Originally posted by LFLee While I like my FA35, I found the PF is pretty serious in certain situations on this lens. Also, if you shoot into direct light (like window) there is a reflection of image going on.
Dealing with PF is something common for FA model lenses, which can only be solved by going to the DA series.
Bringing that up is not an issue, as when people bring it up about the acclaimed 31, 43, and 77, owners of which are all apt to immediately say it can be solved in PP, so it's effectively not an issue. It's disingenuous to turn it around on the FA35 now, as if it's any different.
Again, PF is EASILY removed in PP and not something you'll solve by moving to an FA31.
Originally posted by NitroDC How could build quality, materials, optical quality, and attention to detail POSSIBLY be negligible? You might as well be comparing a Leica to a kit lens... I mean they're all made of glass, right?
I actually don't buy the "materials" thing, which I've brought up in the past. All lenses, including incredibly cheap ones, had similar construction and materials to the FA Limited series. I submit that the bulk of the cost is in the glass and consumer expectations/AKA what the market will bear. I have no issues with plastic housings, though metal has a nice feel.
Attention to detail? At the least, the FA35 is made in Japan. Now, who knows if it's even in production anymore. The LTD series threw all that "attention to detail" out the door when they moved production to Vietnam (notice how people complain about the lenses that are made there and on the used market, people are putting premiums on "MIJ"?). Furthermore, these lenses are mass produced. There should be no illusion of skilled craftspeople slaving over each lens with their loupe until it's "just right". There may be some human interaction, but it's no "attention to detail". You are fooling yourself if you believe that. This is, incidentally, the illusion of movements in the swiss and german watch industry, by the way.
Not to mention, the pricing policies involved in the move to Vietnam, which point clearly at priority on widened profit margins.
Regardless, it might have differing optical characteristics, but optical quality is similar, as proven repeatedly in the comparisons. You're turning "negligible" into something that wasn't discussed in an effort to defend the already fine FA31. It's a fine lens without the exaggerations. The FA35 is also a fine lens. That's all. The performance difference between the two seems to be less than what people think, enough to start dragging build quality and "attention to detail" into it.