Advice? - Pick one only: D-FA 24-70mm f2.8 vs D-FA* 50mm f1.4

pblogic · 04-20-2023, 05:16 PM

I'm in the same conundrum. I'm not overly impressed with the 24-70, but it has a lot of utility. I'm very impressed by the HD FA 50mm and HD FA 85mm..... I really wonder if the better bet is the 85mm or 50mm plus something like the HD SMC FA 35mm for wide shots. The 24- 70, being the re-badged tamron that it is, just isn't good enough to justify the price. I wish Pentax would release a * 24-70. The APSC 16-50 is excellent. I continue to worry about Pentax's commitment to full frame. I'm worried we aren't going to see any more full frame development from them, in bodies or lenses.

**mikesbike** · 04-20-2023, 07:39 PM

Originally posted by pblogic

not overly impressed with the 24-70, but it has a lot of utility.

Yup! It can do a fine job when needed. Of course it is not a top-notch fast prime lens. Nor can those do what a very good fast zoom lens does best. The new DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 PLM is not really up to the standards and aperture capability of best of primes either. It has its imperfections. It would be interesting to compare it's imaging on a K-3 III with the imaging of the DFA 24-70 on a K-1 II. The K-1 II's 36mp advantage should prevail for the same framed shot from the same distance.

pblogic · 04-20-2023, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by mikesbike

Yup! It can do a fine job when needed. Of course it is not a top-notch fast prime lens. Nor can those do what a very good fast zoom lens does best. The new DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 PLM is not really up to the standards and aperture capability of best of primes either. It has its imperfections. It would be interesting to compare it's imaging on a K-3 III with the imaging of the DFA 24-70 on a K-1 II. The K-1 II's 36mp advantage should prevail for the same framed shot from the same distance.

Yes, the compromises of a zoom lens are definitely not limited to the 24-70, or Pentax. However, there have been some good releases in this focal range from other brands recently. I would love to see an updated 24-70 with a * rating at some point. It's hard for me to give up the performance of primes for the convenience of a zoom, but I'm still seriously considering giving this one a try. It's hard to convince myself though... I still might rather swap between a 35 and 50 rather than have 24-70.

**epfler** · 04-24-2023, 06:05 PM

I try to avoid this culture of exclusivity - this! and only this! ... and since decennies I avoided, so to say, the normal lens. This is a big world with many aspects, waiting for being uncovered. Ever more and again and again, in move. Say, it needs two, at least. Looked at the one, now, how does the other look like. Or so.

Far away in time I had Nikkors, a 35/f3.5 and a 85/f2. Later with Contax a Distagon 28/2.0 (yes that one, but I didn't care) and a Planar 135/2.0. In times of data crazyness now thiose sit on an Oly-Pen. Before times of pixel peeking it was easier to get excited about fine quality, not because of a good name and talk about endless perfection, but beause of obvious results to be seen. Growing into postprocesssing now, (as I was used to darkroom practise before), I found the Foveons appalling - liost a DP1 (which is 28mm equivalent), and after a DP2 there was a pair again, the DP1M (28mm) and DP3M (75mm). Continuity preserved.

Questions arose - not around the like: will that thing deliver the best and the ultimative - ... but just the opposite: is there missing something? So for quite some time, noe with the K1, I found the Tokina 28-70 sometimes to deliver, but sometimes not. Found the old M35-70 in comparison then, which would deliver quite more often.

Made some comparisons from published pics the other day, with the DFA 24-70, against the DFA 28-105, but even if the latter has its audience, I would not go there if I had the choice (I loolked around beause of WR). Very second hand so to say, just from viewing, I found more fine approaches with the 24-70 in such terms, jist to deliver. But ok .. I am spoled now anyway, with fine pairs again, as the FA31 and the old K135f2.5 (and for more such kind of exercise, FA*24 against FA*85). Found hardly a situation where those would not deliver (except the FA*24 which requires some special attention).

This is rather not a technical question ... for this one, the DFA 50 Macro would give me an answer, this is precision like crazy, as I'll hardly ever need it. It's for me more a question of taste and approach, when asking if thiat thing delivers. But when having found a lot of nice situations for the FA31,. suddenly the astonishing M35-70 sits around and delivers better, for some situations encountered.

Btw for about WR when having used for quite some years those Foveons, I found, no, those are not declared as water resistant but quality of build would help tolerate quite some bad weather. when taking general care a bit. But other way round, with that Contax in some former time use, I learnt afterwards, that quality of build has not been sufficient in this regards, moisture had crept in and made some problems much later. In times of delicate mechanics this might have been more critical anyway. Those Foveons would have resisted similar conditions better.

But I would not expose stuff to some real rain with non-WR stuff anyway. So I looked if the DFA 28-105 would be an alternative - and I found, against those FA31, K135 and even the M35-70, there was not real need for a DFA 24-70 to come in, except for built-in resilience, but maybe I do not want to know for real.

Just a personal view. Maybe there is very wet seasons ahead, who knows, so to reconsider.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: FA* 80-200 f2.8, FA* 28-70 f2.8, FA* 24 f2, FA 43 f1.9, M 50 f1.7, K-7, AF-540FGZ	JerryFu	Sold Items	6	02-25-2019 10:47 AM
Nature Pick me,Pick me,Pick me.	Sqideyes	Post Your Photos!	4	12-08-2018 05:44 AM
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs.......	Steelski	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	2	06-28-2017 04:59 PM
[Asking]SMC Pentax K 50mm f1/4 VS Pentax-M 50mm f1.4 VS Pentax-M 50mm f1.7 ?	liemjerry	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	24	07-08-2015 04:23 PM
Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 IF EX DG HSM - VS - Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG Macro	Braciola	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	10-15-2010 04:54 AM

04-20-2023, 05:16 PM	#46
pblogic Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Illinois, USA Posts: 141	I'm in the same conundrum. I'm not overly impressed with the 24-70, but it has a lot of utility. I'm very impressed by the HD FA 50mm and HD FA 85mm..... I really wonder if the better bet is the 85mm or 50mm plus something like the HD SMC FA 35mm for wide shots. The 24- 70, being the re-badged tamron that it is, just isn't good enough to justify the price. I wish Pentax would release a * 24-70. The APSC 16-50 is excellent. I continue to worry about Pentax's commitment to full frame. I'm worried we aren't going to see any more full frame development from them, in bodies or lenses.

04-20-2023, 07:39 PM	#47
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	Originally posted by pblogic not overly impressed with the 24-70, but it has a lot of utility. Yup! It can do a fine job when needed. Of course it is not a top-notch fast prime lens. Nor can those do what a very good fast zoom lens does best. The new DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 PLM is not really up to the standards and aperture capability of best of primes either. It has its imperfections. It would be interesting to compare it's imaging on a K-3 III with the imaging of the DFA 24-70 on a K-1 II. The K-1 II's 36mp advantage should prevail for the same framed shot from the same distance.

04-20-2023, 09:18 PM	#48
pblogic Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Illinois, USA Posts: 141	Originally posted by mikesbike Yup! It can do a fine job when needed. Of course it is not a top-notch fast prime lens. Nor can those do what a very good fast zoom lens does best. The new DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 PLM is not really up to the standards and aperture capability of best of primes either. It has its imperfections. It would be interesting to compare it's imaging on a K-3 III with the imaging of the DFA 24-70 on a K-1 II. The K-1 II's 36mp advantage should prevail for the same framed shot from the same distance. Yes, the compromises of a zoom lens are definitely not limited to the 24-70, or Pentax. However, there have been some good releases in this focal range from other brands recently. I would love to see an updated 24-70 with a * rating at some point. It's hard for me to give up the performance of primes for the convenience of a zoom, but I'm still seriously considering giving this one a try. It's hard to convince myself though... I still might rather swap between a 35 and 50 rather than have 24-70.

04-24-2023, 06:05 PM	#49
epfler Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2020 Posts: 4	I try to avoid this culture of exclusivity - this! and only this! ... and since decennies I avoided, so to say, the normal lens. This is a big world with many aspects, waiting for being uncovered. Ever more and again and again, in move. Say, it needs two, at least. Looked at the one, now, how does the other look like. Or so. Far away in time I had Nikkors, a 35/f3.5 and a 85/f2. Later with Contax a Distagon 28/2.0 (yes that one, but I didn't care) and a Planar 135/2.0. In times of data crazyness now thiose sit on an Oly-Pen. Before times of pixel peeking it was easier to get excited about fine quality, not because of a good name and talk about endless perfection, but beause of obvious results to be seen. Growing into postprocesssing now, (as I was used to darkroom practise before), I found the Foveons appalling - liost a DP1 (which is 28mm equivalent), and after a DP2 there was a pair again, the DP1M (28mm) and DP3M (75mm). Continuity preserved. Questions arose - not around the like: will that thing deliver the best and the ultimative - ... but just the opposite: is there missing something? So for quite some time, noe with the K1, I found the Tokina 28-70 sometimes to deliver, but sometimes not. Found the old M35-70 in comparison then, which would deliver quite more often. Made some comparisons from published pics the other day, with the DFA 24-70, against the DFA 28-105, but even if the latter has its audience, I would not go there if I had the choice (I loolked around beause of WR). Very second hand so to say, just from viewing, I found more fine approaches with the 24-70 in such terms, jist to deliver. But ok .. I am spoled now anyway, with fine pairs again, as the FA31 and the old K135f2.5 (and for more such kind of exercise, FA24 against FA85). Found hardly a situation where those would not deliver (except the FA*24 which requires some special attention). This is rather not a technical question ... for this one, the DFA 50 Macro would give me an answer, this is precision like crazy, as I'll hardly ever need it. It's for me more a question of taste and approach, when asking if thiat thing delivers. But when having found a lot of nice situations for the FA31,. suddenly the astonishing M35-70 sits around and delivers better, for some situations encountered. Btw for about WR when having used for quite some years those Foveons, I found, no, those are not declared as water resistant but quality of build would help tolerate quite some bad weather. when taking general care a bit. But other way round, with that Contax in some former time use, I learnt afterwards, that quality of build has not been sufficient in this regards, moisture had crept in and made some problems much later. In times of delicate mechanics this might have been more critical anyway. Those Foveons would have resisted similar conditions better. But I would not expose stuff to some real rain with non-WR stuff anyway. So I looked if the DFA 28-105 would be an alternative - and I found, against those FA31, K135 and even the M35-70, there was not real need for a DFA 24-70 to come in, except for built-in resilience, but maybe I do not want to know for real. Just a personal view. Maybe there is very wet seasons ahead, who knows, so to reconsider.