28-45 and DFA 35mm

2351HD · 12-25-2017, 05:15 PM

Hi, is there anybody here using both the DA 28-45 and the DFA 35mm lenses? Are they comparable, anything better about either of them?

A local dealer has some xmas deals and I can pick up the 35mm at a good price and have been thinking of getting one to use when travelling so that I do not need to take the 28-45.

I am however dubious of spending more cash on my Pentax 645 system, as there is no way to know where its going and if it is a wise investment.

Clermond · 12-30-2017, 03:20 AM

I had the 35mm first and didn’t use it anymore after I could afford the 28-45. So I sold the 35mm. The only reason to keep or purchase the 35mm is if you have a mechanical tilt shift adapter for a DSLR. The 35mm was too long for a wide angle lens but too short for standard shots, kind of neither fish nor fowl. There is nothing in my eyes what the 28-45 wouldn't cover also.

zobeleye · 01-03-2018, 10:50 AM

Weight is the main difference.Tested them thoroughly together before buying the 35. sharpness and contrast could not be closer, in my testing. So I got the 35, and am very happy with it. Later I got the 28-45 used since I wanted that extra on the wide side and the 25 was too dodgy, from what I heard here. VR is not impressive, but there is definitely sample variation in that regard, from my first testing( very weired ).
Now I have both, but find when getting out hiking, I don't miss the wide end very much, so I opt for the 35mm, and the gained weight lets me take another lens on the long end.
just my 50 percent
cheers
Stephan

12-25-2017, 05:15 PM	#1
2351HD Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 750	28-45 and DFA 35mm Hi, is there anybody here using both the DA 28-45 and the DFA 35mm lenses? Are they comparable, anything better about either of them? A local dealer has some xmas deals and I can pick up the 35mm at a good price and have been thinking of getting one to use when travelling so that I do not need to take the 28-45. I am however dubious of spending more cash on my Pentax 645 system, as there is no way to know where its going and if it is a wise investment.

12-30-2017, 03:20 AM	#2
Clermond New Member Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 13	I had the 35mm first and didn’t use it anymore after I could afford the 28-45. So I sold the 35mm. The only reason to keep or purchase the 35mm is if you have a mechanical tilt shift adapter for a DSLR. The 35mm was too long for a wide angle lens but too short for standard shots, kind of neither fish nor fowl. There is nothing in my eyes what the 28-45 wouldn't cover also. Last edited by Clermond; 12-30-2017 at 04:57 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: (all sold) K-1 body, DFA 15-30, FA77, DFA 28-105, Zeiss ZK 35 f/2	kaspy	Sold Items	16	10-14-2017 09:31 PM
Horizon line detail: 645Z & 28-45, 120 macro, 45-85	Namibchris	Pentax Medium Format	14	03-02-2017 07:18 PM
DFA 28-105 or DFA 100mm?	surfar	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	10-06-2016 08:36 PM
Pentax 100mm 2.8 Macro WR DFA verses DFA, A and FA macro	DSLRnovice	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	29	09-06-2016 06:45 AM
645Z plus matching 90mm DFA macro and 28-45mm DFA zoom for sale.	BostonUKshooter	Pentax Medium Format	11	12-03-2015 01:27 AM

01-03-2018, 10:50 AM	#3
zobeleye Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 85	Weight is the main difference.Tested them thoroughly together before buying the 35. sharpness and contrast could not be closer, in my testing. So I got the 35, and am very happy with it. Later I got the 28-45 used since I wanted that extra on the wide side and the 25 was too dodgy, from what I heard here. VR is not impressive, but there is definitely sample variation in that regard, from my first testing( very weired ). Now I have both, but find when getting out hiking, I don't miss the wide end very much, so I opt for the 35mm, and the gained weight lets me take another lens on the long end. just my 50 percent cheers Stephan

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search