[Wheatfield]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

My lenses are about evenly split. But the large DFA zooms are where I don’t tend to buy since I’m using only apsc with Pentax.

I'm sure there are a lot of older full frame lenses in the hands of APS-C users, but probably not that many of the modern D FA lenses.
I strongly doubt that exclusive full frame shooters have a significant number of DA lenses in their kits.

[nonpigliounoshoot]

I'm sure there are a lot of older full frame lenses in the hands of APS-C users, but probably not that many of the modern D FA lenses.
I strongly doubt that exclusive full frame shooters have a significant number of DA lenses in their kits.

I see the two APSC systems and FF not as alternatives but as complementary. Having a small apsc like k70 is very convenient and practical in many circumstances and it is not excessive cost. I did not sell the k70 when I bought the k1, the proceeds would not have been useful to me compared to the usefulness it will still bring me.
Some DA lenses are more advantageous than others because they can be used in both. The same is true for some FAs or DFAs. Others, on the other hand, lose their meaning and / or do not work. Nice to be able to choose based on the versatility of things. In pentax this thing is possible with satisfaction, I don't think it is the same in other brands.

[UlrichSchiegg]

All the DSLR manufacturers have 2 user bases. We have the APS-C user base and the full frame user base. Equipment wise, there probably isn't much cross talk, even though the formats use the same lens mount. I expect the same holds true for Canon and Nikon.

Most of the enthusiast photographers I know have both systems. There is a lot of cross-talk. And I am sure the DFA 50 was preferred over the DFA 85 because of "cross talk". The long DFA lenses are even longer on APSC (birders, ...). I don't use FF but have quite some DFA lenses. For example I personally find the DA 16-85 with the DFA 24-70 an excellent combination. The 16-85 for outdoors (nature, ...) and the 24-70 @F2.8 for indoors people. For outdoor sports the DFA* 70-200 with the K-3/3 is an excellent combination.

A 21mm makes an excellent APSC lens. The DA limited lens I never found really strong in terms of bokeh, I prefer the FA limited. For example the FA 77mm versus the DA 70mm, to me the FA is the clear winner if you can accept the CAs. In the range of 20 to 77mm for the limited characteristics, the size is not such a big driver. If the 21mm shows similar characteristics as the other FA, I will consider.

[repaap]

Most of the enthusiast photographers I know have both systems. There is a lot of cross-talk. And I am sure the DFA 50 was preferred over the DFA 85 because of "cross talk". The long DFA lenses are even longer on APSC (birders, ...). I don't use FF but have quite some DFA lenses. For example I personally find the DA 16-85 with the DFA 24-70 an excellent combination. The 16-85 for outdoors (nature, ...) and the 24-70 @F2.8 for indoors people. For outdoor sports the DFA* 70-200 with the K-3/3 is an excellent combination.

A 21mm makes an excellent APSC lens. The DA limited lens I never found really strong in terms of bokeh, I prefer the FA limited. For example the FA 77mm versus the DA 70mm, to me the FA is the clear winner if you can accept the CAs. In the range of 20 to 77mm for the limited characteristics, the size is not such a big driver. If the 21mm shows similar characteristics as the other FA, I will consider.

I do agree, I shoot k-3/3 and I used last gig only 16-50(SDM, going to be updated) and DFA*70-200. Very good combo for many things. I shoot also with K-1, not so much anymore, since for me it is a bit cumbersome after K-3/3 did come up. I'm goign to get this DFA 21 after buying 16-50PLM to be used for K-3/3 as well as for K-1. For both it is going to be nice focal lenght

[biz-engineer]

I pre-pre-ordered that lens (pre-ordering of a pre-order). Don't miss out, get ahead in the queue of the pre-orders, by pre-pre-ordering.

[Wheatfield]

Most of the enthusiast photographers I know have both systems. There is a lot of cross-talk. And I am sure the DFA 50 was preferred over the DFA 85 because of "cross talk". The long DFA lenses are even longer on APSC (birders, ...). I don't use FF but have quite some DFA lenses. For example I personally find the DA 16-85 with the DFA 24-70 an excellent combination. The 16-85 for outdoors (nature, ...) and the 24-70 @F2.8 for indoors people. For outdoor sports the DFA* 70-200 with the K-3/3 is an excellent combination.

A 21mm makes an excellent APSC lens. The DA limited lens I never found really strong in terms of bokeh, I prefer the FA limited. For example the FA 77mm versus the DA 70mm, to me the FA is the clear winner if you can accept the CAs. In the range of 20 to 77mm for the limited characteristics, the size is not such a big driver. If the 21mm shows similar characteristics as the other FA, I will consider.

The enthusiasts I know are either shooting one format, or if they are shooting two, it's from different manufacturers. I shoot APS-C, but my brand of choice in that format is Fuji.
Consequently, I have zero cross talk between formats. I suspect this is far more common than people using APS-C and full frame on the same mount, mostly because once one has moved to full frame it's hard to justify going back to APS-C except for the specific instance where APS-C has an advantage. I hung on to my K3 after buying the K1 to give myself extra reach with my long lenses. In 4 years, I used my K3 exactly once. I just couldn't justify the quality loss of APS-C for no apparent reason when I could shoot on full frame.
When I do decide to shoot APS-C, I use the Fuji simply because everything (except the viewfinder) about it is superior to Pentax APS-C.
The Fuji lenses that I own are much better than the Pentax DA lenses of similar focal length.

[elkarrde]

This lens being released in 2021 and the lack of aperture ring means it's probably a KAF4 lens, and I _wish_ it's KAF2 - so I could use it with my MZ-S.
Oh well, it'd be FA20 for me, then!

[Brabian]

Amazon | ?????????????HD PENTAX-D FA 21??F2.4ED Limited DC WR ???? ????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????? HD??????????????????????K?????????????????? | ????????? ??

Not when looked, even on Amazon Japan!

[nonpigliounoshoot]

The enthusiasts I know are either shooting one format, or if they are shooting two, it's from different manufacturers. I shoot APS-C, but my brand of choice in that format is Fuji.
Consequently, I have zero cross talk between formats. I suspect this is far more common than people using APS-C and full frame on the same mount, mostly because once one has moved to full frame it's hard to justify going back to APS-C except for the specific instance where APS-C has an advantage. I hung on to my K3 after buying the K1 to give myself extra reach with my long lenses. In 4 years, I used my K3 exactly once. I just couldn't justify the quality loss of APS-C for no apparent reason when I could shoot on full frame.
When I do decide to shoot APS-C, I use the Fuji simply because everything (except the viewfinder) about it is superior to Pentax APS-C.
The Fuji lenses that I own are much better than the Pentax DA lenses of similar focal length.

I have many doubts that the aps c fuji system is superior to pentax on everything, both as bodies and as lenses. Better for what? There is only one fuji body which is weather sealed and stabilized. Some are stabilized but not tropicalized, others to the opposite, still others none. all bodies are in Pentax.
to these parameters, pentax is objectively better, which does not mean absolute best but only that it is relative. Regarding the goals I don't know which ones you have of pentax. Anyway, even here what does best mean? If you look at the brightness of the stills you will say fuji, if you look at others you will say pentax. I don't think 11-18, 16-50, 35 macro, 70 limited, 55 star, 20-40 limited, 50-135, DA 560 can be any worse. A simple 55-300 has always existed in the pentax house in many versions, even very economical but valid. In fuji, the 70-300 has only recently appeared, more expensive but equally dim. But maybe you don't have these pentax lenses. I am happy to use my 31 and 43 on apsc and on FF, I'm happy to use may 50mm 1.4, 55 1.8 K, 28K 3.5, my DA 12-24 su apsc or FF,inexpensive lenses, easily available, versatile and of excellent quality.
I'm happy to use someone too on ME super, MX or K2. In Fuji there are some problem with analogic... I don't think it disappoints the quality that comes out, and if I had a kp or a k3III it would be even better. Would you bet your house that fuji is better? I wouldn't bet mine that Pentax is, but I'd take your bet, it would be pretty easy to prove to you that what you say is absolutely not true, and that there are good and bad things in both systems. APSC Pentax is already of excellent quality, it is not always necessary to use the FF to have that quality in everyday use, where the wide lens use diaphragms from 5.6 and up are mainly used. What good is a bright lens if it is better to use it at f8, except in special cases? To bite the fish ...

[gatorguy]

The enthusiasts I know are either shooting one format, or if they are shooting two, it's from different manufacturers. I shoot APS-C, but my brand of choice in that format is Fuji.
Consequently, I have zero cross talk between formats. I suspect this is far more common than people using APS-C and full frame on the same mount, mostly because once one has moved to full frame it's hard to justify going back to APS-C except for the specific instance where APS-C has an advantage. I hung on to my K3 after buying the K1 to give myself extra reach with my long lenses. In 4 years, I used my K3 exactly once. I just couldn't justify the quality loss of APS-C for no apparent reason when I could shoot on full frame.
When I do decide to shoot APS-C, I use the Fuji simply because everything (except the viewfinder) about it is superior to Pentax APS-C.
The Fuji lenses that I own are much better than the Pentax DA lenses of similar focal length.

I know we have several members here with both Pentax and Fuji. Heck I've looked at 'em too, about as close to a modern mirrorless Pentax as there is IMO. I'm curious, but not yet enough to buy in. At least for now it makes no sense to me to invest in another set of lenses as good as the ones I already have for my Pentax gear and that more often than not can be used on both FF and APSC. Even if I were to sell off all the Pentax APSC gear I have I wouldn't have enough to replace it with a comparable Fuji and lens kit as far as I can tell.

I don't really have an interest in the new 21 anyway having recently purchased both the new 16-50 and an Irix 12 and have an\ older silver HD Pentax DA 21mm that sits on the shelf unused now for my crops. On a K1 it's a prime that won't fit with my shooting either. At the same time I get that there's a number of our members excited about it, as there's not much option in modern wide-angles for our K-1's

[gatorguy]

I'm sure there are a lot of older full frame lenses in the hands of APS-C users, but probably not that many of the modern D FA lenses.
I strongly doubt that exclusive full frame shooters have a significant number of DA lenses in their kits.

I do, and both the *200 and *300 are great on the K1. My *55 has been pressed into service with it before and performed way above expectations. My Pentax 12-24 is another that's been pretty useful from 17mm and up. To me it just makes economic and stylistic sense to stick with Pentax on both formats rather than trying to learn and invest in two. Saves me enough money to buy better glass than I otherwise could afford if I had to outfit for two disparate ecosystems.

That doesn't mean I'm not curious about Fuji and if I ever have the chance to shoot with an x-T3 or 4 and 56mm lens for a week I'd jump on it just to see what the shooting value is compared to what I have now.

[cfraz]

Well, to me the question is simple : having both FA*24/2 and A20/2.8, both of them using 67mm filter shreads, i don't see much interest for this new and overly "limited" lens (in aperture) having a bigger filter shread "for nothing" at least on a landscaping point of view.

This can be true if and only if you care about aperture and filter size and totally disregard all other lens attributes.

[mbukal]

This lens being released in 2021 and the lack of aperture ring means it's probably a KAF4 lens, and I _wish_ it's KAF2 - so I could use it with my MZ-S.
Oh well, it'd be FA20 for me, then!

hello "house old", knowing you and your specifics I don't think DFA lenses are for you, primarily I mean because of their way of autofocus i.e.KAF4, You use either a screwdriver or a manual focus, or something has changed lately since we haven't heard or seen each other,, nice greetings, have you maybe switched to DSLR FF Pentax

[Kunzite]

I have many doubts that the aps c fuji system is superior to pentax on everything, both as bodies and as lenses. Better for what?

The APS-C Fujifilm system is thoroughly superior to Pentax in one specific area: hype.

[Wheatfield]

I have many doubts that the aps c fuji system is superior to pentax on everything, both as bodies and as lenses. Better for what? There is only one fuji body which is weather sealed and stabilized. Some are stabilized but not tropicalized, others to the opposite, still others none. all bodies are in Pentax.
to these parameters, pentax is objectively better, which does not mean absolute best but only that it is relative. Regarding the goals I don't know which ones you have of pentax. Anyway, even here what does best mean? If you look at the brightness of the stills you will say fuji, if you look at others you will say pentax. I don't think 11-18, 16-50, 35 macro, 70 limited, 55 star, 20-40 limited, 50-135, DA 560 can be any worse. A simple 55-300 has always existed in the pentax house in many versions, even very economical but valid. In fuji, the 70-300 has only recently appeared, more expensive but equally dim. But maybe you don't have these pentax lenses. I am happy to use my 31 and 43 on apsc and on FF, I'm happy to use may 50mm 1.4, 55 1.8 K, 28K 3.5, my DA 12-24 su apsc or FF,inexpensive lenses, easily available, versatile and of excellent quality.
I'm happy to use too it on ME super, MX or K2. In Fuji there are some problem with analogic... I don't think it disappoints the quality that comes out, and if I had a kp or a k3III it would be even better. Would you bet your house that fuji is better? I wouldn't bet mine that Pentax is, but I'd take your bet, it would be pretty easy to prove to you that what you say is absolutely not true, and that there are good and bad things in both systems. APSC Pentax is already of excellent quality, it is not always necessary to use the FF to have that quality in everyday use. where diaphragms from 5.6 and up are mainly used. What good is a bright lens if it is better to use it at f8, except in special cases? To bite the fish ...

Certainly there are good and bad things in both systems, but about the only place that Pentax APS-C may be better than the Fuji APS-C system is in weatherproofing, but that is debatable, as Fuji is now releasing most of their focal lengths as WR lenses, and are listing them as "splashproof". They also advertise in their literature that the rear gasket will be replaced for free by any Fuji service center, something I have yet to see Pentax say anything about.
Fuji now has in body stabilization in one body, others are sure to follow in short order, Pentax has lost that advantage.
As for the lenses, the ones that I have used, it's just no contest. The Fuji 14/2.8 hands down is better than the Pentax DA14/2.8 that I owned. Sharper, nicer rendering, less flare, the Fuji is the better lens. Move to the Limited 15/4 instead, the Fuji is a stop faster, has better corners and less field curvature. As with the 14mm, the same with the 21/ltd compared to the Fuji 23mm The Fuji is f/1.4, the Pentax is f/3.2. That's 2.5 stops that the Pentax is giving up, and the Fuji has nicer rendering and better sharpness, especially wider than f/4. The Pentax is nominally wider, but then, Fuji has both 16 and 18mm lenses, both with WR options.
Pentax STILL doesn't make a really fast standard lens for APS-C, something that should be lens lineup 101. Fuji gets a 35/1.4, which is a little gem, Pentax gets a 35/2.8. While it's an excellent lens, it gives up 2 stops to the Fuji, and gains macro ability of questionable usefulness. It is no better than the Fuji, and much slower. Pentax users can move to the revamped 25 year old design 35/2 of course, but it's still not an f/1.4. I have the older FA35/2, the Fuji lens is, again, a much better performer. I'm not sure if the new version of the FA lens is enough better to give it an edge over the Fuji, but I doubt it. It has a very steep climb to get there, and is still a stop slower.
Pentax has given us the DA*55/1.4, Fuji the 56/1.2. The Fuji again has much nicer rendering (I've owned both and compared directly) is nominally faster, and is at least as sharp wide open. It is also smaller and is guaranteed to not suffer Sudden Death Motor syndrome. Moving up the line, Fuji has the 60/2.4 macro, unanswered by Pentax, and the 80/2.8 macro, which is close enough to the Pentax 100/2.8 macro to be effectively the same. It is also a WR lens.
If you want to talk zooms, I think if you look, you will find Fuji has that covered pretty well also, and if my experience with the shorter primes is an example of comparative quality, Pentax just isn't there.

I won't take your bet, but I don't think there is much contest between the two companies in relation to APS-C. Fuji is simply doing a better job of it.
This isn't bashing Pentax, this is just accepting reality.

---------- Post added Oct 12th, 2021 at 10:35 AM ----------

This can be true if and only if you care about aperture and filter size and totally disregard all other lens attributes.

The FA* 24/2 is good on APS-C, but has weak corners on full frame. The new 21LTD apparently also has a 67mm filter thread, so complaining about it not being the same as the 24/2 or A20/2.8 in this regard is noise with no facts to back it up. I expect the new 21 to have very good to excellent corner performance.

---------- Post added Oct 12th, 2021 at 10:39 AM ----------

The APS-C Fujifilm system is thoroughly superior to Pentax in one specific area: hype.

X System | Fujifilm [Canada]

That and number of models, number of lenses, etc.