Performance of 31 LTD on a FF/film body

*aegisphan* · 10-03-2009, 09:15 AM

After the move to Sony, and with the help of David form Leitax, I can now use the Pentax A 50/1.2 on my A900. I don't do a brick wall test, but I still like the result. At the moment, I'm looking for a better alternative to the Sony 35/1.4. I have two choices: Contax Zeiss 35mm 1.4 or the Pentax 31mm Limited.

I don't know if someone with a Pentax film body can go through a roll of film and let me know how the lens performs on a FF body. I'm most interested in the bokeh, and the corner performance (reasonably soft would be much better than the abysmal corner of the Sony). Thank you in advance.

axl · 10-03-2009, 09:37 AM

I don't have film camera to put FA31 on, so can't help you much there, but wasn't in on film cameras this lens has built it's reputation???

BR
Peter

PS: How are Sony's I was thinking....

*Andi Lo* · 10-03-2009, 09:45 AM

Can't find the link right now but some guy that used the 31 LTD on Canon 5d finds it to be better than his 17-40L at 30mm

I REALLY liked his results color / rendition wise that I'm considering buying the 5D just for my taks

Pentaxor · 10-03-2009, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by aegisphan

After the move to Sony, and with the help of David form Leitax, I can now use the Pentax A 50/1.2 on my A900. I don't do a brick wall test, but I still like the result. At the moment, I'm looking for a better alternative to the Sony 35/1.4. I have two choices: Contax Zeiss 35mm 1.4 or the Pentax 31mm Limited.

I don't know if someone with a Pentax film body can go through a roll of film and let me know how the lens performs on a FF body. I'm most interested in the bokeh, and the corner performance (reasonably soft would be much better than the abysmal corner of the Sony). Thank you in advance.

you'd better pray that Pentax doesn't enter the FF derby.

*Andi Lo* · 10-03-2009, 09:51 AM

I dont really think it matters... when Pentax enters FF he would already have enjoyed the 50 and 31 on FF for months, and we're here sitting ducks waiting or use our lowly ME supers

Out of interest on doing the same... is the conversion reversible? Is there any glass for teleconverting? DO I have to shave the mirror for some lenses like in Canon 5d?

Pentaxor · 10-03-2009, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by Andi Lo

I dont really think it matters... when Pentax enters FF he would already have enjoyed the 50 and 31 on FF for months, and we're here sitting ducks waiting or use our lowly ME supers

Out of interest on doing the same... is the conversion reversible? Is there any glass for teleconverting? DO I have to shave the mirror for some lenses like in Canon 5d?

Andi, I think I saw somewhere that there is actually an adapter for K-mounts on Sony bodies for sale. particularly FF body such as the A900. but given how the A900 performs as an FF body, it doesn't give justice to the Pentax glasses. not to mention that it's expensive as well. question is, does the FF capability justify the costs if it isn't even any better as to IQ and High ISO noise performance?

*aegisphan* · 10-03-2009, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Andi Lo

I dont really think it matters... when Pentax enters FF he would already have enjoyed the 50 and 31 on FF for months, and we're here sitting ducks waiting or use our lowly ME supers

Out of interest on doing the same... is the conversion reversible? Is there any glass for teleconverting? DO I have to shave the mirror for some lenses like in Canon 5d?

The conversion is, fortunately, reversible. You can PM me for further info in which model you're planning to use. There is no mirror shaving. This is the only possible way to adapt Pentax on Sony without the glass adapter

@ Pentaxor:

I don't know what you mean by the A900 wouldn't give justice to the Pentax glasses. It's no doubt that the A900 is a fine camera. And Pentax primes are among the finest. I think it's a very good alternative at this moment. And Sony FF is actually the cheapest option right now. More MP means more detail. IQ-wise, I would say A900 is the equi with other FF anyway. ISO might not be Sony's forte, but personally, I think ISO noise is over-rated.

It depends on your need and budget. I don't doubt that if Pentax comes out with a FF option, there will be more than a few Pentaxians make the FF move.

Pentaxor · 10-03-2009, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by aegisphan

The conversion is, fortunately, reversible. You can PM me for further info in which model you're planning to use. There is no mirror shaving. This is the only possible way to adapt Pentax on Sony without the glass adapter

@ Pentaxor:

I don't know what you mean by the A900 wouldn't give justice to the Pentax glasses. It's no doubt that the A900 is a fine camera. And Pentax primes are among the finest. I think it's a very good alternative at this moment. And Sony FF is actually the cheapest option right now. More MP means more detail. IQ-wise, I would say A900 is the equi with other FF anyway. ISO might not be Sony's forte, but personally, I think ISO noise is over-rated.

It depends on your need and budget. I don't doubt that if Pentax comes out with a FF option, there will be more than a few Pentaxians make the FF move.

well, I don't think that it's IQ is equal to the other FF bodies. I noticed a lot more smearing to the images produced by the A900. even at IS0 800, you would noticed some disturbing noises. more noises, more smearing means more work in post-processing. that's just too much work. I do tend to do a bit of post-processing just for a lil exposure adjustments and HDR processing. of course, having a digital FF body is a dream for Pentax users. since Pentax don't have that yet for digital, some users look for an alternative. even I was even excited to hear and learn about the A850, especially it seems to be more Pentax lens adaptable, cheaper and useable at 12MP for APS-C lens (24MP for FF lens, including pre-DA lenses). I wouldn't hesitate to get one for it as a second body. but the initial results and reports, had me thinking twice of getting one asap. I'll let this one pass for now til it's all clears out. I may get this one once it gets very good and unbiased user reviews after a few months, but I'm not getting the A900.

but if I hear something about Pentax having an FF body due to be released just before I purchase, I would cancel it in a heartbeat.

*kristoffon* · 10-03-2009, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by Andi Lo

Can't find the link right now but some guy that used the 31 LTD on Canon 5d finds it to be better than his 17-40L at 30mm I REALLY liked his results color / rendition wise that I'm considering buying the 5D just for my taks

here

DigitalFotoNetz.de :: Thema anzeigen - Pentax FA 1,8/31 an Canon 5D II

*k100d* · 10-03-2009, 02:08 PM

Pentax FA Limited & Canon 5D!!

*k100d* · 10-03-2009, 02:10 PM

my own stuff on crappy lab scans at what i'm guessing is F1.8. take with a grain of salt.

the skyscraper and brick wall i just did a quick sharpen because the lab scans are soft. the brick wall i was testing vignetting of a polarizer, it's darker on the right side is beside another wall.

*aegisphan* · 10-03-2009, 02:27 PM

Thanks guys. Appreciate your help.

@k100d: Thank you for the shots> I guess I'll look forward to use this lens on my A900.

*Ash* · 10-03-2009, 02:28 PM

Well these look very good, appreciating that the brick wall test isn't perfectly done.
There's no doubt it's a fine FF performer.
Good to go on that FF body ogl's speculating/promoting in 2011!

Pentaxor · 10-03-2009, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by Ash

Well these look very good, appreciating that the brick wall test isn't perfectly done.
There's no doubt it's a fine FF performer.
Good to go on that FF body ogl's speculating/promoting in 2011!

well, that would be enough time to save money for it, don't you think?

Digitalis · 10-03-2009, 08:18 PM

I use the FA31 limited with Kodak t-max 100 and I can say it's an incredible lens, it maintains it's sharpness wide open, with slight softening at the extreme borders. there is vignetting, but the contax 35mm f/1.4 is worse in that regard as I seem to recall, handling of flare is generally excellent..resolution and contrast are superb wide open but when you stop it down f-4-5.6 it's performance is as good as it gets on film. As good as a Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH - yes, it's that good.