Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-18-2012, 04:49 PM   #16
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,756
QuoteOriginally posted by VisualDarkness Quote
The (most often) higher pixel density of APS-C can lower the resolution score compared to FF and considering the pretty good border score here the 31mm could get really nice result if tested on a bigger sensor.
I guess. Its just that the extreme edge on APS-C is no where near the extreme edge on full frame. So, on a D800 (same pixel density as K5), you are going to see some border weakness. On D700, probably looks pretty strong.

05-18-2012, 04:53 PM   #17
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I guess. Its just that the extreme edge on APS-C is no where near the extreme edge on full frame. So, on a D800 (same pixel density as K5), you are going to see some border weakness. On D700, probably looks pretty strong.
But if the 31mm got good resolution at the extreme borders and that pixel density is less it could potentially get even greater result in the tests (vignetting will be bad though). This is of coarse nt as true for monsters like the D800.
05-18-2012, 05:57 PM   #18
Pentaxian
liukaitc's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,005
same with kit lens they tested
the border and corner is worse on k5

Last edited by liukaitc; 05-19-2012 at 07:02 PM.
05-18-2012, 06:33 PM   #19
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,158
It all makes sense because this time it was the "31mm f/1.8 Limied", i.e., not the "Limited" lens that was tested (see the title above the MTF figures).

Joking aside, I'm puzzled by the new figures. A peak at f/2.8, if true, would be extraordinary, but yet resolution figures are lower than that of the 35/2.4. This should only be possible if the 31/1.8 has relatively large aberrations that do not depend on the f-ratio. However, lateral CA seems well controlled. So what is the source (if all the figures are right)?

Does anyone know of any other MTF measurements for the FA 31/1.8?

Anyhow, the above is just measurebating (and of some interest to those with a curiosity for optics). I feel a 4/5 rating for the optical quality of the FA 31/1.8 is inadequate. What would a Stradivari receive at photoaudiozone.de? A 3.5 out of 5 for sound? I'm sure it has technical "flaws" and that these are part and parcel of what makes it special.


Last edited by Class A; 05-18-2012 at 06:42 PM.
05-19-2012, 03:17 AM   #20
Veteran Member
vrrattko's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote

Does anyone know of any other MTF measurements for the FA 31/1.8?
Well FA31 was also tested by Lenstip on K-5.....but they dismissed the lens as nothing special and overly expensive. That review pretty much trashed the aura of FA31.
05-19-2012, 05:16 PM   #21
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,158
QuoteOriginally posted by vrrattko Quote
Well FA31 was also tested by Lenstip on K-5.....
Thanks for the pointer.

According to their measurements the centre does definitely not peak at f/2.8, just like it did not with Photozone's earlier measurements. What is going on?
05-19-2012, 05:24 PM   #22
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,539
All I know is my 31 is razor sharp at all F ratios on my K-5 and that's good enough for me. I can't imagine selling that lens at all.
05-19-2012, 05:34 PM   #23
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,703
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
I feel a 4/5 rating for the optical quality of the FA 31/1.8 is inadequate.
See Photozone Rating System

05-19-2012, 05:39 PM   #24
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Thanks for the pointer.

According to their measurements the centre does definitely not peak at f/2.8, just like it did not with Photozone's earlier measurements. What is going on?
Some type of sample variation? Is the newly tested sample MIJ or MIV?
05-19-2012, 11:25 PM   #25
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
The FA 31 is one of the best lenses that Pentax produced and can stand up next to lenses produced by anyone.

Lens reviews are interesting up to a point. I check them just to find out about major issues that I care about.
05-20-2012, 04:49 AM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Posts: 535
Some people seem to discover the fact that sensors do play a role in the camera output just as much as a lens. The fact is, the 31 & 43 Limiteds are designed for film and are getting hammered on a 16MP sensor by DA Limited lenses designed for digital (DA 35 & DA 40). I expect the same will go for the FA 77 on a K5. The DA 70mm will best it on edge performance.
05-20-2012, 04:59 AM - 1 Like   #27
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,539
--I find it hard to believe that my FA31 and FA77 are getting hammered (at the pub? ) by anything frankly. I am stunned every time I see my 31ltd shots after transferring them from the camera. It's easily the best lens I have used.
Just another mediocre image with BS edge sharpness etc etc:



And another one
























What a crap lens it is... maybe I'll just give it away.

Last edited by bossa; 08-24-2012 at 09:22 PM.
05-20-2012, 05:08 AM   #28
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,007
QuoteOriginally posted by vrrattko Quote
Well FA31 was also tested by Lenstip on K-5.....but they dismissed the lens as nothing special and overly expensive. That review pretty much trashed the aura of FA31.
Come it, the FA31 is a nice lens ... in a full format system with AF engine from the late 80's. On an APS-C camera it is a big dinosaur. I like mine, but I also know the problems. The photozone&lenstip reviews explains all the little problems - still prainsing the lens. This thread here only shows how narrow minded the Pentax community is regarding this lens. I only keep my 31FA because I have have use for it and it would be useful on a future full frame camera as wide angle lens - it was designed as a wide angle lens not a normal equiv. lens.
The 9.x rating in Pentax review does not count much in real world - almost everything is rated close to 9 or 10.
05-20-2012, 05:25 AM   #29
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,158
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Some type of sample variation?
Even a decentred copy should have good centre performance (unless it is totally out of whack). Unless the lens is essentially damaged, the peak of sharpness should not shift (that much).

Maybe Klaus changed some measurement parameters but he seems puzzled by the changed measurements for the 43/1.9 as well so I don't necessarily expect him to have an answer.


QuoteOriginally posted by dankoBanana Quote
The fact is, the 31 & 43 Limiteds are designed for film and are getting hammered on a 16MP sensor by DA Limited lenses designed for digital (DA 35 & DA 40).
The FA Ltds and the DA Ltds have different optical designs. The FA Ltds have better peak performance but are not as consistent across the f-ratio range (A characteristic I prefer because I'm a) interested in peak sharpness and b) prefer the rendering of the FA designs.

Even if it were true that the FA Ltds were outdated, it would not explain a shift of peak performance of the 31/1.9 in a retest. It would not explain a drop in border performance of the 43/1.9 either. Something is going on with the photozone retests and Klaus does not appear to have the answers himself.
05-20-2012, 05:33 AM   #30
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,158
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
I'm familiar with the PZ rating system and fully support avoiding inflation with ratings.

However, if lenses like the FA 31/1.8 receive 4/5 then one wonders what lenses will get a rating closer to 5. Maybe a boring macro lens?

Summary ratings are always problematic, but I do not think that degrading the FA 31/1.8's rating from 4.5/5 to 4/5 makes sense, if one considers the reputation of the lens with experienced photographers.

Maybe other lenses I do not know of have surpassed the 31/1.8 and are more deserving of a 4.5/5 or even 5/5.
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!
31mm, f/1.8, f1.8, fa, fa31mm, k-mount, lens, lenses, pentax, pentax lens, quality, review, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Photozone Reviews Tamron 70-200 2.8 HOT! HOT! HOT! JHD Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 31 02-03-2011 09:11 AM
For Sale - Sold: FA31mm/1.8 Limited (Worldwide) LuzArt Sold Items 2 09-27-2010 12:20 PM
should I trade in DA*16-50mm for a FA31mm ltd? mokey Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 09-24-2010 01:27 PM
People Portraiture via the FA31mm [9 imgs] A Modest Mouse Post Your Photos! 2 07-27-2010 03:24 PM
More Photozone reviews! feronovak Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 05-04-2007 05:26 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:33 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