Pentax A 35-70 F4 and A 70-210 F4

[dave_dejoy]

<p>I am using these lenses with my Pentax DSLR. I would like some opinions about image quality with these and what might be better, especially in the 17-70 or thereabouts range. Thanks.</p>

[stemked]

<p>The 70-210 A is a very good lens, very sharp across the range. Sorry, that's all I can offer you.</p>

[trw]

<p>If you're mainly using the 17-70 range, the DA 17-70 f4 <em>might</em> be better in that it's autofocus and coated for digital sensors. I found that I got more keepers from my DA 50-200 than my A 70-210 f4, mainly due to it being autofocus.</p>

<p>Check out the PhotoZone review of the 17-70 <a href="http://www.photozone.de/pentax/408-pentax_1770_4">here</a>.</p>

[thebs]

<p>Just remember the DA 17-70 is a KAF3 mount, no screw and requires SDM, so be sure to have a K10D, K200D or later. Otherwise, it's definitely the lens to get at f/4. Pairing it with the old A 70-210 f/4 or newer DA 55-300 f/4-5.8 is a good option, depending on how much AF v. speed means to you.</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>The DA 17-70mm is probably the best-performing one out there, but the Sigma 17-70mm is no slouch either. It enjoys a high customer satisfaction rating and it is much less costly, and more compact.</p>

<p>A Sigma or Pentax 17-70mm and the Pentax DA 55-300mm would be a very nice combo.</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I own all the lenses mentioned here so far. What you have is already pretty good. I am a big fan of the A35-70/4, which offered a really useful 1:3 macro at 70mm, less so of the A70-210/4 despite its good optical reputation, mostly because I don't care for its size/weight/push-pull design. Other than the obvious lack of autofocus, one of the bigger drawbacks of these lenses operationally is that they don't report focal length to the body so you have to update the focal length manually when you zoom for SR to work optimally. It also doesn't indicate the length in EXIF if that's at all important to you.</p>

<p>The DA17-70/4 is a very good lens, assuming that your body supports SDM (as Bryan mentioned). Bryan's recommendation of pairing with DA 55-300/4-5.8 is an excellent suggestion. The only zoom I have that might be a little better (at least at 70mm) than the DA17-70 is the FA24-90/3.5-4.5, but we're not talking about that big a difference. The draw for me was of course constant f/4, extends into portrait range (70mm/105mm equiv), and that it can be an 'only lens' for one-lens travel. It's well built, noticeably better than the DA16-45/4. I am not thoroughly convinced on SDM--it's quiet, and pretty fast but I think I might have *<em>slightly*</em> more trouble locking on in low light compared to some of my other lenses like FA24-90/3.5-4.5 or F28-80/3.5-4.5, both of which are actually 1/3 stop slower at 70mm. I do like the quick-shift focusing available with DA lenses. Note that the 55-300 isn't much slower than that A70-210/4, as it's still f/4.5 until close to 200mm, and f/5.8 is only at >280mm or so.</p>

<p>The other choice for 17-70 is the Sigma 2.8-4.5, which is less expensive than the Pentax. Reputation is fairly good but I think the DA16-45/4, DA17-70/4, and FA24-90/3.5-4.5 are probably better. Michael says it's more compact--it is a few grams lighter, and 1cm shorter, but takes larger 72mm filters rather than 67mm so it's not all that different.</p>

<p>If you don't need the widest part of the zoom, in addition to the 24-90, some forum members like the Tamron 28-75/2.8. I have used a Sigma 24-60/2.8 EX that I find good, but other than availability of f/2.8 I found it better than the three Pentax zooms I just mentioned. In addition to being a little bulky (77mm filter), the Sigma colors tend to be a little cooler, and the focusing & zoom rings operate in the opposite direction from Pentax glass.</p>

[shaloot]

<p>Great info you're providing Andrew... making me head spinning dreaming about that lens now! I noticed on the review section for the 17-70 on B & H people are talking about how its weather-sealed... I thought only DA* were weathersealed? But then you and others are saying it's SDM, and I thought those are also only DA*? My DA 18-55 is a screw drive, so Pentax has DA's which are sdm?<br>

Or is B & H just forgetting to put the little asterix in the title? If it really is weather sealed and sdm, then the price on b & h is quite good.... sorry adorama/photo net, yours is a little pricey (But hey, I bought my FA50 from you!).</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Somanna, Pentax are looking to the future, where all lenses will be SDM and make you coffee in the morning. The DA 17-70 is <em>NOT</em> weather-sealed (only the DA* and DA WR lenses are weather-sealed), but it <em>IS</em> an SDM lens. Unlike the DA* however, it does not feature screwdrive focusing, so it is <em>ONLY</em> SDM. You can only use it (with working AF) on the K100D Super, K200D, K2000/K-m, K10/20D and K-7.</p>

[shaloot]

<p>I knew it was too good to be true... Pentax doesn't spoil us like that! So unfortunately all those reviewers are thinking its weather sealed and taking it out in the heavy rain and such. And then when it fails they'll quip on how poor the weather sealing is...<br>

Mis, you should <a href="http://enticingthelight.wordpress.com/"><em>enlighten</em> </a> the masses about a potential huge mistake happening over at B & H!</p>

<p>(notice the plug for your blog? You're welcome.)</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I seem to recall that the DA17-70/4 might have a partial seal with a gasket on the mount--but no, not completely weather-resistant. As Mis noted, it is the first SDM-only Pentax lens. It has a good build but not quite DA* good. I rank it among the better of the DA builds--DA12-24, 55-300, 17-70 excellent. 50-200 and 10-17 above average. 16-45 and 18-55 a little less good. Differences can be subtle but it comes down to the materials used and the feel of the zoom, focus, and hood.</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Somanna, I read <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/567353-USA/Pentax_21740_SMCP_DA_17_70mm_f_4_AL.html#reviews">the reviews at B&H</a> and I could only find one guy who wrote anything that could be misconstrued as meaning the lens is WR [emphasis mine]:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>This is a main general purpose lens I use in a variety of shooting situations <strong>including inclement weather</strong> , florals, landscapes,and seascapes..to name a few indeavors.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Nobody else seems to say it's WR. Are we reading different reviews?</p>

 

[shaloot]

<p>I'm sorry about that... I really thought there were more... hmm. But all it takes is one bad customer, right?!<br>

And I goofed on the pricing... Adorama is cheaper by $10.00 when you click on the price!<br>

Just day full of inaccuracies I'm having....</p>