Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-07-2010, 01:30 PM   #61
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
And if you look at the MTF from photozone by f2.8 the 43 is just as sharp as 40....
Actually Peter, on the mtf charts by f/2.8 the fa43 is already skyrocketing in sharpness leaving the da40 behind.

11-07-2010, 01:47 PM   #62
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,777
QuoteOriginally posted by TOUGEFC Quote
Actually Peter, on the mtf charts by f/2.8 the fa43 is already skyrocketing in sharpness leaving the da40 behind.
It's hard to skyrocket from excellent to excellent. These are both superb lenses and any differences in resolution would hardly be noticed outside an MTF test.
11-07-2010, 02:10 PM   #63
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
It's hard to skyrocket from excellent to excellent. These are both superb lenses and any differences in resolution would hardly be noticed outside an MTF test.
I think this would be more obvious and useful especially for cropped images. especially something shot at around midrange to infinity. in close-focus or close distances, the difference don't show that much. hence, the limiting factor.

as you said, both lenses are superb and I concur to this. having said that, eventhough they are both superb, it doesn't mean they dont vary from each other. this was the point raised during the discussion, and paperbag does have some difficulty accepting the facts with regards to IQ compromises between lenses overshadowed by cost-efficiency and personal preferences.

Last edited by Pentaxor; 11-07-2010 at 02:21 PM.
11-07-2010, 02:29 PM   #64
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by TOUGEFC Quote
Actually Peter, on the mtf charts by f/2.8 the fa43 is already skyrocketing in sharpness leaving the da40 behind.
Yes but while this is statistically significant, I'm not so sure that it is practically significant. The point is that both lenses score very high in the sharpness category. "Skyrocketing" is maybe an exaggeration. To put this in perspective, the difference between 1 and 50 is relatively greater than the difference between 1001 and 1050. Neither lens is a slouch, and while the 43 is sharper, you reach a point where the difference in quality becomes less and less noticeable.

Furthermore, I would suggest that the renderings of the out of focus areas is a subjective thing in those pictures. I personally find the 43 more blurry, but also more distracting. The DA 40's out of focus areas are a smooth transition from the in focus areas TO ME. YMMV. I would not suggest that anyone else should select a lens on my biases.

QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
IQ compromises between lenses overshadowed by cost-efficiency
While I will admit to being stubborn, I think cost-efficiency might be the most important factor here. Yes, IQ differences exist. A price difference exists as well, and I think that the IQ differences might be a *little* (ok, a lot) exaggerated. Most people may not care about the sharpness difference between these lenses if they weren't told over and over online that one measures higher than the other! Having people push the most expensive option on others because of some difference they may never see on their own is not a good thing to do and I am standing up against it. I believe the DA 40 was designed and optimized for digital, has actual perceptible strengths above the FA 43, and should be something the OP should seriously consider if he is tight on cash and wants to make a wise purchase.

This is the crux of my argument. Look at the photographs, and decide for yourself.


Last edited by paperbag846; 11-07-2010 at 02:46 PM.
11-07-2010, 02:38 PM - 1 Like   #65
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,777
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
I think this would be more obvious and useful especially for cropped images. especially something shot at around midrange to infinity. in close-focus or close distances, the difference don't show that much. hence, the limiting factor.

as you said, both lenses are superb and I concur to this. having said that, eventhough they are both superb, it doesn't mean they dont vary from each other. this was the point raised during the discussion, and paperbag does have some difficulty with regards to IQ compromises between lenses overshadowed by cost-efficiency and personal preferences.
Your mileage may vary, but my personal experience is that once I have lenses with MTF scores like these, I would need a crop of a shot from a tripod at just the right distance and very short shutter speed and low ISO before differences in this kinds of excellent performers will show. It may happen, but not often enough to be much of a factor.

In a similar vein, the MTF score for my FA35/2 surpasses the MTF score for the DA 40 at F4 by about the same amount as the maximum difference between the DA40 and the FA43. I have yet to come across a real-world situation where that made a difference. In fact, it is very difficult to see the difference even in shots of newspapers.

Last edited by GeneV; 11-07-2010 at 02:46 PM.
11-07-2010, 03:14 PM   #66
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote

I personally find the 43 more blurry, but also more distracting. The DA 40's out of focus areas are a smooth transition from the in focus areas TO ME. YMMV. I would not suggest that anyone else should select a lens on my biases.
you need to show more and better samples to illustrate this. basing on a few test shots would be inconclusive and would not be taken as hard fact. you might think that test shots are easy but they aren't. I had performed initial and in-depth tests, the latter being the best basis since all elements are most likely taken into account but takes a lot of work. shooting distances, angles, aperture opening, lighting setup, and so forth and so on.

the danger is when people perform initial test shots and the viewers would take those shots as conclusive. for me, it is better if the person tries both lenses and see for themselves shooting at those set parameters and conditions.

on a sidenote: I somehow remember a similar discussion before about the Pentax 50/1.4 and 50/1.2. of the optical difference, budget or cost, preference, IQ rendering and so forth and so on. and so far, in general, most of those who were not into the 1.2 lens, never had nor tried the lens itself. and they come complaining because they cant afford it nor want to buy it because of the priceand that the 1.4 is more than enough. but would be all over it if it were priced as much as the 50/1.4. somehow a hypocrisy if you ask me. I would strongly believe it would be the same if the FA43 is priced along the the DA40. between DA40 and FA43 at $270 or $350 bucks, I would bet my house if majority of the forum members here would choose the DA40 over the FA43. for the same price, why would one choose the FA43 now if the difference is negligible between the two lenses?

Last edited by Pentaxor; 11-07-2010 at 03:37 PM.
11-07-2010, 03:22 PM   #67
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
Your mileage may vary, but my personal experience is that once I have lenses with MTF scores like these, I would need a crop of a shot from a tripod at just the right distance and very short shutter speed and low ISO before differences in this kinds of excellent performers will show. It may happen, but not often enough to be much of a factor.

In a similar vein, the MTF score for my FA35/2 surpasses the MTF score for the DA 40 at F4 by about the same amount as the maximum difference between the DA40 and the FA43. I have yet to come across a real-world situation where that made a difference. In fact, it is very difficult to see the difference even in shots of newspapers.
of course, the difference would not be as obvious at close focus. this would what separates both lenses when it comes to extended focus range. I did a similar test with the DA18-55 at 35mm at f4-f5.6 against the FA35 at MFT, and both displayed almost identical results. the difference shows as you move further. same as the fast 50's I have. the 50/1.7 and 50/2. both were excellent doing newspaper shots at close range but the difference in resolution showed as I moved further away.
11-07-2010, 03:29 PM   #68
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,777
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
of course, the difference would not be as obvious at close focus. this would what separates both lenses when it comes to extended focus range. I did a similar test with the DA18-55 at 35mm at f4-f5.6 against the FA35 at MFT, and both displayed almost identical results. the difference shows as you move further. same as the fast 50's I have. the 50/1.7 and 50/2. both were excellent doing newspaper shots at close range but the difference in resolution showed as I moved further away.
I understand that completely, and I'm not saying you or I can't do a test which will show the difference. I've compared the FA35 and DA 40 at distance. I'm just saying that in my experience, the situations where the difference is apparent in my photos are very rare.

11-07-2010, 03:48 PM   #69
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
I would strongly believe it would be the same if the FA43 is priced along the the DA40.
Yes but then my whole argument would never have been made in the first place. My argument is that the FA is better by some measures statistically, and perceptibly by some individuals in some situations. I don't believe in test charts or brick walls because those make for bad photographs. My argument is since they are priced differently, one must consider the value of each lens. VALUE. COST vs. PERFORMANCE. These things are both important! Neither can exist without the other. You get what you pay for, they say. It is true.

After a certain point, you do get more for what you pay for, but not proportionally so. Moreover, the advantages of the FA 43 are specialized and show up in specific situations. The DA 40 can still take pictures in those situations, but maybe not to YOUR EYES the same level as the FA 43. The question is whether the FA 43 is worth the extra dough.

You guys keep taking one half of my argument and forgetting the other half... you either comment on price, OR performance. But they need to be considered together. The sharpness difference between lenses is not something, I believe, most people would pick up on in a double-blind test of general subjects. Of course, a test chart and MATLAB might be able to see the difference, but to humans really care?

Well an unsure consumer might be led to believe that it is far more important than it actually is, if he was to only listen to people rant and rave about their possessions online. If he went in fresh, he might try both and decide that the FA does not offer him much over the DA and save his money. However, if he has all of your suggestions swimming around in the back of his head, he might second guess his decision! I think this is wrong, and misleads a lot of people. The fact that you have bothered taking photographs of newsprint to test a real difference between lenses is kind of silly to me in the first place... clearly the difference is not so obvious when taking pictures of real scenes.

The difference in bokeh quality is subjective and I will leave it at that. I still think that the DA 40's rendering is much more organic and smooth, while the FA 43's is more in your face and distracting. This is to my eyes! Art is totally subjective. Depends on how you like your "special effects". I'm going to guess you enjoyed Avatar . Which is OK! I prefer subtlety. The point is that it is very likely the OP will be satisfied with either lens and he needs to know the pros AND cons to each. Price is a con of the 43, but it is not the only one. The FA 43 is not a superior lens in EVERY way, as you make it sound.
11-07-2010, 03:49 PM   #70
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
Look at the photographs, and decide for yourself.
I have seen them and I had tried the DA40. and I would choose the FA43 simply because the images are much more punchier and better. don't worry, I like the DA40 as I had a handled it in the past, but I would not say that it would be on par with the FA43 because it is not. I had no bias on either lens since I don't own both, and even if I do own, I would still show some objectivity towards both lenses.

actually I did some contemplating of a trade off between my FA35+FA50/1.7 against the FA43, and it's really giving me a hard time selecting between these lenses. the trade-off comes up with focal length and IQ at wide open speed.

but with the DA40, it is easy for me to make up my mind even if I only use one lens for comparison. I would choose my old lenses. not because the DA40 is no good, but aperture speed trade-off.
11-07-2010, 04:44 PM   #71
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
ok maybe i shouldnt have used the words 'skyrocketing' but there is is still a fairly decent gap between them. On an average photo one wont see much difference, but if you were to crop or are doing prints this extra sharpness you get from the fa43 can be a big plus.


Both lenses are great, the da40 is a consistent performer, where as the fa43 has lower low's but it also has higher high's and this is what makes the difference between the two.

Last edited by TOUGEFC; 11-07-2010 at 10:18 PM. Reason: fixing typos
11-07-2010, 05:14 PM   #72
Veteran Member
Jewelltrail's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,180
QuoteQuote:
Pentaxor: .............and paperbag does have some difficulty accepting the facts with regards to IQ compromises between lenses overshadowed by cost-efficiency and personal preferences.
Mr. Pentaxor, I thank you for this excellent & passionate discussion you engage here for all of our benefits. I now know more about the Fa 43 & Da 40, far more, than I did about any woman who ever meant anything to me. Scary thought, but we men can be that way about stuff.

Anyway, I have followed this Saturday Night at the Fights event closely, embarassedly so. I choose not to offer my opinions on the 2 Queens in judgment, lest I make a mistake on par with Paris' judgment of Aphrodite & Helen (excuse my neglect of the other goddesses here for simplification).......we all know the calamity that brought about the ancient world. If not, get a copy of the Iliad and read about all the blood shed in the name of who is right, who is wrong.

Instead though, I do offer, most humbly--that with your quotation above, you have thrown a low-blow. The text simply does not support that Paperbag has difficulty accepeting anything. In fact, his discussion has been gentlemanly throughout, always pointing to both sides of the argument but, like a man, offfering his opinion for why he believes what he believes. He does not say one Queen is more beautiful than the other Queen: he merely states his heart's case for the Queen of his eye.

The fact of reality is lucid: Absolute right & wrong do not really exist, only states of mind.

Last edited by Jewelltrail; 11-07-2010 at 05:26 PM. Reason: Spelling correction :)
11-07-2010, 05:43 PM   #73
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
Mr. Pentaxor, I thank you for this excellent & passionate discussion you engage here for all of our benefits. I now know more about the Fa 43 & Da 40, far more, than I did about any woman who ever meant anything to me. Scary thought, but we men can be that way about stuff.

Anyway, I have followed this Saturday Night at the Fights event closely, embarassedly so. I choose not to offer my opinions on the 2 Queens in judgment, lest I make a mistake on par with Paris' judgment of Aphrodite & Helen (excuse my neglect of the other goddesses here for simplification).......we all know the calamity that brought about the ancient world. If not, get a copy of the Iliad and read about all the blood shed in the name of who is right, who is wrong.

Instead though, I do offer, most humbly--that with your quotation above, you have thrown a low-blow. The text simply does not support that Paperbag has difficulty accepeting anything. In fact, his discussion has been gentlemanly throughout, always pointing to both sides of the argument but, like a man, offfering his opinion for why he believes what he believes. He does not say one Queen is more beautiful than the other Queen: he merely states his heart's case for the Queen of his eye.

The fact of reality is lucid: Absolute right & wrong do not really exist, only states of mind.
one of my favorite reads are about greek mythology and their literary planetary equivalent.

don't get me wrong, my intention was not really that nor low-blow paperbag. his argument was rather saying that one lens' shortcomings can be solved because of the capability of the camera. dismissing points of differences between lenses based on personal preferences is misleading for the OP as this present a subjective opinion. although opinions are freely open, facts shouldn't be dismissed just to prove one's personal feelings about a lens. even paperbag said in his latest post what influenced his preference and it does not answer the OP's dilemma.

just to be fair, if I were the OP, I would try both lenses and see which one I like better and move on. this would eliminate any personal bias on either lenses.
11-07-2010, 06:44 PM   #74
Veteran Member
Jewelltrail's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,180
Pentaxor: I read him clearly acknowledging the advantages of the the Fa over the Da, just as he points out the advantages of the Da over the Fa. I do not think he ever tried to say the advantages of the Fa could be overcome by the Da. He simply repeats, over and over, that the Fa's advantages are not justified in the Fa's price for most of the people here @ the forum. For example:

QuoteQuote:
paperbag846:I think if money is no object, the FAs are the way to go... but don't feel like you are short changing yourself if you go with the DA ltds
QuoteQuote:
paperbag846:Not to say that film lenses are a bad option at all... but lets keep in mind the price difference between the FA 43 and the DA 40. Sure, the 43 is sharper in the center. But I still contend that it is a lens that requires a bit more work to get optimal results than the DA 40, which might be less sharp overall, but is still a very competent performer!
QuoteQuote:
paperbag846: I don't want to start something here so I will respond and leave this conversation be - I've made my point already. I believe that Pentax produces the FA 43 and the DA 40 alongside each other for good reason. I have heard some people state a preference for one, and others a preference for the other. I believe they both have their strengths and weaknesses. I believe that the additional center sharpness of the 43 is worth noting, but is not substantially different from the DA 40 in real world pictures, judging from lines per mm graphs on photozone
QuoteQuote:
paperbag846: I believe that for one reason or another, the DA controls artifacts better than the FA on digital cameras, although I will concede that the difference may not be significant in real world shots. I believe what is significant is the prices of these lenses, and for a digital only shooter who does not care much for an aperture ring, the DA 40 is likely a better value than the DA 43.
QuoteQuote:
paperbag846: ………..but the truth is that very few of us here are paid to take pictures. Those who are should pay for the best - their gear will pay for itself eventually. For most of us, image quality and satisfaction is going to be a series of very subjective judgments. Those judgments can be clouded by all sorts of factors, including money spent, and the opinions of "experts". This comparison is between two very competent lenses, and someone who learns to judge with their eyes and treats their hobby as a hobby (instead of habitual acquisition) will be very satisfied with the DA 40. The sky is the limit with all of these things, so it's important to keep it all in perspective.
11-07-2010, 07:39 PM   #75
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
Pentaxor: I read him clearly acknowledging the advantages of the the Fa over the Da, just as he points out the advantages of the Da over the Fa. I do not think he ever tried to say the advantages of the Fa could be overcome by the Da. He simply repeats, over and over, that the Fa's advantages are not justified in the Fa's price for most of the people here @ the forum. For example:
thanks. although the other posts are somewhat contradictory and gives that other impression or simply giving mixed signals. anyway, if you said that if that was his point, then that's fine. I may had read it wrong so I would apologize for that if I did misinterpret it.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
40mm, 43mm, k-mount, ltd, pentax, pentax lens, report, review, slr lens, test
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Has anyone compared Voigtländer 40mm and 43mm ltd? Ketsuppi11 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 05-20-2010 11:45 PM
40mm DA vs 43mm FA andi Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 73 01-17-2010 10:53 AM
Anyone own the 40mm and 43mm loganross Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 05-27-2007 10:50 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:16 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top