Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-06-2013, 06:07 PM   #16
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,800
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Any "sharpness" difference between these lenses is likely beyond measure. They all have MTF's in the same ballpark:
I agree, the biggest difference you will see between the FA31 f/1.8 Limited, DA35 f/2.8 limited and the DA35 f/2.4 will be in the bokeh rendering - the FA31 has the remarkable trait of producing exceptionally smooth bokeh* that is only bested by the K/A 50mm f/1.2 lenses.



*which is unusual for a lens with an aspherical element in it - aspherics typically have a disruptive influence on bokeh.


Last edited by Digitalis; 09-06-2013 at 06:15 PM.
09-08-2013, 02:09 PM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,736
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
I agree, the biggest difference you will see between the FA31 f/1.8 Limited, DA35 f/2.8 limited and the DA35 f/2.4 will be in the bokeh rendering - the FA31 has the remarkable trait of producing exceptionally smooth bokeh* that is only bested by the K/A 50mm f/1.2 lenses.
If you're looking for smooth bokeh from the DA 35 Macro Ltd,
you can certainly find it close up.

09-08-2013, 06:29 PM   #18
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,800
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
If you're looking for smooth bokeh from the DA 35 Macro Ltd, you can certainly find it close up.
At near focus distances practically any macro lens ever made can create a sharp image with smooth OOF areas - because it is what they are designed for. But at longer distances the DA limited lenses have been criticized for producing distinctly nervous double lined 'Neisen' bokeh. This kind of Bokeh is almost never seen with the FA limited lenses*



Pentax FA77 Limited

*though to be completely honest: Any lens, focused on a subject at a certain focus distance, at a certain f stop, with a contrasty background, any lens can produce hideous results.

Last edited by Digitalis; 09-08-2013 at 06:42 PM.
09-09-2013, 05:05 AM   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,736
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
At near focus distances practically any macro lens ever made can create a sharp image with smooth OOF areas - because it is what they are designed for.
Not a given, see e.g. Photozone's assessment of the Canon EF-S 60/2.8 macro:

"The bokeh (the quality of the out-of-focus blur) is a primary aspect for a macro lens. The Canon does a average job here which is a little disappointing."

09-09-2013, 05:07 AM   #20
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,800
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
The bokeh (the quality of the out-of-focus blur) is a primary aspect for a macro lens. The Canon does a average job here which is a little disappointing
The pentax FA645 120mm f/4 Macro is also known for producing harsh bokeh, but along with the Canon 60mm f/2.8 that is an exception rather than the norm at least as far as macro lenses are concerned.
09-09-2013, 01:55 PM   #21
Pentaxian
Jonathan Mac's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 4,361
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
I have both an there is no perceived sharpness difference. The Macro has a flatter field and appears more even and can take time to focus. From what I see it may have a superior t-stop, so more even transmission across the spectrum. It's advantage to me is it holds well at the f/16 range for macros.
The DA 35 macro does have superior light transmission to the 35/2.4. I've compared the two wide open and the 2.4 is only 1/4 of a stop faster than the 2.8, when both wide open, not the theoretical half stop.

As for sharpness, I will happily go by my own results rather than what lab test results show, for any lens.
09-09-2013, 10:58 PM   #22
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 164
I had both the 35/2.4 and the macro, and I actually thought the 2.4 was sharper than the macro. I think this might be a case by case scenario, as it would depend on each lens, but I certainly thought my macro was a bit softer wide open whereas the 2.4 appeared noticeably sharper. Both were on the K5.
09-10-2013, 10:51 AM   #23
Pentaxian
Jonathan Mac's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 4,361
The 35 macro has an extremely precise focus mechanism that often requires micro-adjustment, especially at infinity. In the reviews there are complaints that it's soft at infinity, but it's due to focus.

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!
bit, da 35mm f2.8, da*55, da55, f2.8, f4, k-mount, ltd, macro, pentax lens, sharpness, sigma, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DA* 55 vs FA 77 LTD? Heie Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 36 06-12-2012 03:12 AM
For Sale - Sold: DA 70mm Ltd , FA 77 Ltd (silver) , DA 14mm f2.8 ED trustkor Sold Items 10 06-11-2012 07:37 AM
For Sale - Sold: DA Ltd's (DA 21mm f3.2, DA 40mm f2.8, DA70 f2.4) and Kit Lens: DA-L 18-55mm chickenandavocado Sold Items 12 10-23-2011 05:49 AM
For Sale - Sold: DA-21 ltd,DA-40 ltd,DA-70 ltd, DA12-24, DA 55-300 (metal mount) (Worldwide) telfish Sold Items 10 12-13-2010 06:15 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:54 AM. | 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