity.

I'd like to own the F or FA 135 for this reason, but I wouldn't be able to justify it.
(that doesn't always stop me, though

Aside from size, the 50-135 is more versatile - at 50-90mm, it's a wonderful
portrait length.

Well i already have the 16-50 and a 135-400 so the 50-135 is a perfect match for it.
09-27-2008, 09:22 PM   #7
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
.


Let me give you a hand in this decision:


(crop)





.
09-29-2008, 01:06 PM   #8
Junior Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South of France
Posts: 37
The F135 is very good, it (FA, identical) was tested in june in "Chasseur d'image"

Attached Images
 
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
f/2.8, f135, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Chinon 135 & Chinar 135 , Good Bad or Ugly seacapt Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 1 02-26-2010 09:03 PM
Sports Ultimate Frisbee Tournament in NC (K-7, F*300, F135) [8 img] arpaagent Post Your Photos! 10 10-24-2009 04:10 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:29 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top