FA80-200/2.8 or DA50-135/2.8?

HermanLee · 04-15-2009, 10:48 AM

I have this problem:
I have the FA*80-200/2.8 which I really like for the sake of it's IQ (as everybody knows) but it's heavy.
Lately I've been doing more portraits and I'm lacking in 51-79mm focal length for my lens collection.
The DA*50-135 seems good for portrait (50-85mm) and lighter (but I don't know how much lighter in real world experience. Is it tiring to handhold for long period?)
I have the DA*16-50m, FA43Ltd or F50/1.4 also but often I need to get tighter photo.
With FA*80-200, sometimes I can do by backing up a bit but my hand is always shaking because of the weight. Well, I'm not a big guy either

I'd love to get FA77Ltd one day but for now I'm looking for a zoom for convenience.

So, if you already had FA*80-200, will you still buy the DA*50-135?

Thanks,

legacyb4 · 04-15-2009, 11:39 AM

Always depends on your financial situation, but those 2 zooms can co-exist happily in an owner's bag since they overlap but not completely.

Weight-wise, the 50-135 is a great lens for carrying around; not too heavy and not too long.

mrt10x · 04-15-2009, 11:47 AM

I have both a Tamron 70-200 2.8 and the 50-135... i rarely use the 50-135. The Tamron is bigger, heavier, and slower, but it has great IQ and gives me more reach, which I always seem to need... If I were you I would be looking at the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 or the Sigma 24-70 f2.8.

**Lowell Goudge** · 04-15-2009, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by HermanLee

I have this problem:
I have the FA*80-200/2.8 which I really like for the sake of it's IQ (as everybody knows) but it's heavy.
Lately I've been doing more portraits and I'm lacking in 51-79mm focal length for my lens collection.
The DA*50-135 seems good for portrait (50-85mm) and lighter (but I don't know how much lighter in real world experience. Is it tiring to handhold for long period?)
I have the DA*16-50m, FA43Ltd or F50/1.4 also but often I need to get tighter photo.
With FA*80-200, sometimes I can do by backing up a bit but my hand is always shaking because of the weight. Well, I'm not a big guy either

I'd love to get FA77Ltd one day but for now I'm looking for a zoom for convenience.

So, if you already had FA*80-200, will you still buy the DA*50-135?

Thanks,

I would actually go a different direction perhaps, but it is your money.

I would get either a tamron 28-75 or sigma 24-70 since they suite your shooting, and then keep the 70-200 for when you need it.

It is all about a complete system, and you need to consider the ranges you shoot

mrt10x · 04-15-2009, 12:14 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

I would actually go a different direction perhaps, but it is your money.

I would get either a tamron 28-75 or sigma 24-70 since they suite your shooting, and then keep the 70-200 for when you need it.

It is all about a complete system, and you need to consider the ranges you shoot

isnt that what I said??

and I only have 4070 less posts than you

**Lowell Goudge** · 04-15-2009, 01:47 PM

mrt10x

didn't see your post.

basic point is that the OP is ow at a position where he needs to plan his entire system, it is easy to recommend lenses out of the blue, but wherre do they fit into what he/she wants in the end

HermanLee · 04-15-2009, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by legacyb4

Always depends on your financial situation, but those 2 zooms can co-exist happily in an owner's bag since they overlap but not completely.

Weight-wise, the 50-135 is a great lens for carrying around; not too heavy and not too long.

Thanks for the info, Legacyb4.
Man, I envy your FA*85/1.4

That's one lens that I definitely want to have one day

Originally posted by mrt10x

I have both a Tamron 70-200 2.8 and the 50-135... i rarely use the 50-135. The Tamron is bigger, heavier, and slower, but it has great IQ and gives me more reach, which I always seem to need... If I were you I would be looking at the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 or the Sigma 24-70 f2.8.

Yes, this comes to my consideration too. The new Sigma 24-70 HSM for Pentax seems really nice. I wonder when they will have it available and the price.
Mrt10x, what do you use the Tamron 70-200 mainly for? Is it for portrait or something else?

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

mrt10x
..., it is easy to recommend lenses out of the blue, but wherre do they fit into what he/she wants in the end

Wise word.
I like the 28-75 focal length but I think the 50-135 reach is better for my style.
My main concern is weight. If only FA*80-200 is a little bit less heavier, I won't try to get another zoom for portrait.
I will not sell my FA* 80-200 though

even if I get the 50-135. Maybe I'll just sell my other lens. The FA*80-200 is too good for a lens especially at 200mm.
I can put it in the same level of primes.

mrt10x · 04-15-2009, 04:15 PM

I use the 70-200 mostly for landscape and wildlife photography. I see your point about how the lens would fit your needs as opposed to mine

Maybe the 50-135 would be the perfect lens, it is about 30% smaller than most 70-200/80-200's. For portraits I use my 31mm ltd and Sigma 100 Macro.

kenyee · 04-15-2009, 04:24 PM

Originally posted by HermanLee

Yes, this comes to my consideration too. The new Sigma 24-70 HSM for Pentax seems really nice. I wonder when they will have it available and the price.

May 2nd and $900.

You should keep your 80-200. A lot of folks seem to use 70-200/2.8 for portraits outdoors (you have to be pretty far away) for the DOF. The 50-135 is a smaller lens that should be good for studio/portrait work as well.

flyer · 04-15-2009, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by HermanLee

Thanks for the info, Legacyb4.
Man, I envy your FA*85/1.4

That's one lens that I definitely want to have one day

Just keep an eye on eBay. Mine got stolen a few weeks ago, so it might show up there. Who knows?

mel · 04-15-2009, 05:14 PM

i've been using my 50-135 for portraits lately. nice lens for that.

maxwell1295 · 04-15-2009, 05:35 PM

The 50-135 is brutally sharp and is in the perfect range for portraits.

Votesh · 04-15-2009, 06:22 PM

I had the 50-135 and it was really a outstanding lens. But if it were me I'd go for the FA 77mm LTD. Either that or save up and get the FA* 85mm. I just got it at it's quickly becoming my favorite lens, and I haven't even used it for portraits just yet.

**ManuH** · 04-15-2009, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by flyer

Just keep an eye on eBay. Mine got stolen a few weeks ago, so it might show up there. Who knows?

How was it stolen? I think we should have a section on this forum for putting serial# of stolen lens/cameras.

HermanLee · 04-16-2009, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by flyer

Just keep an eye on eBay. Mine got stolen a few weeks ago, so it might show up there. Who knows?

Sorry to hear that, Yves.
The one who stole it must be desperately want that particular lens

I hope you have insurance for it.

04-15-2009, 10:48 AM	#1
HermanLee Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Southern California, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 729	*FA80-200/2.8 or DA50-135/2.8?* I have this problem: I have the FA80-200/2.8 which I really like for the sake of it's IQ (as everybody knows) but it's heavy. Lately I've been doing more portraits and I'm lacking in 51-79mm focal length for my lens collection. The DA50-135 seems good for portrait (50-85mm) and lighter (but I don't know how much lighter in real world experience. Is it tiring to handhold for long period?) I have the DA16-50m, FA43Ltd or F50/1.4 also but often I need to get tighter photo. With FA80-200, sometimes I can do by backing up a bit but my hand is always shaking because of the weight. Well, I'm not a big guy either I'd love to get FA77Ltd one day but for now I'm looking for a zoom for convenience. So, if you already had FA80-200, will you still buy the DA50-135? Thanks,

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Tokina 80-200/2.8 KA; K 135/2.5; M 200/4; Tamron 70-150/2.8 soft	thomasxie	Sold Items	6	02-26-2010 11:08 AM
For Sale - Sold: M42 lenses (Takumar 200 3.5, Pentacon/Zeiss 135 2.8 and Vivitar 200 3.5)	Skorzen	Sold Items	1	06-10-2008 03:23 PM
For Sale - Sold: M 50/f1.4, Takumar 135/f2.5, Super Tak 28/f3.5, Tokina 80-200/f2.8, M 80-200/f	loudbay	Sold Items	11	03-07-2008 04:53 PM

04-15-2009, 11:39 AM	#2
legacyb4 Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Tri-Cities, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,784	Always depends on your financial situation, but those 2 zooms can co-exist happily in an owner's bag since they overlap but not completely. Weight-wise, the 50-135 is a great lens for carrying around; not too heavy and not too long.

04-15-2009, 11:47 AM	#3
mrt10x Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Woodland Park CO Posts: 102	I have both a Tamron 70-200 2.8 and the 50-135... i rarely use the 50-135. The Tamron is bigger, heavier, and slower, but it has great IQ and gives me more reach, which I always seem to need... If I were you I would be looking at the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 or the Sigma 24-70 f2.8.

04-15-2009, 12:00 PM	#4
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	Originally posted by HermanLee I have this problem: I have the FA80-200/2.8 which I really like for the sake of it's IQ (as everybody knows) but it's heavy. Lately I've been doing more portraits and I'm lacking in 51-79mm focal length for my lens collection. The DA50-135 seems good for portrait (50-85mm) and lighter (but I don't know how much lighter in real world experience. Is it tiring to handhold for long period?) I have the DA16-50m, FA43Ltd or F50/1.4 also but often I need to get tighter photo. With FA80-200, sometimes I can do by backing up a bit but my hand is always shaking because of the weight. Well, I'm not a big guy either I'd love to get FA77Ltd one day but for now I'm looking for a zoom for convenience. So, if you already had FA80-200, will you still buy the DA50-135? Thanks, I would actually go a different direction perhaps, but it is your money. I would get either a tamron 28-75 or sigma 24-70 since they suite your shooting, and then keep the 70-200 for when you need it. It is all about a complete system, and you need to consider the ranges you shoot

04-15-2009, 12:14 PM	#5
mrt10x Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Woodland Park CO Posts: 102	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge I would actually go a different direction perhaps, but it is your money. I would get either a tamron 28-75 or sigma 24-70 since they suite your shooting, and then keep the 70-200 for when you need it. It is all about a complete system, and you need to consider the ranges you shoot isnt that what I said?? and I only have 4070 less posts than you

04-15-2009, 01:47 PM	#6
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	mrt10x didn't see your post. basic point is that the OP is ow at a position where he needs to plan his entire system, it is easy to recommend lenses out of the blue, but wherre do they fit into what he/she wants in the end

04-15-2009, 02:26 PM	#7
HermanLee Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Southern California, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 729 Original Poster	Originally posted by legacyb4 Always depends on your financial situation, but those 2 zooms can co-exist happily in an owner's bag since they overlap but not completely. Weight-wise, the 50-135 is a great lens for carrying around; not too heavy and not too long. Thanks for the info, Legacyb4. Man, I envy your FA85/1.4 That's one lens that I definitely want to have one day Originally posted by mrt10x I have both a Tamron 70-200 2.8 and the 50-135... i rarely use the 50-135. The Tamron is bigger, heavier, and slower, but it has great IQ and gives me more reach, which I always seem to need... If I were you I would be looking at the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 or the Sigma 24-70 f2.8. Yes, this comes to my consideration too. The new Sigma 24-70 HSM for Pentax seems really nice. I wonder when they will have it available and the price. Mrt10x, what do you use the Tamron 70-200 mainly for? Is it for portrait or something else? Originally posted by Lowell Goudge mrt10x ..., it is easy to recommend lenses out of the blue, but wherre do they fit into what he/she wants in the end Wise word. I like the 28-75 focal length but I think the 50-135 reach is better for my style. My main concern is weight. If only FA80-200 is a little bit less heavier, I won't try to get another zoom for portrait. I will not sell my FA* 80-200 though even if I get the 50-135. Maybe I'll just sell my other lens. The FA*80-200 is too good for a lens especially at 200mm. I can put it in the same level of primes.

04-15-2009, 04:15 PM	#8
mrt10x Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Woodland Park CO Posts: 102	I use the 70-200 mostly for landscape and wildlife photography. I see your point about how the lens would fit your needs as opposed to mine Maybe the 50-135 would be the perfect lens, it is about 30% smaller than most 70-200/80-200's. For portraits I use my 31mm ltd and Sigma 100 Macro.

04-15-2009, 04:24 PM	#9
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	Originally posted by HermanLee Yes, this comes to my consideration too. The new Sigma 24-70 HSM for Pentax seems really nice. I wonder when they will have it available and the price. May 2nd and $900. You should keep your 80-200. A lot of folks seem to use 70-200/2.8 for portraits outdoors (you have to be pretty far away) for the DOF. The 50-135 is a smaller lens that should be good for studio/portrait work as well.

04-15-2009, 05:07 PM	#10
flyer Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ste-Anne des Plaines, Qc., Canada Posts: 2,013	Originally posted by HermanLee Thanks for the info, Legacyb4. Man, I envy your FA*85/1.4 That's one lens that I definitely want to have one day Just keep an eye on eBay. Mine got stolen a few weeks ago, so it might show up there. Who knows?

04-15-2009, 05:14 PM	#11
mel Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Virginia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,531	i've been using my 50-135 for portraits lately. nice lens for that.

04-15-2009, 05:35 PM	#12
maxwell1295 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Long Island, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,703	The 50-135 is brutally sharp and is in the perfect range for portraits.

04-15-2009, 06:22 PM	#13
Votesh Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 817	I had the 50-135 and it was really a outstanding lens. But if it were me I'd go for the FA 77mm LTD. Either that or save up and get the FA* 85mm. I just got it at it's quickly becoming my favorite lens, and I haven't even used it for portraits just yet.

04-15-2009, 06:29 PM	#14
ManuH Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Montreal Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,249	Originally posted by flyer Just keep an eye on eBay. Mine got stolen a few weeks ago, so it might show up there. Who knows? How was it stolen? I think we should have a section on this forum for putting serial# of stolen lens/cameras.

04-16-2009, 10:39 AM	#15
HermanLee Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Southern California, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 729 Original Poster	Originally posted by flyer Just keep an eye on eBay. Mine got stolen a few weeks ago, so it might show up there. Who knows? Sorry to hear that, Yves. The one who stole it must be desperately want that particular lens I hope you have insurance for it.

FA*80-200/2.8 or DA*50-135/2.8?

FA80-200/2.8 or DA50-135/2.8?