Is 77mm Limited magic worth the $$$ it is over the Takumars 85mm?

Aegon · 09-12-2010, 05:35 PM

77 auto-focus gets the shots.
77 pixie dust makes the shots look amazing.

I'm not even a good photographer, but I get results with this lens every time.

WiseOx · 09-12-2010, 05:44 PM

I haven't used the DA 70, or FA 77, so I won't try and compare....but I do own a SMC Tak 85, which is my favorite lens.

One thing I will warn, is the 85 is very unforgiving for MF. Wide open, the DOF is very thin. I will admit I have limited experience with MF, practice will hopefully improve that....or maybe investment in a split screen for my k-7. When you nail it though...it's a magical lens. See more use than my FA 43 in the last few months.

Freak · 09-12-2010, 07:12 PM

The FA77 LTD, is the most impressive lens i have purchased, and although i doubt the price increase compared to say the DA70.

The quality, the feel, look and results are all magical.....

The AF even at 1.8 on my K-7 is so unbelievably good, My Pentax Macro 100mm 2.8 WR in comparison makes you work for it all the time, the FA77 just hits the focus in 0.1 second and nails it.

It's the perfect portrait lens, unfortunately i don't do portraits, Still it will never be sold, I have only owned a DSLR for 2months and the FA77 for 2weeks.....

I'm not sure the price is justified with the FA, but the results and enjoyment are worth every penny.

ll_coffee_lP · 09-12-2010, 07:34 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

it's more of a focal length preference actually and how they render at such focal length.

cite image comparisons >>> Pentax 77mm und 85mm-Objektive: Test-Portrait

The difference between 85mm and 77mm is minimal. If it bothers you that much take 1/2 a step forward with the 77 and voila!

As for rendering...they are all excellent - so whatever floats your boat is the one to go with.

c[_]

Pentaxor · 09-12-2010, 08:06 PM

Originally posted by WiseOx

I haven't used the DA 70, or FA 77, so I won't try and compare....but I do own a SMC Tak 85, which is my favorite lens.

One thing I will warn, is the 85 is very unforgiving for MF. Wide open, the DOF is very thin. I will admit I have limited experience with MF, practice will hopefully improve that....or maybe investment in a split screen for my k-7. When you nail it though...it's a magical lens. See more use than my FA 43 in the last few months.

Yes, the 85 can be very unforgiving for MF. that is why it is crucial to have a bigger and brighter VF, split/focus screen and a very smooth focusing ring. this is why I sold my Rok 85 as I didn't like the focus ring that much and struggled with it's handling. although the Rok 85 is really a great lens for portraiture, especially it's bokeh rendering which I really liked, the dealbreaker for me was it's MF.

TOUGEFC · 09-13-2010, 03:43 AM

Another vote here for the FA77, its my #1 lens for magic.

Boris · 09-13-2010, 05:29 AM

I have FA 77 limited. In fact I have all three FA limited lenses. They are excellent lenses. Nothing magical about them, however. They are sharp stopped down, reasonably sharp wide open, have smooth rendering of out of focus areas, compact, light, made with quality materials and are pleasant to use. The images that came out of my FA limited lenses (total about 10,000 of them) are only as good as I am as a photographer.

GeneV · 09-13-2010, 05:34 AM

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

Another vote here for the FA77, its my #1 lens for magic.

Nice shot. I think a lot of the "magic" of the FA77 comes from the shallow depth of field and bokeh that is not precisely duplicated with other Pentax lenses.

I've taken the same kinds of portraits of children with the FA77 and the DA70 and they weren't quite the same.

**rparmar** · 09-13-2010, 05:58 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by Boris

The images that came out of my FA limited lenses (total about 10,000 of them) are only as good as I am as a photographer.

While this may be a popular humanist sentiment, it is also false. In fact, as one gets better as a photographer the little differences in lens rendering, and how one uses these differences, becomes more important, not less.

The FA Limiteds were designed by Jun Hirakawa to render differently from all other optimised lenses. We call it "magic" because it's simpler than saying: "Rather than perfectly correcting for field curvature, the FA Limited lenses completely correct astigmatic difference in both meridional and sagittal subject planes, allowing small amounts of field curvature to remain."

Boris · 09-13-2010, 06:04 AM

Originally posted by rparmar

While this may be a popular humanist sentiment, it is also false. In fact, as one gets better as a photographer the little differences in lens rendering, and how one uses these differences, becomes more important, not less.

I don't think it is a proper thread to (re?)start this argument. In my opinion (which naturally could be different than yours, Robin), it takes great amount of experience and thoughtful analysis of results in order to actually understand these little differences and take full advantage of them. Personally, I don't think I am any near to that. Until this happens, FA limited lenses for me are just good lenses, no less and no more.

Originally posted by rparmar

The FA Limiteds were designed by Jun Hirakawa to render differently from all other optimised lenses. We call it "magic" because it's simpler than saying: "Rather than perfectly correcting for field curvature, the FA Limited lenses completely correct astigmatic difference in both meridional and sagittal subject planes, allowing small amounts of field curvature to remain."

Thank you for explanation. Indeed using a single word is better for brevity. Unfortunately, it was chosen to use word "magic" to denote perfectly technical, measurable and rather non-magical things. Evidently, after some time the real underlying meaning of "FA limited lenses magic" becomes forgotten and the hype is born.

But then again, I should digress here, so as not to provoke a flame. I am considering producing a write up on the matter and may be starting a separate thread, but not just yet.

**rparmar** · 09-13-2010, 08:17 AM

Fair enough Boris, no flame meant. But I should point out that if you feel this is not the proper place for restarting this argument, maybe you should not have done so?

Boris · 09-13-2010, 08:32 AM

Valid question indeed, Robin. Having just reread the title of this thread I find my initial reply appropriate. The thread started asked to compare FA 77's magic with other lenses, allegedly not magical (in context of definition given by you). I therefore thought it might be useful to point out that along with magical qualities (potential flame notwithstanding) FA 77 has regular qualities such as sharpness, OOF rendering, build, etc. I am afraid, Robin, that the series of exclamations about the magic overshadow other good non-magical qualities of FA 77 that make it stand out from its peers.

Indeed, I should think through that write up and put it either here or in my blog.

Blue · 09-13-2010, 09:50 AM

While I have a decent Tak collection, the FA 77mm is the only lens in that FL that I currently own unless I count the Tamron 90mm. The prices of the S-M-C 85/1.8 is a good part of they way to a FA 77mm ltd. The FA will also work on all my k-mount manual focus and AF bodies. I doe have a Zeiss with no mount.

Blue · 09-13-2010, 09:52 AM

What happens is all 85mm m42 lenses are sought after by the Canon crowd, Pentax Crowd, the 4/3 crowd etc. Even the Auto Tak 85/1.8 prices are currently high.

**cdurfor** · 09-13-2010, 12:35 PM

Love my FA 77. Funny thing is that unlike all of my other lens, I do not need to adjust the sharpness or color saturation. What comes out of my K200D, is what I want...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FA* 85mm f/1.4 vs. Limited 77mm f/1.8	Manwe	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	54	05-06-2014 07:25 AM
Nature Magic of helios 85mm wide open	ramir73	Post Your Photos!	1	03-06-2010 01:14 PM
How much is this set of Takumars worth? (35, 50, 135)	sameagle	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	02-13-2010 09:42 PM
Magic Lantern Guides: K100D, is it worth it?	chrisca70	Photographic Technique	20	11-11-2007 09:00 PM

09-12-2010, 05:35 PM	#16
Aegon Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 1,416	77 auto-focus gets the shots. 77 pixie dust makes the shots look amazing. I'm not even a good photographer, but I get results with this lens every time.

09-12-2010, 05:44 PM	#17
WiseOx Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Whitby (near Toronto), Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 433	I haven't used the DA 70, or FA 77, so I won't try and compare....but I do own a SMC Tak 85, which is my favorite lens. One thing I will warn, is the 85 is very unforgiving for MF. Wide open, the DOF is very thin. I will admit I have limited experience with MF, practice will hopefully improve that....or maybe investment in a split screen for my k-7. When you nail it though...it's a magical lens. See more use than my FA 43 in the last few months.

09-12-2010, 07:12 PM	#18
Freak Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 361	The FA77 LTD, is the most impressive lens i have purchased, and although i doubt the price increase compared to say the DA70. The quality, the feel, look and results are all magical..... The AF even at 1.8 on my K-7 is so unbelievably good, My Pentax Macro 100mm 2.8 WR in comparison makes you work for it all the time, the FA77 just hits the focus in 0.1 second and nails it. It's the perfect portrait lens, unfortunately i don't do portraits, Still it will never be sold, I have only owned a DSLR for 2months and the FA77 for 2weeks..... I'm not sure the price is justified with the FA, but the results and enjoyment are worth every penny.

09-12-2010, 07:34 PM	#19
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	Originally posted by Pentaxor it's more of a focal length preference actually and how they render at such focal length. cite image comparisons >>> Pentax 77mm und 85mm-Objektive: Test-Portrait The difference between 85mm and 77mm is minimal. If it bothers you that much take 1/2 a step forward with the 77 and voila! As for rendering...they are all excellent - so whatever floats your boat is the one to go with. c[_]

09-12-2010, 08:06 PM	#20
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by WiseOx I haven't used the DA 70, or FA 77, so I won't try and compare....but I do own a SMC Tak 85, which is my favorite lens. One thing I will warn, is the 85 is very unforgiving for MF. Wide open, the DOF is very thin. I will admit I have limited experience with MF, practice will hopefully improve that....or maybe investment in a split screen for my k-7. When you nail it though...it's a magical lens. See more use than my FA 43 in the last few months. Yes, the 85 can be very unforgiving for MF. that is why it is crucial to have a bigger and brighter VF, split/focus screen and a very smooth focusing ring. this is why I sold my Rok 85 as I didn't like the focus ring that much and struggled with it's handling. although the Rok 85 is really a great lens for portraiture, especially it's bokeh rendering which I really liked, the dealbreaker for me was it's MF.

09-13-2010, 03:43 AM	#21
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Another vote here for the FA77, its my #1 lens for magic.

09-13-2010, 05:29 AM	#22
Boris Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Israel Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 932	I have FA 77 limited. In fact I have all three FA limited lenses. They are excellent lenses. Nothing magical about them, however. They are sharp stopped down, reasonably sharp wide open, have smooth rendering of out of focus areas, compact, light, made with quality materials and are pleasant to use. The images that came out of my FA limited lenses (total about 10,000 of them) are only as good as I am as a photographer.

09-13-2010, 05:34 AM	#23
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by TOUGEFC Another vote here for the FA77, its my #1 lens for magic. Nice shot. I think a lot of the "magic" of the FA77 comes from the shallow depth of field and bokeh that is not precisely duplicated with other Pentax lenses. I've taken the same kinds of portraits of children with the FA77 and the DA70 and they weren't quite the same.

09-13-2010, 05:58 AM - 2 Likes	#24
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Originally posted by Boris The images that came out of my FA limited lenses (total about 10,000 of them) are only as good as I am as a photographer. While this may be a popular humanist sentiment, it is also false. In fact, as one gets better as a photographer the little differences in lens rendering, and how one uses these differences, becomes more important, not less. The FA Limiteds were designed by Jun Hirakawa to render differently from all other optimised lenses. We call it "magic" because it's simpler than saying: "Rather than perfectly correcting for field curvature, the FA Limited lenses completely correct astigmatic difference in both meridional and sagittal subject planes, allowing small amounts of field curvature to remain."

09-13-2010, 06:04 AM	#25
Boris Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Israel Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 932	Originally posted by rparmar While this may be a popular humanist sentiment, it is also false. In fact, as one gets better as a photographer the little differences in lens rendering, and how one uses these differences, becomes more important, not less. I don't think it is a proper thread to (re?)start this argument. In my opinion (which naturally could be different than yours, Robin), it takes great amount of experience and thoughtful analysis of results in order to actually understand these little differences and take full advantage of them. Personally, I don't think I am any near to that. Until this happens, FA limited lenses for me are just good lenses, no less and no more. Originally posted by rparmar The FA Limiteds were designed by Jun Hirakawa to render differently from all other optimised lenses. We call it "magic" because it's simpler than saying: "Rather than perfectly correcting for field curvature, the FA Limited lenses completely correct astigmatic difference in both meridional and sagittal subject planes, allowing small amounts of field curvature to remain." Thank you for explanation. Indeed using a single word is better for brevity. Unfortunately, it was chosen to use word "magic" to denote perfectly technical, measurable and rather non-magical things. Evidently, after some time the real underlying meaning of "FA limited lenses magic" becomes forgotten and the hype is born. But then again, I should digress here, so as not to provoke a flame. I am considering producing a write up on the matter and may be starting a separate thread, but not just yet.

09-13-2010, 08:17 AM	#26
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Fair enough Boris, no flame meant. But I should point out that if you feel this is not the proper place for restarting this argument, maybe you should not have done so?

09-13-2010, 08:32 AM	#27
Boris Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Israel Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 932	Valid question indeed, Robin. Having just reread the title of this thread I find my initial reply appropriate. The thread started asked to compare FA 77's magic with other lenses, allegedly not magical (in context of definition given by you). I therefore thought it might be useful to point out that along with magical qualities (potential flame notwithstanding) FA 77 has regular qualities such as sharpness, OOF rendering, build, etc. I am afraid, Robin, that the series of exclamations about the magic overshadow other good non-magical qualities of FA 77 that make it stand out from its peers. Indeed, I should think through that write up and put it either here or in my blog.

09-13-2010, 09:50 AM	#28
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	While I have a decent Tak collection, the FA 77mm is the only lens in that FL that I currently own unless I count the Tamron 90mm. The prices of the S-M-C 85/1.8 is a good part of they way to a FA 77mm ltd. The FA will also work on all my k-mount manual focus and AF bodies. I doe have a Zeiss with no mount.

09-13-2010, 09:52 AM	#29
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	What happens is all 85mm m42 lenses are sought after by the Canon crowd, Pentax Crowd, the 4/3 crowd etc. Even the Auto Tak 85/1.8 prices are currently high.

09-13-2010, 12:35 PM	#30
cdurfor Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Washington, DC Photos: Gallery Posts: 581	Love my FA 77. Funny thing is that unlike all of my other lens, I do not need to adjust the sharpness or color saturation. What comes out of my K200D, is what I want...