[rparmar]

The FA lenses have the feel of a manual lens when manually focusing. The DA ltds are close in that regard. The build feel is reminiscent of the Takumars during the Asahi Optical glory days.

IMO, nothing beats the feeling of a Takumar, Zeiss, or Leica lens. Though certainly other third-party brands of manual focus lenses can equal them on occasion (Vivitar for example).

The FA Limiteds are "good enough" in my books, being compromised for auto-focus. How I wish they were manual with a slightly more damped motion. The DA lenses lag behind on this score, but really weren't made for manual focus.

[interested_observer]

The Pentax FA Ltd are regarded by some as the best prime lenses ever built, across all brands. One website (and I cannot find it yet) even stated that the FA77mm was THE best lens.

I have the FA31mm Ltd and, yes, it s a a special lens. For me, I regard the FA31mm as special/unique because it give me the best percentage of 'keepers'. If I need to shoot something unique and want the best IQ with the least chance of stuff up, the FA31mm Ltd is my best choice.

Here you go.... here is the site, and it a quality website with a wonderful following to boot!

• sm-02-05-02

IMO, nothing beats the feeling of a Takumar, Zeiss, or Leica lens. Though certainly other third-party brands of manual focus lenses can equal them on occasion (Vivitar for example).

The FA Limiteds are "good enough" in my books, being compromised for auto-focus. How I wish they were manual with a slightly more damped motion. The DA lenses lag behind on this score, but really weren't made for manual focus.

I have been fortunate enough to acquire (over a several year period) a FA 31 Ltd, Contax Carl Zeiss 28/f2.8 Distagon, 85/f2.8 Sonnar, Auto Takumar 85/f1.8 and just recently a Zeiss 25/f2.8 Distagon. In terms of build quality nothing really beats these (well I have to think that a Leica would be an equal). The Zeiss and Auto Tak are both a 10, with the Limited being a 9.999999 followed by the Contax at a 9.9888888.

The optics are tremendous, the builds are wonderful, and the handling is excellent. Really difficult to go beyond these.

[Sage97]

....The Zeiss and Auto Tak are both a 10.....

Where do we see pics taken with these lenses?

[Sandy Hancock]

Here you go.... here is the site, and it a quality website with a wonderful following to boot!

• sm-02-05-02

Cool! The article might be ten years old, but it's still a wonderful read.
It gives me a warm fuzzy feeling now I have all of the Three Amigos

[cali92rs]

Certainly, and the Pentax SMC coatings. I suppose I should ask Blue about whether they have the new rear element costings that he has a thread on too.

There must be other design features for the non-pancake models that allow them to be so small. My Vivitar 85/1.4 is a real monster when its size and weight are compared to the closest focal length in the limiteds, the 77.

I think the difference in size between say a 85mm f1.4 and a 77mm f1.7 can mainly mainly attributed to the difference in Max aperture. It appears that there's a big size penalty between 1.7 and 1.8 vs 1.4

[Docrwm]

You pledged not to buy any more Pentax lenses, but you bought a LTD anyway. THAT's how special they are.

Go read the pledge, it was NEW Pentax Lenses at the hyper-inflated MSRP. I specified that it is a (used) lenses.

[Docrwm]

The irony is they often don't mention Ghostless Coating. Both ltd series have it and select other lenses. The only one that gets mentioned consistently is the SP. The Aero Bright is on some of the newer premium lenses as well.

That's what I was looking for, not praise for them but actual facts as to why they are praised so often. Thanks, I did not realize that both the FA and DA Limiteds have the Ghostless Coating.

[Docrwm]

"Unique" means one-of-a-kind. So, essentially every different lens is unique. How about another adjective?

Actually, it's pointless as you've already read all the opinions, there will not be any new opinions here, and you've already bought the lens so you will be able to look for yourself soon :-)

No looking for opinions, I was actually looking for facts like those that Blue provided about the line. Yes, I bought a used 70 due to my appreciation for my 35 and the reviews, but I also would like to know more about what sets the Limiteds apart technically.

[Docrwm]

Agreed- I only ever hear of those in the initial press releases, as they're not even mentioned in the official specs.

Which is, at least in part, the reason for this thread. Odd that SMC gets played up but the newer and, apparently, higher end coatings are downplayed.

[selar]

You pledged not to buy any more Pentax lenses

Yeah go and look at his original "Pledge". He keeps editing it to suit his convenience! I withdraw my pledge, on the grounds that this guy is worse than any politician I have known!

[pinholecam]

For the price, size = superb portability, build quality and optical performance (harmonious blend of bokeh; rendering; sharpness; etc ) with AF, there are probably no equivalents, esp. at the focal lengths offered.

[Clavius]

Yeah go and look at his original "Pledge". He keeps editing it to suit his convenience! I withdraw my pledge, on the grounds that this guy is worse than any politician I have known!

LOL! Yes, I noticed the same.

[Trysaeder]

Mostly off topic, but this must go somewhere.

Metal (steel) is perhaps the worst material to make lenses out of with modern technology. It's comparatively heavy and temperature sensitive while not offering anything over polycarbonate versions, except for a perceived superiority on par with luxury cars, ie, unjustified increase in price, causing a reduction in bang/buck.
For build quality, any increase in toughness when it matters is offset by the greater force experienced throughout its life. Drop or bang a metal lens into anything and it is likely to experience double the force compared to a homologous polycarbonate one, which is likely to decentre elements and damage the housing.
The subjective 'feel' of a lens is also questionable, as metals are great heat conductors and will drain heat much faster from the user in colder weather, which is rarely desirable. Steel also expands and contracts much more significantly, possibly affecting focus accuracy and focal plane placement, as well as other optical alignments.
After using several zeiss and leica lenses in moderately adverse and demanding conditions, as well as an autofocus pancake, I find that calling 'metal construction' an asset is a terribly misguided act. In general use, it is not a significant liability unless the weight penalty gets too far out of hand (often with zeiss slr lenses compared to their equivalents). However, the issue of cost is a global one, and as long as the luxury, high quality mentality exists, it is unlikely that this issue will subside.
Steel is a physically poor material to create precision instruments that may be subjected to moderate environmental stresses in the face of polycarbonate.

[Docrwm]

Yeah go and look at his original "Pledge". He keeps editing it to suit his convenience! I withdraw my pledge, on the grounds that this guy is worse than any politician I have known!

I wrote it and know what it says. It has always said "new" meaning BNIB. I'm very sorry if you misunderstood. Buying SuperTaks, M, A, F, and other old lenses was never part of the pledge, nor was buying used because the entire intent is not to reinforce Pentax for bad behavior. Paying another photographer for his kit does not put any money into Pentax's pockets even indirectly. I'm very sorry if you can't see that.

[stevebrot]

How unique are they? Witness the number of Canon users who are willing to pay very good money for these lenses for their FF bodies and then either surgically alter the lens or shave the mirrors of their cameras just for the privilege of shooting with them as manual focus, manual apertures glass.


Steve