FA ltd or DA ltd

eyou · 02-10-2009, 04:38 PM

Hi guys,

Ive been lurking and such but this is my first post. I got the K-m in December (First DSLR, first camera in ~8 years), always liked photography, never had the money. I just recently graduated, and finally some money in my life, so I thought I'd get into this hobby. Last camera I had was a windup Nikon.

Got the km cause it was cheap and new and the 40mm DA lens to go with it since its so small (got it for a trip to hawaii) and really loved the lens.

I was about to splurge $$ on the other DA ltd but it kept bugging me that the FA ltd were more expensive. I did some research, the whole full frame, cropped sensor thing came up you guys know the rest (where do you think i found this info?!)

why are the FAs more expensive? Is it cause they have to be better cause they have to cover a bigger area? The DAs are cheaper cause they arent as fast? I'm just so surprised that the 10 year old product is more expensive than the new DAs.

So the real question is which would you get?

joelovotti · 02-10-2009, 04:57 PM

There is no secret that you don't already know.
FA and DA lenses are just different. Both are very very good lenses and you really can't make a mistake choosing any of them.
If you drop the FF issue it comes down to size vs speed and you pay for speed.
There are plenty of passionate photographers on this site that may jump in with strong opinions on this FA or that DA but it will all come down to subtleties.

What should you buy:

Without the FF question, I'd go DAs if you don't need the speed.

Thinking of upgrading to a FF Pentax in 2009 or 2010 if one comes avialable, then you have to consider the FAs

You have a great problem here. The only possible outcome is a pile of beautiful photos.

Be well,
joe

felix68 · 02-10-2009, 05:02 PM

Originally posted by joelovotti

There is no secret that you don't already know.
FA and DA lenses are just different. Both are very very good lenses and you really can't make a mistake choosing any of them.
If you drop the FF issue it comes down to size vs speed and you pay for speed.
There are plenty of passionate photographers on this site that may jump in with strong opinions on this FA or that DA but it will all come down to subtleties.

What should you buy:

Without the FF question, I'd go DAs if you don't need the speed.

Thinking of upgrading to a FF Pentax in 2009 or 2010 if one comes avialable, then you have to consider the FAs

You have a great problem here. The only possible outcome is a pile of beautiful photos.

Be well,
joe

Just like joe said, you pay for speed. One of the other major considerations between the 2 lines is if you ever decide to get into shooting film, the FA Limiteds have an aperture ring and therefore can be used on many more film bodies. This may sound absurd in this digital day and age, but I have recently got back into black and white film and like it a lot more than digital.

**rparmar** · 02-10-2009, 05:12 PM

I've got two FA Limiteds and one DA Limited so that won't help you at all.

They are all great lenses. But I always prefer speed. There is no substitute.

Photography = Light. End of story.

**GaryM** · 02-10-2009, 05:13 PM

FA Limiteds: Faster maximum aperture, more expensive, suitable for full-frame and 35mm film
DA Limiteds: Smaller, less expensive, slower maximum aperture, quick-shift focusing, designed for APS-C sensors

redpigeons · 02-10-2009, 05:20 PM

if you have the 40mm and you love it
you need first of all think about what you need more wide or more zoom.
the FA will not give you much more wide on Dslr. the 31 will be more normal length then wide
if you need a portrait lens both 70 and the 77 get great reviews.
the 77 might not be available soon any more so I would get that one first

JHfwp · 02-10-2009, 05:55 PM

The 77 can also be had for a lot less than the 31.

davef · 02-10-2009, 06:14 PM

Personally I prefer speed but I have not seen a bad Limited. The 21 would make an excellent complement for your 40 as would the 70 or 77. The size of the 21 and 70, together with your 40 and K-M would make a very nice travel kit. There is also the 35 Macro and reputedly, there will soon be a DA15. Dave

**Michaelina2** · 02-10-2009, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by eyou

why are the FAs more expensive?

...simple economics 101... some people are willing and able to pay more. The reasons are varied, personal and...

Since the K-M design is optimized for DA lens use... get DA lenses and don't look back. You will love them!

Ciao...

jsherman999 · 02-10-2009, 06:57 PM

If you can afford it, the FA 77ltd would make a great companion to your DA 40 - a medium telephoto with speed, perfect for low light shooting also.

And bokeh.

Votesh · 02-10-2009, 07:05 PM

If you love the 40mm you would probably love the other DA Limiteds. The FA limiteds are bigger and faster and apparently don't focus as quickly. But they all seem to be stellar. If you like small size and don't mind a little slower lenses, the DA's are for you.

farfisa · 02-10-2009, 07:32 PM

They're all great (the DA's and the FA's), but I do love the speed and build of the FA Limiteds. The 77mm ltd is the first limited I got, and it's still my favourite. Though in the winter I don't shoot long as much. Unfortunately the cheapest FA limited is the 43, and that's a little too close to what you have.

For manual focusing, the FA's are amazing too, though the "quick shift" (switching to manual focus without having to flick a switch) of the DA's is a nice feature to have, especially on the 35mm macro.

For walking around in Hawaii, though, I don't think you could've picked a better lightweight kit than the k-m and the DA 40!

If you feel you want something wider, the 21 is a great little lens--does landscapes and people very well. If you want something faster and longer, the FA 77 would be my first recommendation. The DA 70 is only a touch heavier than the 40 though, so if you're enjoying the weight advantage you might prefer to go that route.

nostatic · 02-10-2009, 08:08 PM

The DA limiteds have quick shift and are smaller lighter. The FA limiteds are faster. The DA limiteds cost less. The FA limiteds have incredible build quality. The DA limiteds are great. The FA limiteds are sublime.

Just depends what is important to you.

eyou · 02-10-2009, 08:17 PM

when i was looking at most of my snap shots they were pretty wide from 18-25mm so the 21 da is looking nice. I didnt have a telephoto lens and was regretting it the whole trip (the longest i had was the 55mm of the kit lens). Maybe 21da and 77 fa? Maybe even thinking of trading the 40mm DA for 43mm .... too many choices. i had to look up what LBA meant and i think i might have it....

eyou · 02-10-2009, 08:25 PM

also noticed theres no cheap old prime lenses in the 70-100mm range. 85mm is way too expensive. for the 20-30mm theres a 28mm 2.8 for pretty cheap. maybe thats a decent bang for buck combo

02-10-2009, 04:38 PM	#1
eyou Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 224	FA ltd or DA ltd Hi guys, Ive been lurking and such but this is my first post. I got the K-m in December (First DSLR, first camera in ~8 years), always liked photography, never had the money. I just recently graduated, and finally some money in my life, so I thought I'd get into this hobby. Last camera I had was a windup Nikon. Got the km cause it was cheap and new and the 40mm DA lens to go with it since its so small (got it for a trip to hawaii) and really loved the lens. I was about to splurge $$ on the other DA ltd but it kept bugging me that the FA ltd were more expensive. I did some research, the whole full frame, cropped sensor thing came up you guys know the rest (where do you think i found this info?!) why are the FAs more expensive? Is it cause they have to be better cause they have to cover a bigger area? The DAs are cheaper cause they arent as fast? I'm just so surprised that the 10 year old product is more expensive than the new DAs. So the real question is which would you get?

02-10-2009, 05:02 PM	#3
felix68 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 281	Adding My $0.02 Originally posted by joelovotti There is no secret that you don't already know. FA and DA lenses are just different. Both are very very good lenses and you really can't make a mistake choosing any of them. If you drop the FF issue it comes down to size vs speed and you pay for speed. There are plenty of passionate photographers on this site that may jump in with strong opinions on this FA or that DA but it will all come down to subtleties. What should you buy: Without the FF question, I'd go DAs if you don't need the speed. Thinking of upgrading to a FF Pentax in 2009 or 2010 if one comes avialable, then you have to consider the FAs You have a great problem here. The only possible outcome is a pile of beautiful photos. Be well, joe Just like joe said, you pay for speed. One of the other major considerations between the 2 lines is if you ever decide to get into shooting film, the FA Limiteds have an aperture ring and therefore can be used on many more film bodies. This may sound absurd in this digital day and age, but I have recently got back into black and white film and like it a lot more than digital.

02-10-2009, 06:55 PM	#9
Michaelina2 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: SE Michigan USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,300	The answer is... Originally posted by eyou why are the FAs more expensive? ...simple economics 101... some people are willing and able to pay more. The reasons are varied, personal and... Since the K-M design is optimized for DA lens use... get DA lenses and don't look back. You will love them! Ciao...

02-10-2009, 04:57 PM	#2
joelovotti Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: US Photos: Albums Posts: 393	There is no secret that you don't already know. FA and DA lenses are just different. Both are very very good lenses and you really can't make a mistake choosing any of them. If you drop the FF issue it comes down to size vs speed and you pay for speed. There are plenty of passionate photographers on this site that may jump in with strong opinions on this FA or that DA but it will all come down to subtleties. What should you buy: Without the FF question, I'd go DAs if you don't need the speed. Thinking of upgrading to a FF Pentax in 2009 or 2010 if one comes avialable, then you have to consider the FAs You have a great problem here. The only possible outcome is a pile of beautiful photos. Be well, joe

02-10-2009, 05:12 PM	#4
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	I've got two FA Limiteds and one DA Limited so that won't help you at all. They are all great lenses. But I always prefer speed. There is no substitute. Photography = Light. End of story.

02-10-2009, 05:13 PM	#5
GaryM Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Montclair, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 426	FA Limiteds: Faster maximum aperture, more expensive, suitable for full-frame and 35mm film DA Limiteds: Smaller, less expensive, slower maximum aperture, quick-shift focusing, designed for APS-C sensors

02-10-2009, 05:20 PM	#6
redpigeons Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: NYC Posts: 943	if you have the 40mm and you love it you need first of all think about what you need more wide or more zoom. the FA will not give you much more wide on Dslr. the 31 will be more normal length then wide if you need a portrait lens both 70 and the 77 get great reviews. the 77 might not be available soon any more so I would get that one first

02-10-2009, 05:55 PM	#7
JHfwp Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 876	The 77 can also be had for a lot less than the 31.

02-10-2009, 06:14 PM	#8
davef Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Ontario Posts: 433	Personally I prefer speed but I have not seen a bad Limited. The 21 would make an excellent complement for your 40 as would the 70 or 77. The size of the 21 and 70, together with your 40 and K-M would make a very nice travel kit. There is also the 35 Macro and reputedly, there will soon be a DA15. Dave

02-10-2009, 06:57 PM	#10
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	If you can afford it, the FA 77ltd would make a great companion to your DA 40 - a medium telephoto with speed, perfect for low light shooting also. And bokeh.

02-10-2009, 07:05 PM	#11
Votesh Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 817	If you love the 40mm you would probably love the other DA Limiteds. The FA limiteds are bigger and faster and apparently don't focus as quickly. But they all seem to be stellar. If you like small size and don't mind a little slower lenses, the DA's are for you.

02-10-2009, 07:32 PM	#12
farfisa Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Toronto, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,274	They're all great (the DA's and the FA's), but I do love the speed and build of the FA Limiteds. The 77mm ltd is the first limited I got, and it's still my favourite. Though in the winter I don't shoot long as much. Unfortunately the cheapest FA limited is the 43, and that's a little too close to what you have. For manual focusing, the FA's are amazing too, though the "quick shift" (switching to manual focus without having to flick a switch) of the DA's is a nice feature to have, especially on the 35mm macro. For walking around in Hawaii, though, I don't think you could've picked a better lightweight kit than the k-m and the DA 40! If you feel you want something wider, the 21 is a great little lens--does landscapes and people very well. If you want something faster and longer, the FA 77 would be my first recommendation. The DA 70 is only a touch heavier than the 40 though, so if you're enjoying the weight advantage you might prefer to go that route.

02-10-2009, 08:08 PM	#13
nostatic Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: socal Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,575	The DA limiteds have quick shift and are smaller lighter. The FA limiteds are faster. The DA limiteds cost less. The FA limiteds have incredible build quality. The DA limiteds are great. The FA limiteds are sublime. Just depends what is important to you.

02-10-2009, 08:17 PM	#14
eyou Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 224 Original Poster	when i was looking at most of my snap shots they were pretty wide from 18-25mm so the 21 da is looking nice. I didnt have a telephoto lens and was regretting it the whole trip (the longest i had was the 55mm of the kit lens). Maybe 21da and 77 fa? Maybe even thinking of trading the 40mm DA for 43mm .... too many choices. i had to look up what LBA meant and i think i might have it....

02-10-2009, 08:25 PM	#15
eyou Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 224 Original Poster	also noticed theres no cheap old prime lenses in the 70-100mm range. 85mm is way too expensive. for the 20-30mm theres a 28mm 2.8 for pretty cheap. maybe thats a decent bang for buck combo