DA 17-70 vs DFA 28-105
Posted 16/02/2017 - 10:08
Link
I've reviewed both for EPZ and the 28-105mm I found to be a much better lens.
Best regards, John
Posted 16/02/2017 - 12:29
Link
Isn't that a bit like comparing apples with oranges? One's an APS-C lens, the other is full frame. Either would be best for its intended purpose. On APS-C you couldn't achieve 17mm with a 28mm lens. On FF the 17mm will vignette.
John K
Posted 16/02/2017 - 13:05
Link
JAK wrote:
Isn't that a bit like comparing apples with oranges? One's an APS-C lens, the other is full frame. Either would be best for its intended purpose. On APS-C you couldn't achieve 17mm with a 28mm lens. On FF the 17mm will vignette.
Isn't that a bit like comparing apples with oranges? One's an APS-C lens, the other is full frame. Either would be best for its intended purpose. On APS-C you couldn't achieve 17mm with a 28mm lens. On FF the 17mm will vignette.
I think of it as comparing two standard zooms, each in relation to its own format, which I do feel is a valid comparison.
Best regards, John
Posted 16/02/2017 - 13:32
Link
johnriley wrote:
I've reviewed both for EPZ and the 28-105mm I found to be a much better lens.
I've reviewed both for EPZ and the 28-105mm I found to be a much better lens.
woah thanks, I will consider to buy it then.
Posted 16/02/2017 - 13:34
Link
JAK wrote:
Isn't that a bit like comparing apples with oranges? One's an APS-C lens, the other is full frame. Either would be best for its intended purpose. On APS-C you couldn't achieve 17mm with a 28mm lens. On FF the 17mm will vignette.
Isn't that a bit like comparing apples with oranges? One's an APS-C lens, the other is full frame. Either would be best for its intended purpose. On APS-C you couldn't achieve 17mm with a 28mm lens. On FF the 17mm will vignette.
in a given sense you are right, but it's still possible to compare the quality of the FF image against the cropped one, just to have an idea.
Posted 16/02/2017 - 15:34
Link
For APS-C don't discount the 16-85 as its a more recent fine lens too with a wider range.
As to the other point, the 17-70 on APS-C is a wide to moderate telephoto, whereas the 28-105 is a standard to medium telephoto so they are not directly comparable IMO. Probably worth having both!
Alternatively look at the 18-135mm.
As to the other point, the 17-70 on APS-C is a wide to moderate telephoto, whereas the 28-105 is a standard to medium telephoto so they are not directly comparable IMO. Probably worth having both!
Alternatively look at the 18-135mm.
John K
Posted 16/02/2017 - 16:16
Link
The 28-105 on the K-1 would be much nicer than a 17-70 on the K-3 in terms of sharpness and depth of field (the D-FA feels like a 17-70 f/2.8 - 4 lens if you're used to APS-C).
The field of view of both lenses on their respective systems is the same.
If used on APS-C then I would look at the 16-85 as it has a more useful range.
The field of view of both lenses on their respective systems is the same.
If used on APS-C then I would look at the 16-85 as it has a more useful range.
All the gear with no idea
Posted 16/02/2017 - 16:50
Link
I want a comparison of the DFA on the K1 with the 17-70 on a cropped sensor. You answered my question overall. Thank you.
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
597 posts
13 years
Southsea