[Serkevan]

In the same way, a person might decide that the DFA*85/1.4 is way more lens than they need, and that the FA77/1.8 might fit the bill quite nicely.

This is me. To be fair, for all the issues the lens does have with fringing, the photos come out looking gorgeous in the vast majority of cases. You don't often need outstanding edge sharpness on a wide aperture portrait either. In terms of quality per currency unit, the 77 is IMHO pretty hard to beat.

[Wheatfield]

This is me. To be fair, for all the issues the lens does have with fringing, the photos come out looking gorgeous in the vast majority of cases. You don't often need outstanding edge sharpness on a wide aperture portrait either. In terms of quality per currency unit, the 77 is IMHO pretty hard to beat.

This is why I kept my 77 and sold my A*85/1.4. It was a tough decision, let me tell you.

[Smolk]

The fast 85 look does get tired pretty quickly. My first few sessions with the new 85mm were done at f1.4 just because I could. Honestly though, f2 or f2.8 is a better aperture to be at just to get that little bit extra in focus. The 77 at f2.8 is very usable.

That's a very useful comment - and on reflection I agree.

[mbukal]

Eh... what? The FA 77 was designed for a 36x24mm sensor, and is sold new as a lens for the K-1. The comparison makes sense, it's a just-a-bit-shorter telephoto with less than a stop of aperture difference. Both lenses can be used interchangeably in 90% or more of the situations where you'd use one of the two. It's just the performance that is going to be different.

which FF DSLR sensor was Pentax 1999 in the plan or even before that time already on sale considering the time needed to design the lens for the current and future required optical properties and characteristics, the FA77/1.8 is one quality lens with a great compromise in use on today's FF DSLR Pentax photo bodies, which the new DFA*85/1.4 does not have, because of the above I think that they are not for parallel comparison, but only for advice on how and in what way to use and under what conditions their best properties and characteristics

---

Last edited by mbukal; 08-19-2022 at 03:00 PM.

[robbiec]

which FF DSLR sensor was Pentax 1999 in the plan or even before that time already on sale considering the time needed to design the lens for the current and future required optical properties and characteristics, the FA77/1.8 is one quality lens with a great compromise in use on today's FF DSLR Pentax photo bodies, which the new DFA*85/1.4 does not have, because of the above I think that they are not for parallel comparison, but only for advice on how and in what way to use and under what conditions their best properties and characteristics

It was designed for the original FF sensor, photographic film The 77 was designed around telling a photographic story, not necessarily a measurable story but an emotional memories based one. The 3 FA Limited's impart a rose tinted view of the scene. Time will tell if the 85 becomes a legend but the 77 is part of the FA Limited legend.

[mbukal]

It was designed for the original FF sensor, photographic film The 77 was designed around telling a photographic story, not necessarily a measurable story but an emotional memories based one. The 3 FA Limited's impart a rose tinted view of the scene. Time will tell if the 85 becomes a legend but the 77 is part of the FA Limited legend.

this is exactly why I claim that FA77 and DFA*85 are not at all for parallel comparison

[robbiec]

this is exactly why I claim that FA77 and DFA*85 are not at all for parallel comparison

But there will always be those that will suggest that they are absolute competitors. Pentax have normally been pretty good at keeping the various focal lengths apart but I can still remember the ruffles over the DA70 vs FA77 and to a lesser extent DA40 vs FA43. Its just moved further up the ladder and now it's FA77 vs DFA*85; but this is where you have very different photographic philosophies coming into the argument / debate.

The *'s are what is the best possible way of managing the light for the best resulting image using a FF digital sensor and to hell with size / weight constraints (relatively speaking) vs the FA Limited's which as I've alluded to in a previous post are more artistic, emotional in design.

Value for money weighs in the 77's favour but it has limitations with PF and other CA whereas the 85 has negligible PF and CA but is quite the beast and is double the cost of the 77.

In another thread a question was asked that if you had the 43 would you need or want a 50? If the other 50 was the DFA* then I'd say yes you would if you could, the same can be said here, if you can, get both.

[Sandy Hancock]

why, why don't you compare two of the same length with the same apertures, FA 85/1.4 vs DFA 85/1.4

I have both lenses. Although I love the images I have made with the FA*, the DFA* blows it out of the water at f/1.4 from edge to edge. Chromatic aberration is also *much* better controlled.

DFA* - if you want to pixel peep, click on the image and zoom in twice.



FA* - a bit of wide open glow and quite a bit of CA, and this was shot in much softer light. I still love it though



Stop it down to f/2.5 though, and the FA* starts to sing

[mbukal]

Sandy Hancock thanks, short/clear/equivalent comparison of the two same lenses, without philosophizing and presenting your views, you presented/described the same possibilities of the same lenses where you can see the concrete difference of them for the same application
after your experience, as an amateur family photographer, I would rather buy the FA*85/1.4 than the DFA* because of the profitability/economic calculation, and after everything I read, I would buy the FA*85/1.4 again for portraits rather than the FA 77/1, 8, if I had extra money, only then would I buy a DFA*85/1.4 for my needs, these are just my thoughts regarding the price/quality/use of the mentioned lenses

[Rondec]

this is exactly why I claim that FA77 and DFA*85 are not at all for parallel comparison

You can compare anything. You could compare an orange to a Ferrari if you want, although I'm not sure it would be helpful.

In this case, the HD FA 77 is available new and the DFA *85 is available new. The FA *85 is available used and the copies out there are relatively old. I think it is reasonable to compare all three lenses. My guess is that most people looking for a prime in this range will end up with the FA 77 -- the smaller size plus the lesser cost is enough to push them in the direction of the limited. If they were only 200 or 300 dollars apart, my guess is that more people would look seriously at the DFA *85.

The DFA *85 is a better lens than either the FA *85 or the FA 77, but as to whether or not the differences are significant enough to warrant the price difference is something that each photographer would have to decide.

[iheiramo]

MTF chart supports my experience with the lens. Don't go beyond f8 and feel free to shoot wide open whenever you feel like it.

[Serkevan]

which FF DSLR sensor was Pentax 1999 in the plan or even before that time already on sale considering the time needed to design the lens for the current and future required optical properties and characteristics, the FA77/1.8 is one quality lens with a great compromise in use on today's FF DSLR Pentax photo bodies, which the new DFA*85/1.4 does not have, because of the above I think that they are not for parallel comparison, but only for advice on how and in what way to use and under what conditions their best properties and characteristics

If that's the reason for the 77 being a bad comparison, exactly which FF DSLR sensor did Pentax design the FA* 85 for?

[mbukal]

let's connect with the text from the previous message

Eh... what? The FA 77 is designed for a 36x24mm sensor and is sold new as a lens for the K-1. The comparison makes sense, it's just a slightly shorter telephoto with less than a stop difference in aperture. Objects can be used interchangeably in 90% or more of the situations where you would use one of the two. Only the performance will be different.

so isn't the FA*85/1.4 designed for 36x24mm i.e. FF format, and I don't see any difference in approach design between it and the FA77/1.8 at a time when Pentax didn't have a FF DSLR, both were made in the FF SLR era of Pentax, one received a direct successor, and the other is after 32 years old optical and construction formulas only receive a cosmetic change on the packaging (body font and glass coating) to be reincarnated as a new lens, I still maintain that the two lenses are not for side-by-side comparison and I'm not claiming that any of the mentioned is a bad lens I completely agree with Rondec's statement: whether the differences are significant enough to justify the price difference is something that every photographer would have to decide, ie. by no means compare them primarily as lenses of the same class

[gatorguy]

I still maintain that the two lenses are not for side-by-side comparison and I'm not claiming that any of the mentioned is a bad lens

Understood.

Not everyone agrees that they are comparable, and many other photogs do. Take away from the discussion what you find useful and ignore the rest.

[mbukal]

Understood.

Not everyone agrees that they are comparable, and many other photogs do. Take away from the discussion what you find useful and ignore the rest.

everything is fine, no bad blood, I'm defending arguments that are easily verifiable here on the forum in the Pentax lens description section, I'm not trying to impose my opinion, but the facts are inexorable regardless of the fact that every one of us has our own opinion about a certain lens