FA* 28-70mm vs FA ltds, how does it compare?

axl · 01-13-2010, 02:25 PM

Title says it all really.
How does the FA* "normal" zoom compare to the the three amigos?
I know it loses in speed and size and weight, but how is the IQ?
I mean contrast, colors, sharpness overall rendering..
would it be worth it instead of the ltds?

BR
Peter

Krafty McFirefly · 01-15-2010, 09:11 PM

I would rate the DA*16-50 above the FA*.

Ole · 01-15-2010, 09:34 PM

The FA*28-70 is my most used lens. Sharpness and contrast in top. It doesn't have the "3D bokeh" of the 31mm Ltd, but if you don't want to be constrained to one focal length the 28-70 is the way to go.

Autofocus is fast and accurate.

axl · 01-16-2010, 02:00 AM

thanks guys,
I'll think about it

pcarfan · 01-16-2010, 04:26 AM

Peter,

When you first posted it. I wrote a response based on the images I had seen (exhaustive research) but deleted it, as I don't own the lens. You may want to check pixelpeer.com and draw your conclusions.

Bart · 01-16-2010, 01:18 PM

Well, this lens was what the DA*16-50 was meant to substitute, just like the DA*50-135 and the FA*80-200.

My take on any of these pairs replacing primes would be no, they do not. But if you want a zoom for whatever reason, better get the best available and these are it.

So, except for it not being my most used lens, I agree with Ole. Plus I also like the colors.
The DA*16-50 delivers more contrast, though.
On the other hand: the FA*28-70 has no SDM. A Plus?

And the lens retracts automatically to it shortest setting when you shut down the camera - part of the Powerzoom package. Nifty!

One more thing: I guess I'm not telling anything new if I say the FA*28-70 is no wide lens - on a crop sensor.

axl · 01-17-2010, 02:22 AM

Originally posted by pcarfan

Peter,

When you first posted it. I wrote a response based on the images I had seen (exhaustive research) but deleted it, as I don't own the lens. You may want to check pixelpeer.com and draw your conclusions.

thanks, I'll have a look...
But I think the battle has been fought already. I'm keeping my primes

axl · 01-17-2010, 02:26 AM

still, I would like to read your originall long reply

pcarfan · 01-17-2010, 06:01 AM

Originally posted by axl

thanks, I'll have a look...
But I think the battle has been fought already. I'm keeping my primes

Well! I think you made a brilliant choice.

pcarfan · 01-17-2010, 06:08 AM

Originally posted by axl

thanks, I'll have a look...
But I think the battle has been fought already. I'm keeping my primes

Well, I just don't see the magic in the 28-70, and IMO it's not a substitute in any form or shape to the FA limiteds, or the DA limiteds or some of the finer primes. Frankly it is hard for me to spend the money on it over the DA* zooms, but the lack of SDM will possibly swing it over in the FA*'s favor

and of course the focal length differences.

Now, if you take the 80-200, now that may not be the sharpest, but I can certainly spend more for it than the sigma or the tamron. I can't justify the price it fetches now (I don't use those focal lengths much being the only reason) , but I can certainly see why it fetches the big bucks,...... what a lens!.

**Ron Boggs** · 01-17-2010, 09:59 PM

Bought the 3 amigos and the 28-70/2.8 all within a month of their release over a several year period. So have been shooting some for more than a decade. All are stunning, and don't sell this zoom short! For art, I'll generally choose the Amigos. For outdoor "people in action" stuff or indoor flash lit images the 28-70 is pretty phenomenal. It's one of the old engineered and built at Pentax Japan lenses that has a color rendering and pop that's pretty phenomenal. I've sold many dozens of color glossy mag images from it including a couple covers. Primary colors just scream through this zoom. It's almost like a hypersaturation thing...Fuji Velvia with elements. I can't rave enough about this oversized, overweight lens. It's as good as the Amigos for rendering publication quality images and it's so sharp as to make more than one editor comment. Of course all four listed lenses are more than capable and typically do such good work that none of these lenses are as much of a limiting factor to IQ as I am.

If your budget allows, don't avoid any of these lenses as all are truly wonderful!

axl · 01-18-2010, 02:26 AM

Thanks Ron,
Q though: if you would havee to choose the FA* or the FAltds, which would you keep?

**Ron Boggs** · 01-18-2010, 09:00 PM

Can't believe I would say this publicly, but I would actually choose the FA* 28-70/2.8 over The Three Amigos!

I say this primarily because of the niche that zoom fills for my shooting. I really don't use the Amigos very much because I tend to shoot my Pentax 67II or Hasselblad XpanII medium format film systems for the most critical subjects and certainly for art. So the Amigo's only get art duty when I don't have the medium format gear with me.

Probably more than half of my published photos over the last 20 years are outdoor recreation images and the lion's share of those were shot through the 28-70 so it's indispensible to my outdoor lifestyle stuff (which is also a big part of who I am.)

I also sell fine art prints which I tend to print large--16x20 being small and 30x40 being my "anchor prints" for shows. My main inventory and exposure is with a series of prints harkening toward Elliot Porter's Intimate Landscape stuff. Not a single print was made with the Amigo's and all but a couple were shot at medium format sizes on film. So for the circumstances that most folks would use the Amigo's I tend to step up in size. So I could live without the Amigos and still have all the photo fun I'm having today.

NOTE THAT I WOULD NEVER CHOOSE BETWEEN THE AMIGOS AND THE ZOOM. I OWN THEM ALL AND BARRING STARVATION, PLAN TO DIE WITH ALL FOUR LENSES IN MY KIT. I HOLD NO ASPIRATIONS TO SWITCH AWAY FROM FA* OR FA LIMITED LENSES AS I'M A FANBOY AND LOVE THEM ALL DEARLY.

I have friends with DA* lenses that I get to use (the lenses not the friends), but there's just something about the FA* renditions that I prefer.

Image from last May in AZ...shot with the zoom...

pcarfan · 01-19-2010, 06:35 AM

There you go,...... Ron, Ole and others who have actually used this lens extensively rate it quite highly, so in my mind there is no doubt it's a stellar lens worthy of being a companion to the FA limiteds. I am glad you started this thread as I learned from it as well....now, I will keeping an eye out for this gem of a lens...............

Ben_Edict · 01-19-2010, 06:44 AM

Originally posted by Ole

The FA*28-70 is my most used lens. Sharpness and contrast in top. It doesn't have the "3D bokeh" of the 31mm Ltd, but if you don't want to be constrained to one focal length the 28-70 is the way to go.

Autofocus is fast and accurate.

I am with Ole and Ron. Though the FA is sure not a standard zoom in todays fl-thinking, it is a very useable lens, from normal to what (I consider) a very good portrait length. Built is excellent, though you may find some complaints on the web about its durabilty. But mine has been heavily used and abused since its release and it works perfectly (though it lost the Powerzoom switch sometime in the past - closed the hole with tape...)

It is sharp, useable wide open and colour rendering is as good as other FA lenses, like the 24/2 and the 85/1.4 - that's my personal "Amigo Trio".

Ben

01-13-2010, 02:25 PM	#1
axl Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,181	*FA 28-70mm vs FA ltds, how does it compare?** Title says it all really. How does the FA* "normal" zoom compare to the the three amigos? I know it loses in speed and size and weight, but how is the IQ? I mean contrast, colors, sharpness overall rendering.. would it be worth it instead of the ltds? BR Peter

01-17-2010, 06:08 AM	#10
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	Originally posted by axl thanks, I'll have a look... But I think the battle has been fought already. I'm keeping my primes Well, I just don't see the magic in the 28-70, and IMO it's not a substitute in any form or shape to the FA limiteds, or the DA limiteds or some of the finer primes. Frankly it is hard for me to spend the money on it over the DA* zooms, but the lack of SDM will possibly swing it over in the FA's favor and of course the focal length differences. Now, if you take the 80-200, now that may not be the sharpest, but I can certainly spend more for it than the sigma or the tamron. I can't justify the price it fetches now (I don't use those focal lengths much being the only reason) , but I can certainly see why it fetches the big bucks,...... what a lens!. Last edited by pcarfan; 01-17-2010 at 06:28 AM.*

01-18-2010, 09:00 PM	#13
Ron Boggs Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: MT Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,328	Can't believe I would say this publicly, but I would actually choose the FA* 28-70/2.8 over The Three Amigos! I say this primarily because of the niche that zoom fills for my shooting. I really don't use the Amigos very much because I tend to shoot my Pentax 67II or Hasselblad XpanII medium format film systems for the most critical subjects and certainly for art. So the Amigo's only get art duty when I don't have the medium format gear with me. Probably more than half of my published photos over the last 20 years are outdoor recreation images and the lion's share of those were shot through the 28-70 so it's indispensible to my outdoor lifestyle stuff (which is also a big part of who I am.) I also sell fine art prints which I tend to print large--16x20 being small and 30x40 being my "anchor prints" for shows. My main inventory and exposure is with a series of prints harkening toward Elliot Porter's Intimate Landscape stuff. Not a single print was made with the Amigo's and all but a couple were shot at medium format sizes on film. So for the circumstances that most folks would use the Amigo's I tend to step up in size. So I could live without the Amigos and still have all the photo fun I'm having today. NOTE THAT I WOULD NEVER CHOOSE BETWEEN THE AMIGOS AND THE ZOOM. I OWN THEM ALL AND BARRING STARVATION, PLAN TO DIE WITH ALL FOUR LENSES IN MY KIT. I HOLD NO ASPIRATIONS TO SWITCH AWAY FROM FA* OR FA LIMITED LENSES AS I'M A FANBOY AND LOVE THEM ALL DEARLY. I have friends with DA* lenses that I get to use (the lenses not the friends), but there's just something about the FA* renditions that I prefer. Image from last May in AZ...shot with the zoom... Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ltd case and FA ltds?	axl	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	27	10-31-2010 07:09 PM
CPL for DA Ltds 21mm/41mm/70mm	kit p. lang	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	07-23-2010 04:39 PM
coloured FA ltds bags question	axl	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	05-05-2010 12:41 PM
For Sale - Sold: K100DS and 21mm, 35mm, 70mm DA LTDs	waterhouse8800	Sold Items	15	07-20-2009 06:04 PM

01-15-2010, 09:11 PM	#2
Krafty McFirefly New Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1	I would rate the DA16-50 above the FA.

01-15-2010, 09:34 PM	#3
Ole Administrator Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Copenhagen, Denmark Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,347	The FA*28-70 is my most used lens. Sharpness and contrast in top. It doesn't have the "3D bokeh" of the 31mm Ltd, but if you don't want to be constrained to one focal length the 28-70 is the way to go. Autofocus is fast and accurate.

01-16-2010, 02:00 AM	#4
axl Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,181 Original Poster	thanks guys, I'll think about it

01-16-2010, 04:26 AM	#5
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	Peter, When you first posted it. I wrote a response based on the images I had seen (exhaustive research) but deleted it, as I don't own the lens. You may want to check pixelpeer.com and draw your conclusions.

01-16-2010, 01:18 PM	#6
Bart Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: WW community of Pentax users Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,591	Well, this lens was what the DA16-50 was meant to substitute, just like the DA50-135 and the FA80-200. My take on any of these pairs replacing primes would be no, they do not. But if you want a zoom for whatever reason, better get the best available and these are it. So, except for it not being my most used lens, I agree with Ole. Plus I also like the colors. The DA16-50 delivers more contrast, though. On the other hand: the FA28-70 has no SDM. A Plus? And the lens retracts automatically to it shortest setting when you shut down the camera - part of the Powerzoom package. Nifty! One more thing: I guess I'm not telling anything new if I say the FA28-70 is no wide lens - on a crop sensor.

01-17-2010, 02:22 AM	#7
axl Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,181 Original Poster	Originally posted by pcarfan Peter, When you first posted it. I wrote a response based on the images I had seen (exhaustive research) but deleted it, as I don't own the lens. You may want to check pixelpeer.com and draw your conclusions. thanks, I'll have a look... But I think the battle has been fought already. I'm keeping my primes

01-17-2010, 02:26 AM	#8
axl Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,181 Original Poster	still, I would like to read your originall long reply

01-17-2010, 06:01 AM	#9
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	Originally posted by axl thanks, I'll have a look... But I think the battle has been fought already. I'm keeping my primes Well! I think you made a brilliant choice.

01-17-2010, 09:59 PM	#11
Ron Boggs Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: MT Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,328	Bought the 3 amigos and the 28-70/2.8 all within a month of their release over a several year period. So have been shooting some for more than a decade. All are stunning, and don't sell this zoom short! For art, I'll generally choose the Amigos. For outdoor "people in action" stuff or indoor flash lit images the 28-70 is pretty phenomenal. It's one of the old engineered and built at Pentax Japan lenses that has a color rendering and pop that's pretty phenomenal. I've sold many dozens of color glossy mag images from it including a couple covers. Primary colors just scream through this zoom. It's almost like a hypersaturation thing...Fuji Velvia with elements. I can't rave enough about this oversized, overweight lens. It's as good as the Amigos for rendering publication quality images and it's so sharp as to make more than one editor comment. Of course all four listed lenses are more than capable and typically do such good work that none of these lenses are as much of a limiting factor to IQ as I am. If your budget allows, don't avoid any of these lenses as all are truly wonderful!

01-18-2010, 02:26 AM	#12
axl Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,181 Original Poster	Thanks Ron, Q though: if you would havee to choose the FA* or the FAltds, which would you keep?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-19-2010, 06:35 AM	#14
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	There you go,...... Ron, Ole and others who have actually used this lens extensively rate it quite highly, so in my mind there is no doubt it's a stellar lens worthy of being a companion to the FA limiteds. I am glad you started this thread as I learned from it as well....now, I will keeping an eye out for this gem of a lens...............

01-19-2010, 06:44 AM	#15
Ben_Edict Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: SouthWest "Regio" Photos: Albums Posts: 3,309	Originally posted by Ole The FA*28-70 is my most used lens. Sharpness and contrast in top. It doesn't have the "3D bokeh" of the 31mm Ltd, but if you don't want to be constrained to one focal length the 28-70 is the way to go. Autofocus is fast and accurate. I am with Ole and Ron. Though the FA is sure not a standard zoom in todays fl-thinking, it is a very useable lens, from normal to what (I consider) a very good portrait length. Built is excellent, though you may find some complaints on the web about its durabilty. But mine has been heavily used and abused since its release and it works perfectly (though it lost the Powerzoom switch sometime in the past - closed the hole with tape...) It is sharp, useable wide open and colour rendering is as good as other FA lenses, like the 24/2 and the 85/1.4 - that's my personal "Amigo Trio". Ben