Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-04-2011, 06:31 PM   #31
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,250
QuoteOriginally posted by nanthor Quote
OK, what's up about the coating and the glass? Are the lenses being made today worser now than the ones first built? Not wanting to start a big controversy but I would want to think that companies are always seeking to improve their quality, not go the other way. So what's the backstory on this? Thanks, Bob. (looking to buy some FA limiteds)
Do you actually know something that the rest of us don't? As far as I know, the coatings are basically the same. Both sets of lenses are quite flare resistant and have excellent contrast. The FA limiteds may be a little warmer in color rendition, but overall, I would have a hard time saying that the DA limiteds coating is worse than that of the FA limiteds.

The reason why people like the FA limiteds better than the DA limiteds is that they are faster and still quite sharp wide open.

04-04-2011, 07:04 PM   #32
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The reason why people like the FA limiteds better than the DA limiteds is that they are faster and still quite sharp wide open.
Actually, that's just icing for me. The unique rendering is the biggest strength of the FA's over the DA's in my book.
04-04-2011, 07:28 PM   #33
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 49
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Do you actually know something that the rest of us don't? As far as I know, the coatings are basically the same. Both sets of lenses are quite flare resistant and have excellent contrast. The FA limiteds may be a little warmer in color rendition, but overall, I would have a hard time saying that the DA limiteds coating is worse than that of the FA limiteds.

The reason why people like the FA limiteds better than the DA limiteds is that they are faster and still quite sharp wide open.

No, I don't know that the coatings are any different. I was referring to a post just previous to mine that made it seem like an early 43mm limited had different coating and special glass compared to the later 43 limiteds. I was asking the two posters who seemed to be discussing this if they could back up the claim. It would seem to me that no company would purposely make an inferior lens at a later date. An example would be Leica, as good as their lenses were back in the 70s and 80s, they have steadily improved the image quality with each new design. So the inference that an early 43mm would be special or better than one made today would surprise me. I think it's just creating lore.
04-04-2011, 07:36 PM   #34
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
In general, it's a wash as far as appropriateness goes. It comes down to price vs. speed for me.

For those who don't like processing color in post, the FA ltds also have a different color palate to them that some prefer.

04-04-2011, 07:49 PM   #35
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by nanthor Quote
No, I don't know that the coatings are any different. I was referring to a post just previous to mine that made it seem like an early 43mm limited had different coating and special glass compared to the later 43 limiteds. I was asking the two posters who seemed to be discussing this if they could back up the claim. It would seem to me that no company would purposely make an inferior lens at a later date. An example would be Leica, as good as their lenses were back in the 70s and 80s, they have steadily improved the image quality with each new design. So the inference that an early 43mm would be special or better than one made today would surprise me. I think it's just creating lore.

No, that's a real thing. Axl can give you more of the low-down, but very early 43's had glass with lead in it and slightly different coatings.
04-04-2011, 08:03 PM   #36
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 49
Hi, have they been shown to be better, worse, or just different than the later 43's? If different, does anyone know in what way, cooler, warmer, different rendition? I had a very early 31mm and wasn't happy with it compared to my 77 and 43. I recently bought another 31mm and it seems to be the best limited I've ever owned, so it's just a bit confusing that the qualities seem to differ over the years.
04-04-2011, 08:14 PM   #37
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by nanthor Quote
Hi, have they been shown to be better, worse, or just different than the later 43's? If different, does anyone know in what way, cooler, warmer, different rendition? I had a very early 31mm and wasn't happy with it compared to my 77 and 43. I recently bought another 31mm and it seems to be the best limited I've ever owned, so it's just a bit confusing that the qualities seem to differ over the years.
Kinda adds to the mystique, though, doesn't it?
04-05-2011, 02:09 AM   #38
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ft. Myers Florida
Posts: 169
QuoteOriginally posted by Cambo Quote
Limiteds started coming out in the film days...about 96-97 I believe.

I personally find it ODD that they're still issuing them (full-frame lenses) without a camera to go with it. I STILL think there's a rangefinder in the wings, they're just waiting for really good EV's.

Cheers,
Cameron
Pentax still produces them because they sell and are profitable. It appears that they were designed with the LX in mind...not digital. Digital at the time was in its infancy. Perhaps there was an AF LX but it got sidelined. I dunno.

Pentax 43/1.9 Limited

The FA Limiteds are very good lenses that have achieved cult status and luxury item prices. They are not necessary to get good images. Color rendition is easily altered in PP. I like the DA Limiteds. To each their own.

I was salivating for the DA* 30mm f1.4. I truly wonder if the cult status and sales of the FA 31 killed it?


Last edited by Spotmatic; 04-05-2011 at 05:24 AM.
04-05-2011, 10:08 AM   #39
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ft. Myers Florida
Posts: 169
QuoteOriginally posted by pentup Quote
I admire anyone who can do a close portrait wider open than 2.4 at that focal length, and keep both eyes acceptably in focus. I can't. This was shot at 2.5, and I wish I'd leaned back a bit, or stopped down. As for backgrounds, they seem to me as much a question of the background's proximity to the subject, as the aperture. I prefer faster lenses as well, but not for the sake of portraits. But that's just because I don't care for the ears blurry, tip of nose blurry, both eyes in focus but only if the person is looking straight ahead kind of shot. I love the 77, but it's an ackward length for portraits on digital, for me. But frankly, so is the 70. I'm used to using a 90 f 2.4 on film.
Good point. I was wondering what all the fuss is about and why one would pony up the $$$ for big apertures on APS bodies. The 85 f 1.4 comes to mind too. These were really meant for film or FF.
04-05-2011, 10:13 AM   #40
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ft. Myers Florida
Posts: 169
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Do you actually know something that the rest of us don't? As far as I know, the coatings are basically the same. Both sets of lenses are quite flare resistant and have excellent contrast. The FA limiteds may be a little warmer in color rendition, but overall, I would have a hard time saying that the DA limiteds coating is worse than that of the FA limiteds.

The reason why people like the FA limiteds better than the DA limiteds is that they are faster and still quite sharp wide open.
The DA coating is optimized for digital, sensors are different than film. The coating on the FA's is not the same. That said, there is nothing 'wrong' with either one.
04-05-2011, 10:48 AM   #41
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by Spotmatic Quote
The DA coating is optimized for digital, sensors are different than film. The coating on the FA's is not the same. That said, there is nothing 'wrong' with either one.
Do you have any proof of this, because if you do you may be the only one. It seems that you are trying to usurp paperbag as the main FA Ltd. doubter here on the forum. He's been reining in his rhetoric of late while you seem to be increasing yours. The above is a tempered insult and an insinuation that the FA's are inferior because they have "film-optimized" coatings. Nothing wrong with preferring the DA's, but we do get kind of tired of reading it in every thread.

Last edited by DogLover; 04-05-2011 at 12:39 PM.
04-05-2011, 12:32 PM   #42
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,675
QuoteOriginally posted by DogLover Quote
Do you have any proof of this, because if you do you may be the only one. It seems that you are trying to usurp paperbag as the main FA Ltd. doubter here on the forum. He's been reigning in his rhetoric of late while you seem to be increasing yours. The above is a tempered insult and an insinuation that the FA's are inferior because they have "film-optimized" coatings. Nothing wrong with preferring the DA's, but we do get kind of tired of reading it in every thread.
Agreed. I'm pretty sure the coating are the same, as there wasn't much time between the release of the last FA Limited and DAs.

QuoteOriginally posted by nanthor Quote
OK, what's up about the coating and the glass? Are the lenses being made today worser now than the ones first built? Not wanting to start a big controversy but I would want to think that companies are always seeking to improve their quality, not go the other way. So what's the backstory on this? Thanks, Bob. (looking to buy some FA limiteds)
I don't think it's always the company's decision. If I had the decision I'd still use leaded gasoline in my vehicles. More power, more effeciency and a lead coating to reduce friction and wear & tear, but I can't, because it burns up the catalytic converter. Pentax can't put lead in all their glass and coating anymore either. Environmental activists have pushed a lot of changes on companies and products, not all for the better.

Now I need to mention I don't know if the original FA 43 is better or not, with the lead. I haven't used both. Maybe axl could give us his opinion for a better idea.
04-05-2011, 12:41 PM   #43
Veteran Member
gnaztee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Cornelius, OR
Posts: 753
QuoteOriginally posted by DogLover Quote
The above is a tempered insult and an insinuation that the FA's are inferior because they have "film-optimized" coatings.
An insult? Really?! Insulting to whom?

Nevertheless, the coatings are different, as spec'd on Pentax's website, and the DA Ltds are listed as "optimized for digital," but it doesn't say that the coatings are optimized for digital. So, hard to say if the claim is true.
04-05-2011, 01:05 PM   #44
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by gnaztee Quote
An insult? Really?! Insulting to whom?

Nevertheless, the coatings are different, as spec'd on Pentax's website, and the DA Ltds are listed as "optimized for digital," but it doesn't say that the coatings are optimized for digital. So, hard to say if the claim is true.
Where do you see that on Pentax's website?
04-05-2011, 01:06 PM   #45
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: europe
Posts: 148
but if pentax still produce FA, they have to be "optimized for digital" or?

I can not imagine that theses lenses are still dedicated for film SLR, film shall be a very small part of their usage now
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!
cameras, da, fa, k-mount, lenses, limiteds, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Using old lenses on new digital camera sissy64sonny Welcomes and Introductions 9 06-05-2010 10:03 AM
Heads-up: Two Silver FA LTD's on Keh joeyc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 03-13-2010 08:26 AM
New to digital, what lenses to purchase houstonmacgregor Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 07-10-2008 06:34 AM
FA ltd's vs DA ltd's? beaumont Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 05-17-2008 09:48 PM
ME Super lenses with a digital body? - Is it possible? Max Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 04-03-2008 06:04 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:35 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