77ltd vs 50-135* Thoughts...?

Alfisti · 10-07-2008, 05:51 AM

Originally posted by RBellavance

What the DA*50-135 can't give you is the shallow depth of field resulting from apertures wider than f/2.8.

Sur eit can, just use 100mm f/2.8 instead of 77 f/1.8.

paolojackson · 10-07-2008, 05:56 AM

LBA got the best of me and thanks to MS Cashback, I have both of these lenses on the way. I did get some pretty nice deals though. I'll let you know how it goes.

**mtngal** · 10-07-2008, 06:02 AM

I have both lenses and have no intention of getting rid of one of them. The 77 Ltd has better contrast. Both are really sharp at all apertures (at least mine seem to be), and both can give excellent results when you look at comparison shots. I think the 77 is better than my 50-135 but it's very close. There's just something extra that the 77 offers, I can't really define it.

So why do I keep both? They really are different animals. One is light, one heavy. One a zoom, one a prime. Recently my husband and I were in Yellowstone and he got bored, so I offered him the K100 and a lens to play with (he's not into photography). After playing around with a couple of lenses, he settled on the 50-135 and used it for the week, having a ball. I ended up using the 77 (along with a wide-angle and a 300mm) and there were only a couple of times where I missed the zoom on the 50-135. On the other hand, I was constantly changing lenses (using two primes and the 12-24) while he happily clicked away with one lens, and came away with all kinds of outstanding shots.

So while one person will find the 50-135 better for their uses, another will prefer the 77. For me, I'm delighted I have both lenses and have found myself using the 77 more than I expected.

celetron · 10-07-2008, 06:29 AM

Well said there mtngal, I agree with you 99%

As far as it concerns image quality, sharpness wide open and especially contrast, 77 wins hands down.
The versatility of 50-135 is not noticeable when you have the luxury of time to change lenses and you don't have to run all over the place to catch the moment from the right distance... You will however find it quite easier to shoot with 50-135 on your camera when you are shooting weddings, exhibitions or even maybe some family occasions etc where you might not have that luxury... But then again try to keep in mind that 50-135 focuses noticeably slower than 77 does.
Other advantages of 50-135 are the possibility to offer more effects than the 77 does while keeping satisfactory quality standards through all its focal length and it obviously comes cheaper than keeping FA50/1.4, FA77/1.8 Ltd and FA135/2.8 instead...

PS: the 50-135 is quite capable of capturing outstanding portraits...

creampuff · 10-07-2008, 06:44 AM

Another lens that can give the DA* 50-135mm a run for the money is the FA 135mm f/2.8. Lovely bokeh, a smaller and lighter lens and very fast focusing.

lbam · 10-07-2008, 11:34 AM

I own both lenses and despite the 50-135mm being more practical, I find I use the 77mm more often, mainly due to it's size, and aperture... I'm a sucker for shallow depth of field...

This was taken at F2.0

RBellavance · 10-07-2008, 12:36 PM

Originally posted by Alfisti

Sur eit can, just use 100mm f/2.8 instead of 77 f/1.8.

Sure, that's technically correct. However, you'll either have a different composition (because of the tighter field of view) or a different perspective (because you'll have to step back to get the same composition).

By all accounts, the DA*50-135 is a fantastic lens. But in some circumstances there's no substitute for being able to open up to f/1.8.

The ideal soluation is, funds permitting, to get both

rfortson · 10-07-2008, 12:51 PM

Originally posted by celetron

... But then again try to keep in mind that 50-135 focuses noticeably slower than 77 does.
...

I never noticed that when I had both. In fact, I'd say it's the opposite if there is a difference. My 50-135 is my action lens, and with the SDM it's the fastest lens I have. The 77Ltd was no slower than my other lenses in general, but I wouldn't call it snappy. There's no reason it should be, either. The point of the 77Ltd is not lightning fast AF, it's superb IQ.

Originally posted by celetron

... PS: the 50-135 is quite capable of capturing outstanding portraits...

I'll agree with that, for sure!

Here are a couple of shots taken with the two lenses. I'll take either one.

beaumont · 10-07-2008, 01:09 PM

Great feedback (although it doesn't seem to make the decision any easier.) I do love my 31ltd, as most of you do your 77ltd (and your 50-135*'s). And the 1.8 does come in handy...

beaumont · 10-07-2008, 01:09 PM

Originally posted by lbam

I own both lenses and despite the 50-135mm being more practical, I find I use the 77mm more often, mainly due to it's size, and aperture... I'm a sucker for shallow depth of field...

This was taken at F2.0

PS Great shot!!! (A happier MonaLisa)

beaumont · 10-08-2008, 06:02 PM

And the comment...
At this point If I were to recommend only three AF lenses for Pentax - if you could
own only three - I'd say DA 12-24, DA* 50-135, and FA 77.
...over in the "Stop trying to make me sell my 77ltd" thread" doesn't help much!

**Canada_Rockies** · 10-08-2008, 09:09 PM

Originally posted by offertonhatter

The 50-135 is a stunning lens, and a perfect Portrait lens. Now the 77mm will have to be truly exceptional to beat it. Having said that I would love a 77mm as well, but I have LBA........ lol

Just to get a couple of shots from the 50-135 in the link ... I shot these yesterday on a walk in the rain, and during a break. Just for fun. Love that I don't need plastic bags and other junk on my camera just because of a moderate rain.

Orignal photos on Flickr at the two links here, or in my signature. EXIF data is intact on the largest at Flickr.

_IGP2918 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
_IGP2916 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

suro · 10-09-2008, 02:10 AM

About 1 hour ago, 77 Limited:

Great lens!

yipchunyu · 10-09-2008, 06:30 AM

Originally posted by suro

About 1 hour ago, 77 Limited:

Great lens!

but when compare 70LE with 50-135.
which one is better?

suro · 10-09-2008, 07:39 AM

Originally posted by yipchunyu

but when compare 70LE with 50-135.
which one is better?

I write it here recently - the 70mm Limited is much better

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is this bokeh ok for 77ltd	kiwao	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	05-26-2010 08:53 AM
For Sale - Sold: K20d, 50-135*, 16-45, 43ltd, 35ltd macro, Voigtlander 58/1.4, maybe 77ltd	nostatic	Sold Items	8	01-24-2009 10:07 AM
An example of why the 77ltd doesn't suck	jsherman999	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	26	06-16-2008 03:02 PM
A few with the new to me 77LTD :)	vievetrick	Post Your Photos!	8	11-13-2007 07:27 AM
First thoughts on Sigma 24-135 2.8-4.5	filmamigo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	09-30-2007 08:04 PM

10-07-2008, 05:51 AM	#16
Alfisti Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toronto (for now) Posts: 1,748	Originally posted by RBellavance What the DA*50-135 can't give you is the shallow depth of field resulting from apertures wider than f/2.8. Sur eit can, just use 100mm f/2.8 instead of 77 f/1.8.

10-07-2008, 05:56 AM	#17
paolojackson Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 379	LBA got the best of me and thanks to MS Cashback, I have both of these lenses on the way. I did get some pretty nice deals though. I'll let you know how it goes.

10-07-2008, 06:02 AM	#18
mtngal Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Wherever I’m Parked Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,003	I have both lenses and have no intention of getting rid of one of them. The 77 Ltd has better contrast. Both are really sharp at all apertures (at least mine seem to be), and both can give excellent results when you look at comparison shots. I think the 77 is better than my 50-135 but it's very close. There's just something extra that the 77 offers, I can't really define it. So why do I keep both? They really are different animals. One is light, one heavy. One a zoom, one a prime. Recently my husband and I were in Yellowstone and he got bored, so I offered him the K100 and a lens to play with (he's not into photography). After playing around with a couple of lenses, he settled on the 50-135 and used it for the week, having a ball. I ended up using the 77 (along with a wide-angle and a 300mm) and there were only a couple of times where I missed the zoom on the 50-135. On the other hand, I was constantly changing lenses (using two primes and the 12-24) while he happily clicked away with one lens, and came away with all kinds of outstanding shots. So while one person will find the 50-135 better for their uses, another will prefer the 77. For me, I'm delighted I have both lenses and have found myself using the 77 more than I expected.

10-07-2008, 06:29 AM	#19
celetron Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Greece Photos: Albums Posts: 301	Well said there mtngal, I agree with you 99% As far as it concerns image quality, sharpness wide open and especially contrast, 77 wins hands down. The versatility of 50-135 is not noticeable when you have the luxury of time to change lenses and you don't have to run all over the place to catch the moment from the right distance... You will however find it quite easier to shoot with 50-135 on your camera when you are shooting weddings, exhibitions or even maybe some family occasions etc where you might not have that luxury... But then again try to keep in mind that 50-135 focuses noticeably slower than 77 does. Other advantages of 50-135 are the possibility to offer more effects than the 77 does while keeping satisfactory quality standards through all its focal length and it obviously comes cheaper than keeping FA50/1.4, FA77/1.8 Ltd and FA135/2.8 instead... PS: the 50-135 is quite capable of capturing outstanding portraits...

10-07-2008, 06:44 AM	#20
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	Another lens that can give the DA* 50-135mm a run for the money is the FA 135mm f/2.8. Lovely bokeh, a smaller and lighter lens and very fast focusing.

10-07-2008, 11:34 AM	#21
lbam Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 442	I own both lenses and despite the 50-135mm being more practical, I find I use the 77mm more often, mainly due to it's size, and aperture... I'm a sucker for shallow depth of field... This was taken at F2.0

10-07-2008, 12:36 PM	#22
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	Originally posted by Alfisti Sur eit can, just use 100mm f/2.8 instead of 77 f/1.8. Sure, that's technically correct. However, you'll either have a different composition (because of the tighter field of view) or a different perspective (because you'll have to step back to get the same composition). By all accounts, the DA*50-135 is a fantastic lens. But in some circumstances there's no substitute for being able to open up to f/1.8. The ideal soluation is, funds permitting, to get both

10-07-2008, 12:51 PM	#23
rfortson Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Houston TX Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,129	Originally posted by celetron ... But then again try to keep in mind that 50-135 focuses noticeably slower than 77 does. ... I never noticed that when I had both. In fact, I'd say it's the opposite if there is a difference. My 50-135 is my action lens, and with the SDM it's the fastest lens I have. The 77Ltd was no slower than my other lenses in general, but I wouldn't call it snappy. There's no reason it should be, either. The point of the 77Ltd is not lightning fast AF, it's superb IQ. Originally posted by celetron ... PS: the 50-135 is quite capable of capturing outstanding portraits... I'll agree with that, for sure! Here are a couple of shots taken with the two lenses. I'll take either one.

10-07-2008, 01:09 PM	#24
beaumont Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 505 Original Poster	Great feedback (although it doesn't seem to make the decision any easier.) I do love my 31ltd, as most of you do your 77ltd (and your 50-135*'s). And the 1.8 does come in handy...

10-07-2008, 01:09 PM	#25
beaumont Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 505 Original Poster	Originally posted by lbam I own both lenses and despite the 50-135mm being more practical, I find I use the 77mm more often, mainly due to it's size, and aperture... I'm a sucker for shallow depth of field... This was taken at F2.0 PS Great shot!!! (A happier MonaLisa)

10-08-2008, 06:02 PM	#26
beaumont Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 505 Original Poster	And the comment... At this point If I were to recommend only three AF lenses for Pentax - if you could own only three - I'd say DA 12-24, DA* 50-135, and FA 77. ...over in the "Stop trying to make me sell my 77ltd" thread" doesn't help much!

10-09-2008, 02:10 AM	#28
suro Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Ekaterinburg Posts: 344	About 1 hour ago, 77 Limited: Great lens!

10-09-2008, 06:30 AM	#29
yipchunyu Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: HK Posts: 171	Originally posted by suro About 1 hour ago, 77 Limited: Great lens! but when compare 70LE with 50-135. which one is better?

10-09-2008, 07:39 AM	#30
suro Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Ekaterinburg Posts: 344	Originally posted by yipchunyu but when compare 70LE with 50-135. which one is better? I write it here recently - the 70mm Limited is much better