An odd question?

Benny · 05-11-2007, 05:34 AM

My next buy for my K10D will probably be a short tele lense, for portraits, candids etc. I don't know if it is an odd question but I´m thinking of either FA 50/1,4 or DA 70/2,4. They differ on a number of points:

- the "speed": do I need the extra speed of the FA 50? I use FA 35/2 as my "normal" and I think it works well in low lightning. 1,4 is two steps extra however. What do you think?

- the focal length: which focal length is the best for my need? (portraits, candids etc.)

- the price: here in Sweden the FA 50 is about half the price of the DA 70. (I know that the FA 77 could be seen as an option as well, but it is way too expensive for me) Many have stated that the FA 50 is well worth its money, what do you say about the DA 70?

Please help me out.

/B

**barondla** · 05-11-2007, 06:01 AM

Would rather have the 70 for portraits. 50 is too short for my tastes. Have the A50 1.7. Doesn't even make it into the camera bag most of the time. Don't shoot that many portraits anymore. The 50s are great quality lenses. Do you use the 18-55 kit lens at 50 for portraits? This will tells if its a good focal length for you. Will you miss the speed? Possibly. For formal portraits it is hard to shoot at 1.7 or 1.4. So little depth of field you can't get whole face in focus. For greater distance candid shots the 1.7, 1.4 can be helpful. This is why the 77 lives in my bag. Hope this helps.
thanks
barondla

Buddha Jones · 05-11-2007, 08:35 AM

I have the 50, and I think that it is too short for portraits, unless you are doing a setting portrait that encompasses a room or a scene. I find muself using the 50-200 more than I tought I would. I think that my next lens will be the Tamron 28-75 f2.8. I hear that it is a stellar lens, won an award, heck, Ben likes it,how bad can it be?

**NaClH2O** · 05-11-2007, 08:47 AM

Originally posted by Benny

My next buy for my K10D will probably be a short tele lense, for portraits, candids etc. I don't know if it is an odd question but I´m thinking of either FA 50/1,4 or DA 70/2,4. They differ on a number of points:

- the "speed": do I need the extra speed of the FA 50? I use FA 35/2 as my "normal" and I think it works well in low lightning. 1,4 is two steps extra however. What do you think?

- the focal length: which focal length is the best for my need? (portraits, candids etc.)

- the price: here in Sweden the FA 50 is about half the price of the DA 70. (I know that the FA 77 could be seen as an option as well, but it is way too expensive for me) Many have stated that the FA 50 is well worth its money, what do you say about the DA 70?

Please help me out.

/B

I'm not much of a portrait taker, but I will say that the low profile of the 70mm 'pancake' makes it an ideal "candid" and street photography lens. I own bothe the FA 50 1.4 and the K 50mm 1.2, and I really like both lenses, but I don't think either would be best for portraits, I'd use my Tamron 90mm for that.

NaCl(I'm trying to decide between the 70mm pancake and the 77ltd myself)H2O

jnorth · 05-11-2007, 02:09 PM

I'd say the 50 serves a purpose but it may be on the short side for what you need. Have you taken images with a zoom, that are in the neighbourhood of what you are hoping to accomplish with a prime? That'd be what I'd do - throw on a zoom covering the 50-70 range take some shots of the kind of portrait and candid you are hoping to do and then look at your results and see what the exif data says the focal length was. Then choose your prime based on that. I'd suspect for candids in anything but a small room, you could benefit from something longer than the 50 and maybe even longer than the 70. You'd be able to be a bit further from the action to not cause as much distraction allowing for a more candid candid. I've even seen portraits taken with a fisheye. So there is no magic hard and fast rule, but alot like 70 and up. It's picking the lens that meets YOUR requirements. Unless you suffer from LBA. Then you need to choose something close to what you are looking for. Realize that it's not quite the right thing. Keep it for your kit, and try again. I'd like a new 50, and 70 but....

Jun Park · 05-11-2007, 04:29 PM

Hi, Benny. Are you willing to shoot with manual everything lenses? If you are, you should be able to buy a manual 50 lens pretty cheaply. After you shoot with it a while, you'll be able to determine for yourself if you need more speed or more length. And on the plus side, you should be able to sell the manual lens for close to what you paid (if you bought well... ;-) )

I mention this because I believe you are best qualified to determine what you need and manual lenses are a cheap, easy way to experiment/rent/play, etc.

Originally posted by Benny

My next buy for my K10D will probably be a short tele lense, for portraits, candids etc. I don't know if it is an odd question but I´m thinking of either FA 50/1,4 or DA 70/2,4. They differ on a number of points:

- the "speed": do I need the extra speed of the FA 50? I use FA 35/2 as my "normal" and I think it works well in low lightning. 1,4 is two steps extra however. What do you think?

- the focal length: which focal length is the best for my need? (portraits, candids etc.)

- the price: here in Sweden the FA 50 is about half the price of the DA 70. (I know that the FA 77 could be seen as an option as well, but it is way too expensive for me) Many have stated that the FA 50 is well worth its money, what do you say about the DA 70?

Please help me out.

/B

**jamesk8752** · 05-11-2007, 05:06 PM

Benny, I'd recommend the DA70/2.4 for portrait use. I find that the 50mm lenses are a ltttle bit too wide. At 70mm I can frame really nice head shots, and an aperture of f2.8-3.5 or so gives the best DOF for keeping the entire head in focus while throwing the rest of the image OOF, so zooms like the 50-200 are not quite right for me. YMMV, of course.

Benny · 05-12-2007, 03:20 AM

Thank you for your comments. I will take a closer look on the exif data of the pictures that I have taken so far. I don't know why I did not think of that myself!? I use the Sigma 17-70 from time to time and it cover the range. We'll se what I end up with. Anyway, thanks again!

/B

neighhoma · 05-12-2007, 06:47 AM

Yeah I agree also with Jim that the DA 70 is the better choice. I have both the 35, 50 and 70, and I find the 50 too close to 35. So IMO a 35 and a 70 will be good together. I find my 50 go unused, but I really like the f/1.4.

05-11-2007, 05:34 AM	#1
Benny New Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 5	An odd question? My next buy for my K10D will probably be a short tele lense, for portraits, candids etc. I don't know if it is an odd question but I´m thinking of either FA 50/1,4 or DA 70/2,4. They differ on a number of points: - the "speed": do I need the extra speed of the FA 50? I use FA 35/2 as my "normal" and I think it works well in low lightning. 1,4 is two steps extra however. What do you think? - the focal length: which focal length is the best for my need? (portraits, candids etc.) - the price: here in Sweden the FA 50 is about half the price of the DA 70. (I know that the FA 77 could be seen as an option as well, but it is way too expensive for me) Many have stated that the FA 50 is well worth its money, what do you say about the DA 70? Please help me out. /B

05-12-2007, 03:20 AM	#8
Benny New Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 5 Original Poster	Thanks! Thank you for your comments. I will take a closer look on the exif data of the pictures that I have taken so far. I don't know why I did not think of that myself!? I use the Sigma 17-70 from time to time and it cover the range. We'll se what I end up with. Anyway, thanks again! /B

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Something odd about the K-x	jct us101	Pentax DSLR Discussion	16	05-23-2010 12:36 AM
Macro The Odd Fly	eaglem	Post Your Photos!	14	04-14-2010 05:14 PM
Odd Metering question	MSM	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	16	01-07-2010 11:54 AM
Are we too odd as well as too few or is it just me?	jptreen	Pentax DSLR Discussion	72	10-09-2009 02:59 AM
So this is odd...	ajuett	Post Your Photos!	7	03-09-2009 04:32 PM

05-11-2007, 06:01 AM	#2
barondla Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: midwest, United States Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,714	Would rather have the 70 for portraits. 50 is too short for my tastes. Have the A50 1.7. Doesn't even make it into the camera bag most of the time. Don't shoot that many portraits anymore. The 50s are great quality lenses. Do you use the 18-55 kit lens at 50 for portraits? This will tells if its a good focal length for you. Will you miss the speed? Possibly. For formal portraits it is hard to shoot at 1.7 or 1.4. So little depth of field you can't get whole face in focus. For greater distance candid shots the 1.7, 1.4 can be helpful. This is why the 77 lives in my bag. Hope this helps. thanks barondla

05-11-2007, 08:35 AM	#3
Buddha Jones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,587	I have the 50, and I think that it is too short for portraits, unless you are doing a setting portrait that encompasses a room or a scene. I find muself using the 50-200 more than I tought I would. I think that my next lens will be the Tamron 28-75 f2.8. I hear that it is a stellar lens, won an award, heck, Ben likes it,how bad can it be?

05-11-2007, 08:47 AM	#4
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	Originally posted by Benny My next buy for my K10D will probably be a short tele lense, for portraits, candids etc. I don't know if it is an odd question but I´m thinking of either FA 50/1,4 or DA 70/2,4. They differ on a number of points: - the "speed": do I need the extra speed of the FA 50? I use FA 35/2 as my "normal" and I think it works well in low lightning. 1,4 is two steps extra however. What do you think? - the focal length: which focal length is the best for my need? (portraits, candids etc.) - the price: here in Sweden the FA 50 is about half the price of the DA 70. (I know that the FA 77 could be seen as an option as well, but it is way too expensive for me) Many have stated that the FA 50 is well worth its money, what do you say about the DA 70? Please help me out. /B I'm not much of a portrait taker, but I will say that the low profile of the 70mm 'pancake' makes it an ideal "candid" and street photography lens. I own bothe the FA 50 1.4 and the K 50mm 1.2, and I really like both lenses, but I don't think either would be best for portraits, I'd use my Tamron 90mm for that. NaCl(I'm trying to decide between the 70mm pancake and the 77ltd myself)H2O

05-11-2007, 02:09 PM	#5
jnorth Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Vancouver BC Posts: 230	I'd say the 50 serves a purpose but it may be on the short side for what you need. Have you taken images with a zoom, that are in the neighbourhood of what you are hoping to accomplish with a prime? That'd be what I'd do - throw on a zoom covering the 50-70 range take some shots of the kind of portrait and candid you are hoping to do and then look at your results and see what the exif data says the focal length was. Then choose your prime based on that. I'd suspect for candids in anything but a small room, you could benefit from something longer than the 50 and maybe even longer than the 70. You'd be able to be a bit further from the action to not cause as much distraction allowing for a more candid candid. I've even seen portraits taken with a fisheye. So there is no magic hard and fast rule, but alot like 70 and up. It's picking the lens that meets YOUR requirements. Unless you suffer from LBA. Then you need to choose something close to what you are looking for. Realize that it's not quite the right thing. Keep it for your kit, and try again. I'd like a new 50, and 70 but....

05-11-2007, 04:29 PM	#6
Jun Park Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Pensacola, FL Posts: 182	Hi, Benny. Are you willing to shoot with manual everything lenses? If you are, you should be able to buy a manual 50 lens pretty cheaply. After you shoot with it a while, you'll be able to determine for yourself if you need more speed or more length. And on the plus side, you should be able to sell the manual lens for close to what you paid (if you bought well... ;-) ) I mention this because I believe you are best qualified to determine what you need and manual lenses are a cheap, easy way to experiment/rent/play, etc. Originally posted by Benny My next buy for my K10D will probably be a short tele lense, for portraits, candids etc. I don't know if it is an odd question but I´m thinking of either FA 50/1,4 or DA 70/2,4. They differ on a number of points: - the "speed": do I need the extra speed of the FA 50? I use FA 35/2 as my "normal" and I think it works well in low lightning. 1,4 is two steps extra however. What do you think? - the focal length: which focal length is the best for my need? (portraits, candids etc.) - the price: here in Sweden the FA 50 is about half the price of the DA 70. (I know that the FA 77 could be seen as an option as well, but it is way too expensive for me) Many have stated that the FA 50 is well worth its money, what do you say about the DA 70? Please help me out. /B

05-11-2007, 05:06 PM	#7
jamesk8752 Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Suburban Detroit, MI, USA Posts: 238	Benny, I'd recommend the DA70/2.4 for portrait use. I find that the 50mm lenses are a ltttle bit too wide. At 70mm I can frame really nice head shots, and an aperture of f2.8-3.5 or so gives the best DOF for keeping the entire head in focus while throwing the rest of the image OOF, so zooms like the 50-200 are not quite right for me. YMMV, of course.

05-12-2007, 06:47 AM	#9
neighhoma Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 84	Yeah I agree also with Jim that the DA 70 is the better choice. I have both the 35, 50 and 70, and I find the 50 too close to 35. So IMO a 35 and a 70 will be good together. I find my 50 go unused, but I really like the f/1.4.