Originally posted by Abbazz I feel it is important to straighten things out. The FA 77 Limited has very little lateral chromatic aberration, which is the kind of chromatic aberration that can be automatically "cured" by software or by the firmware of some of the newer cameras. Unfortunately, the FA 77 Ltd has tons of longitudinal chromatic aberration and purple fringing, which can not be removed automatically and which is really difficult to remove manually.
I know I will get bashed by the followers of the FA 77 cult, but to me the FA 77 is a specialized lens which shines only for portrait work on film cameras or on digital cameras in controlled environment, while the DA 70 is a welcomed upgrade especially designed for digital cameras as well as a more versatile lens.
Cheers!
Abbazz
Actually, there are some of us who do not worship 77 ltd. I for one used to have it and sold it, and the reason was . . . . . . well, I thought it was a bit flat. The thing about it was that I didn't think it was the lens. In fact, I thought it had everything to do with me, being one of worst photographers around. It seems to me that it is very hard to hit a sweet spot with 77, even after using it for a while. I just didn't get it. So I sold it, and got DA 70. Again, it was difficult for me at first (still is, actually), but for whatever reasons I have a better feel for 70. I just seem to know when NOT to use it.
It is strange that I have a completely opposite opinion of 31. I worship that one.
It could be the focal length thing. 77 with APS-C is not what I am used to with 135mm format. Slightly over a 100mm on APS-C . . . . . a bit weird of a focal length.
If I were to buy similar focal length lens, I want Zeiss 85. No, it's not worth the extra cash, but it is Zeiss. After getting my 50/1.4 ZK, I am hooked.