[bhairavp]

K-r and 35mm F2.4 have arrived!

Check out Chris's post about half way down the thread. No vignetting on an ME Super.

This just lends credence to the theory that it is a redesigned FA35..

[Biro]

That's great if it's true... but it makes me scratch my head even harder over why they reduced the aperture from f/2.0 to f/2.4. It's not like the FA 35 wasn't pretty sharp wide open anyway.

[Pentaxor]

That's great if it's true... but it makes me scratch my head even harder over why they reduced the aperture from f/2.0 to f/2.4. It's not like the FA 35 wasn't pretty sharp wide open anyway.

that's pretty odd indeed. unless they are cutting the costs or making an affordable 35mm lens.

although my feeling on this one is rather that Pentax was concerned of making it an F2 would cannibalize the sales of the FA31, DA35 and DA40 (maybe include the FA43 as well). IMO, I think it may already cannibalize the slower DA35, and DA40 ( FA43 maybe?).

[DSims]

That's great if it's true... but it makes me scratch my head even harder over why they reduced the aperture from f/2.0 to f/2.4. It's not like the FA 35 wasn't pretty sharp wide open anyway.

Because the FA35 never had good image quality at f/2 anyway, in my experience. While many quality midrange Pentax primes only need to be stopped down 1/3 stop, this needed 2/3 of a stop - sometime even a full stop. I don't think I ever got a good image at less than f/2.5 with it.

Truthfully, this is what I suspected all along (that it was essentially a repackaged FA35) so this makes perfect sense. Now it may perform well wide open! Plus the prices of the FA35 were getting too high. I think this is great news, personally. Unless one needs the aperture ring, this is smart buy, and Pentax finally has an affordable prime again!

If these reports are accurate (since I haven't checked them out for myself) I'd say only Nikon has something that can compete. Its nice 35/1.8 may be better, and certainly has DOF advantages, but Nikon lacks any in-body Shake Reduction, so the Pentax may still win in some situations.

[Pentaxor]

Because the FA35 never had good image quality at f/2 anyway, in my experience. While many quality midrange Pentax primes only need to be stopped down 1/3 stop, this needed 2/3 of a stop - sometime even a full stop. I don't think I ever got a good image at less than f/2.5 with it.

Truthfully, this is what I suspected all along (that it was essentially a repackaged FA35) so this makes perfect sense. Now it may perform well wide open! Plus the prices of the FA35 were getting too high. I think this is great news, personally. Unless one needs the aperture ring, this is smart buy, and Pentax finally has an affordable prime again!

If these reports are accurate (since I haven't checked them out for myself) I'd say only Nikon has something that can compete. Its nice 35/1.8 may be better, and certainly has DOF advantages, but Nikon lacks any in-body Shake Reduction, so the Pentax may still win in some situations.

probably something like the K55/1.8 and K55/2.

number of optics and blades are the same. size is mostly the same. mfd and weight are close. the only thing that are of significant differences are the MF ring, aperture ring and F2 for the FA. and build/WR, quickshift and MF ring for the DA. for $200 bucks, it's quite a bargain already.

[axl]

.... and build/WR, quickshift and MF ring for the DA. for $200 bucks, it's quite a bargain already.

I didn't think it has neither WR, neither quickshift

[RBellavance]

Because the FA35 never had good image quality at f/2 anyway, in my experience. While many quality midrange Pentax primes only need to be stopped down 1/3 stop, this needed 2/3 of a stop - sometime even a full stop. I don't think I ever got a good image at less than f/2.5 with it.

This is contrary to my own experience, and to the popular wisdom about the FA35/2: it is one of the few lenses that can be used wide open without fear.

[Pentaxor]

I didn't think it has neither WR, neither quickshift

I see it doesn't look to have quickshift. but the WR feature seems to be not totally there since the front element have an SP coating which is a unique feature of WR lenses. I would think the lens can be used under the weather. otherwise it's pointless to have the SP coating on. also, basing from the image of the lens, it looks pretty tight and secured.

[axl]

SP coating simply means less muck on the front element. No WR... IMHO. If it was WR lens then for the price and with indicated FF compatibility and IQ as shown by first samples, this little beauty would be a STEAL! Sadly, I think the WR is wishful thinking only IMO. But I have a contact on the guy who runs srs (the same guy who slapped the lens on the film camera) so I'll try to ask him about things...

[nater]

This is contrary to my own experience, and to the popular wisdom about the FA35/2: it is one of the few lenses that can be used wide open without fear.

The objective tests I've seen back that up (though the lens, like most every lens, improves as it's stopped down).

According to the Lenstip review, "Even at the maximum relative aperture the results are useful - at the level of 30 lpmm." (Photozon's review turned in similar results.) While chromatic aberrations do rise quickly (hitting close to peak by f/4), they don't exceed 0.11%. Coma does start a bit high at f/2 though, and does decrease a lot by f/2.8. Vignetting also practically disappears by f/2.8.

If the 35mm f/2.4 lens is the same optical design, f/2.4 will certainly deliver better image quality than f/2, especially in regards to coma and vignetting.

[axl]

This is contrary to my own experience, and to the popular wisdom about the FA35/2: it is one of the few lenses that can be used wide open without fear.

I never had FA35 but all I've read agrees with statement above! The only complains were OOF rendering

[Pentaxor]

I never had FA35 but all I've read agrees with statement above! The only complains were OOF rendering

true. fwiw, the FA35 is a strong lens for anything with defined background or ultimately for architectures and landscapes. it only somehow lacks that portrait efficiency that other fast lenses possess. bokeh-wise, the 50/2 has a lot better bokeh. sharpness-wise, the FA35 just cuts.

[Biro]

The following quote is an excerpt from Pentax's news relase about the DA 18-135mm lens:

"Rounded diaphragm to produce beautiful bokeh. The lens features a completely rounded diaphragm to produce a natural, beautiful bokeh (out-of-focus) effect, while minimising the streaking effect of point light sources."

Could this same rounded diaphragm be used on the new DA 35mm f/2.4? Probably not as it's not mentioned in the release for the prime. But it would go a long way toward improving the bokeh.

[Pentaxor]

The following quote is an excerpt from Pentax's news relase about the DA 18-135mm lens:

"Rounded diaphragm to produce beautiful bokeh. The lens features a completely rounded diaphragm to produce a natural, beautiful bokeh (out-of-focus) effect, while minimising the streaking effect of point light sources."

Could this same rounded diaphragm be used on the new DA 35mm f/2.4? Probably not as it's not mentioned in the release for the prime. But it would go a long way toward improving the bokeh.

although you need some good lighting or nice HIGH-ISO camera if ever you are going to use it for lowlights. probably the K-5 will come in handy. also hope that the bokeh will be awesome. if it's does and it has great IQ rendering, it could end the need for the 3 DA* zooms, the 18-55 kitlens, DA 16-45, and probably the DA 18-250.

[Blue]

that's pretty odd indeed. unless they are cutting the costs or making an affordable 35mm lens.

although my feeling on this one is rather that Pentax was concerned of making it an F2 would cannibalize the sales of the FA31, DA35 and DA40 (maybe include the FA43 as well). IMO, I think it may already cannibalize the slower DA35, and DA40 ( FA43 maybe?).

The diameter of the elements in the DA 35/2.4 are 1mm less than those in the FA 35/2. Both received the Ghostless Coating according to Japanese literature. Plus, the DA lacks the aperture ring so it probably has as much to do with the new aperture control mechanism as much as anything else.