Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-20-2012, 04:12 PM   #31
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,177
Klaus wrote:
The center resolution characteristic may be different due to the different RAW profile of the cameras although I am surprised about the difference.
?

05-20-2012, 04:32 PM   #32
Site Supporter
robbiec's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cork, Ireland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,213
Original Poster
A few things jump out for me on this retest.. First of all, a lot of people regard as gospel the numbers produced as being the be all and end all which is frankly a load of bollox. We have seen and I have personally experienced the 43 produce amazingly sharp shots with amazing colours and all of a sudden because of a couple of tests it is starting to seem as if they are now regarded as flukes!
Second... I am begining to wonder if the sensor positioning in the K-5 or the actual sensor itself is creating some of the disparaties shown while being measured. I have long suspected the Samsung in the K20D to be more tolerant across the whole frame than the Sony. Pity is does not like high ISO, as colour wise it is also better, again in my opinion.
Lastly.. I would propose to any of these sites that actual run a test on any Pentax equipment to get in 3 versions of each. The QA from the factories seems to be patchy at best, non existant at worst.

ps.. I adore my copy of the 43, it is noticeably sharp across the frame pre infinity from f/2.8 onwards, razor sharp from f/4 and it does return colours & contrast with loads of impact. All this does is add more ammunition to the FA or DA argument
05-20-2012, 04:49 PM   #33
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,665
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
That, is called "sticking your head in the sand".
This is funny. It seems as though someone who avoids this lens because of another's opinion posted online is sticking their head in the sand, as opposed to someone not agreeing with said opinion. Lab tests are never as important for tried and true lenses. Maybe for a newly released lens they would mean more to me, but my real world use has proven the 43 to be a better performer than most other lenses out there, new or old.
05-20-2012, 04:54 PM   #34
jac
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Clyde River, Nunavut, Canada
Posts: 2,363
Lytrytyr:
Please read my comment. Subjective numbers, highly comparative and competitive, one lens scores a 4 and the other 2.5. Forget about the platform or even the lenses themselves. A lack of objectivity becomes apparent to me.

05-20-2012, 05:55 PM   #35
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
Unfortunately for Pentax users though what was best in 2001 for us is still the best available (with 1 or 2 exceptions perhaps, DA70, DFA100).
05-20-2012, 05:59 PM   #36
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,724
QuoteOriginally posted by jac Quote
Lytrytyr:
Please read my comment.
Which one?
I read and responded to your earlier one, and will be happy to respond to this one:

QuoteOriginally posted by jac Quote
Subjective numbers, highly comparative and competitive, one lens scores a 4 and the other 2.5.
In one pair of tests, yes.
But as I mentioned in response to your earlier comment,
the same two lenses each received 3.5
as the corresponding subjective numbers in another pair of tests.

QuoteOriginally posted by jac Quote
Forget about the platform or even the lenses themselves. A lack of objectivity becomes apparent to me.
The rating system is certainly subjective.

The tests themselves generally seem to be objective, just reading off from Imatest,
although there may be some subjective input in deciding to repeat tests,
or to choose one particular test image out of a series.

To interpret the tests (e.g. as a potential buyer of a particular lens),
you do need to consider the platform on which the lens was tested.

I would not regard the tests as "scientific,"
since they generally involve just one sample,
and do not seem to be reproducible.
05-20-2012, 06:21 PM   #37
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,018
QuoteOriginally posted by builttospill Quote
This is funny. It seems as though someone who avoids this lens because of another's opinion posted online is sticking their head in the sand, as opposed to someone not agreeing with said opinion. Lab tests are never as important for tried and true lenses. Maybe for a newly released lens they would mean more to me, but my real world use has proven the 43 to be a better performer than most other lenses out there, new or old.
As someone else has said, the 43mm focal length is one that just never worked for me. I own the FA 31, the DA *55 and the DA 70 and that gives me the coverage that I need/want with primes. I owned the DA 40 (but not the FA 43) and it was a very nice lens, but not one that worked well for me.

I wonder if this test doesn't reveal poor Pentax QC more than it does anything else. Klaus says that it was a different copy of the lens (he says who he borrows the lenses from at the top of the page) from the one he tested on the K10. Still, he is usually pretty good at identifying things like poorly aligned lens elements (which wouldn't really give this look anyway). It would be nice to see a different lens tested. Based on this one, you would choose the FA 50 or the DA 40 over this lens for most applications -- and they are cheaper too.
05-20-2012, 06:30 PM   #38
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,211
QuoteOriginally posted by gofour3 Quote
This test and the previous one are irrelevant. The FA43/1.9 is a 15 year old lens design optimized for the FF Pentax film cameras of the late 1990’s.

How it or any Pentax lens released during the film area fare on a DSLR has no bearing on how Pentax designed or built the FA43/1.9. An original review from 1997 would be more accurate.

Phil.
If that is the case, the same could be said about the FA 31 LTD, but it got top marks in the re-test on the K-5 and got the rare, recommended status which rarely happens on any Pentax lens at Photozone. The thing about the 43 and 77 is that they were both designed by Hirakawa Jun. The weren't really designed to perform well on flat res tests. It wouldn't surprise me to see them do well on a full frame sensor in a realistic shooting situation.


Last edited by Blue; 05-23-2012 at 06:02 PM.
05-20-2012, 06:34 PM   #39
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
There aren't many "highly recommended" left now with it taken off the DA40 & FA43 in the K-5 retests.

So now just FA31, DA70 & DA*60-250?

I just noticed the FA50 has a "highly recommended" comment in the conclusion, but doesn't get the icon displayed for it
05-20-2012, 06:36 PM   #40
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,335
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
As opposed to a personally held opinion that 43mm is a weird focal length on APS-C, not giving in to fetishism by collecting the "Three Amigos", and not wasting good money on Film era lenses based on an article from 2001 expressing an opinion that the FA Limiteds were the best lenses made.

They may have been the best lenses in 2001, but hey wake up Rip Van Winkles, its 2012 now!
A friendly question Selar - have you ever made a nice, friendly, non-snarky, uncritical comment (about anything whatsoever) on this Forum?
05-20-2012, 06:37 PM   #41
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,211
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
As opposed to a personally held opinion that 43mm is a weird focal length on APS-C, not giving in to fetishism by collecting the "Three Amigos", and not wasting good money on Film era lenses based on an article from 2001 expressing an opinion that the FA Limiteds were the best lenses made.

They may have been the best lenses in 2001, but hey wake up Rip Van Winkles, its 2012 now!
Well, Photozone hasn't re-tested the DA* 55/1.4 on the K-5 yet. Hell, they may be using a lens stained early run of the K-5. Hysterical They wouldn't likely know since they use them only for lens testing.
05-20-2012, 06:46 PM   #42
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,665
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
As opposed to a personally held opinion that 43mm is a weird focal length on APS-C, not giving in to fetishism by collecting the "Three Amigos", and not wasting good money on Film era lenses based on an article from 2001 expressing an opinion that the FA Limiteds were the best lenses made.

They may have been the best lenses in 2001, but hey wake up Rip Van Winkles, its 2012 now!
It is an odd focal length on a crop sensor; that I agree with. I've never used the FA 31 so I couldn't be classified as part of the fetish, right? I also owned the DA 40 at the same time as the 43; I kept the one I thought to be superior in every way. Also, even though it's 2012, I often use the 43 and 77 on film cameras, which are the best in quality and focal length. But now I suppose you'll tell me to wake up because film is dead.
05-20-2012, 07:08 PM   #43
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
A friendly question Selar
Asked as a PM yes, it would have been a friendly question, asked openly, its just a poorly concealed ad hominem attack on my point of view in this thread.
05-20-2012, 07:11 PM   #44
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,211
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
Asked as a PM yes, it would have been a friendly question, asked openly, its just a poorly concealed ad hominem attack on my point of view in this thread.
Calling people Rip Van Winkles and "sticking their head in the sand" because they have a different opinion than you isn't exactly concealed either.
05-20-2012, 07:54 PM   #45
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Calling people Rip Van Winkles and "sticking their head in the sand" because they have a different opinion than you isn't exactly concealed either.
Agreed, and removing that stuff.
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!
f/1.9, fa, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens, test
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Photozone re-reviews FA31mm hcc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 91 05-30-2012 07:58 PM
Photozone Reviews Tamron 70-200 2.8 HOT! HOT! HOT! JHD Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 31 02-03-2011 09:11 AM
K5 and photozone bluekorn Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 5 02-02-2011 02:15 AM
photozone da35mm limited review is up! architorture Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 28 08-23-2008 07:38 AM
More Photozone reviews! feronovak Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 05-04-2007 05:26 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:36 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