Pentax 100mm macro WR vs Non-WR

OldNoob · 10-22-2013, 08:07 PM

Been shopping around for a good macro, and ive noticed something odd. The smc PENTAX D FA MACRO 100mm F2.8 WR is less expensive than the NON-WR smc PENTAX D FA 100mm F2.8 Macro.

Anyone know why this is?

Adam · 10-22-2013, 08:11 PM

Originally posted by OldNoob

Been shopping around for a good macro, and ive noticed something odd. The smc PENTAX D FA MACRO 100mm F2.8 WR is less expensive than the NON-WR smc PENTAX D FA 100mm F2.8 Macro.

Anyone know why this is?

The non-WR macro has been discontinued for a while, and I believe there's currently a rebate on the WR version, so a store still listing the old lens at MAP pricing may actually end up charging more for it.

**Rondec** · 10-23-2013, 03:12 AM

If given a choice and equal cost, I would choose the WR version. Big difference is the WR and the rounded aperture blades, which can produce a little nicer bokeh. Otherwise they're the same lens.

kswong_00 · 10-23-2013, 04:41 AM

i thought the non wr version can be used with telecoverter?

kswong_00 · 10-23-2013, 04:41 AM

i thought the non wr version can be used with teleconverter?

bdery · 10-23-2013, 05:26 AM

Originally posted by kswong_00

i thought the non wr version can be used with telecoverter?

It will depend on the TC, but a TC without any external optical element will work. Wether images will be good or not is another matter.

If prices are similar, I'd go with the WR in a hearbeat. Better made, smaller, metal, WR, a much better choice.

Dr_who · 10-23-2013, 09:45 AM

doesn't the WR also have rounded aperture blades as well?

bdery · 10-23-2013, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by Dr_who

doesn't the WR also have rounded aperture blades as well?

Yes it does.

**Just1MoreDave** · 10-23-2013, 12:26 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by kswong_00

i thought the non wr version can be used with telecoverter?

That's a good point - the old version has an aperture ring, so it's easier to use with extension tubes or TCs without contacts.

snostorm · 10-23-2013, 03:08 PM - **1 Like**

I own the D FA 100, pre WR, and my impression from image examples is that the WR is better -- mostly in the area of CA/PF. Of course, there's also the WR. If I were in the market for a 100mm dedicated Macro, the WR version would be a no brainer.

I originally chose the D FA for its weight since I like to shoot macro handheld with flash, and the WR version is actually smaller and lighter.

Any macro lens can be used with a TC for added magnification. TCs usually allow slightly closer Minimum Focusing Distances, so the magnification increase can be slightly greater than that stated on the TC (for example, the 1.7x AFA on a 1:1 dedicated macro lens results in about a 1.9:1 mag ratio). Whether the IQ will be satisfactory is up to the quality of the TC, and the skill/technique of the photographer. Any faults in the lens will be magnified by the TC, and any faults in the optics of the TC will probably be obvious. In addition to the mag ratio, the lens will lose effective max aperture directly proportional to the magnification increase. Greater than 1:1 macro photography becomes exponentially more difficult as the magnification increases. Advantages that can be gained with a TC is that with the increased effective FL, one can shoot at 1:1 at a longer working distance. This gives deeper DOF, is possibly less intimidating to live subjects, and gives you a shallower angle for a camera mounted flash.

Just my 2¢

Scott

Carlos33 · 06-29-2022, 11:58 AM

Hello

Does somebody know, is there is difference in IQ between the DFA 100mm Macro f2.8 (older, 2009) and the newer WR version?
It would be good a comparision or all the info.

Thanks.
Carlos

**mikesbike** · 06-30-2022, 01:51 PM

Originally posted by Carlos33

Hello

Does somebody know, is there is difference in IQ between the DFA 100mm Macro f2.8 (older, 2009) and the newer WR version?
It would be good a comparision or all the info.

Thanks.
Carlos

Should be about the same or very similar, which is excellent, since technically both use the same optical formula. However, the older original DFA version is not built nearly as well as the WR version, but it does have the mechanical aperture ring which has the "A" setting, so aperture can be set either on the lens or by the camera body. This fact might be important to some users.

The WR construction is rather unique among macro lenses, being then in the upper league from that standpoint. This can be very useful when shooting closeups under drippy conditions, which can make for some beautiful effects.

**RICHARD L.** · 06-30-2022, 02:24 PM

bdery · 07-04-2022, 05:23 AM

Originally posted by mikesbike

The WR construction is rather unique among macro lenses, being then in the upper league from that standpoint. This can be very useful when shooting closeups under drippy conditions, which can make for some beautiful effects.

To be fair, Irix also has a WR macro lens, but the size, weight, metal finish of the Pentax 100mm are indeed unique.

10-22-2013, 08:07 PM	#1
OldNoob Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 402	Pentax 100mm macro WR vs Non-WR Been shopping around for a good macro, and ive noticed something odd. The smc PENTAX D FA MACRO 100mm F2.8 WR is less expensive than the NON-WR smc PENTAX D FA 100mm F2.8 Macro. Anyone know why this is?

10-22-2013, 08:11 PM	#2
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,608	Originally posted by OldNoob Been shopping around for a good macro, and ive noticed something odd. The smc PENTAX D FA MACRO 100mm F2.8 WR is less expensive than the NON-WR smc PENTAX D FA 100mm F2.8 Macro. Anyone know why this is? The non-WR macro has been discontinued for a while, and I believe there's currently a rebate on the WR version, so a store still listing the old lens at MAP pricing may actually end up charging more for it. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

06-30-2022, 02:24 PM	#13
RICHARD L. Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2018 Location: Quebec City, Quebec Posts: 6,637	DFA 100 mm f/2.8 non-WR macro : an excellent lens !

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
SMC Pentax-D FA 100mm f2.8 Macro (Non WR)	ultraviolet	Lens Sample Photo Archive	5	08-02-2015 10:17 AM
Pentax F-100mm f2.8 macro vs Pentax D FA-100mm f2.8 macro WR	pentaz	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	07-03-2013 06:22 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DFA 100mm f/2.8 (non-WR)	loveisageless	Sold Items	4	09-04-2012 09:11 AM
Tamron 90mm vs Pentax D-FA 100mm WR Macro	Adam	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	03-28-2012 06:41 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax D-FA 100mm f2.8 Macro (non WR)	nandystam	Sold Items	4	09-05-2011 09:03 PM

10-23-2013, 03:12 AM	#3
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	If given a choice and equal cost, I would choose the WR version. Big difference is the WR and the rounded aperture blades, which can produce a little nicer bokeh. Otherwise they're the same lens.

10-23-2013, 04:41 AM	#4
kswong_00 Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 63	i thought the non wr version can be used with telecoverter?

10-23-2013, 05:26 AM	#6
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,362	Originally posted by kswong_00 i thought the non wr version can be used with telecoverter? It will depend on the TC, but a TC without any external optical element will work. Wether images will be good or not is another matter. If prices are similar, I'd go with the WR in a hearbeat. Better made, smaller, metal, WR, a much better choice.

10-23-2013, 09:45 AM	#7
Dr_who Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 777	doesn't the WR also have rounded aperture blades as well?

10-23-2013, 10:38 AM	#8
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,362	Originally posted by Dr_who doesn't the WR also have rounded aperture blades as well? Yes it does.

10-23-2013, 12:26 PM - 1 Like	#9
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	Originally posted by kswong_00 i thought the non wr version can be used with telecoverter? That's a good point - the old version has an aperture ring, so it's easier to use with extension tubes or TCs without contacts.

10-23-2013, 03:08 PM - 1 Like	#10
snostorm Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA Posts: 1,535	I own the D FA 100, pre WR, and my impression from image examples is that the WR is better -- mostly in the area of CA/PF. Of course, there's also the WR. If I were in the market for a 100mm dedicated Macro, the WR version would be a no brainer. I originally chose the D FA for its weight since I like to shoot macro handheld with flash, and the WR version is actually smaller and lighter. Any macro lens can be used with a TC for added magnification. TCs usually allow slightly closer Minimum Focusing Distances, so the magnification increase can be slightly greater than that stated on the TC (for example, the 1.7x AFA on a 1:1 dedicated macro lens results in about a 1.9:1 mag ratio). Whether the IQ will be satisfactory is up to the quality of the TC, and the skill/technique of the photographer. Any faults in the lens will be magnified by the TC, and any faults in the optics of the TC will probably be obvious. In addition to the mag ratio, the lens will lose effective max aperture directly proportional to the magnification increase. Greater than 1:1 macro photography becomes exponentially more difficult as the magnification increases. Advantages that can be gained with a TC is that with the increased effective FL, one can shoot at 1:1 at a longer working distance. This gives deeper DOF, is possibly less intimidating to live subjects, and gives you a shallower angle for a camera mounted flash. Just my 2¢ Scott

06-29-2022, 11:58 AM	#11
Carlos33 New Member Join Date: Feb 2020 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery Posts: 24	Hello Does somebody know, is there is difference in IQ between the DFA 100mm Macro f2.8 (older, 2009) and the newer WR version? It would be good a comparision or all the info. Thanks. Carlos

06-30-2022, 01:51 PM	#12
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,560	Originally posted by Carlos33 Hello Does somebody know, is there is difference in IQ between the DFA 100mm Macro f2.8 (older, 2009) and the newer WR version? It would be good a comparision or all the info. Thanks. Carlos Should be about the same or very similar, which is excellent, since technically both use the same optical formula. However, the older original DFA version is not built nearly as well as the WR version, but it does have the mechanical aperture ring which has the "A" setting, so aperture can be set either on the lens or by the camera body. This fact might be important to some users. The WR construction is rather unique among macro lenses, being then in the upper league from that standpoint. This can be very useful when shooting closeups under drippy conditions, which can make for some beautiful effects.

07-04-2022, 05:23 AM	#14
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,362	Originally posted by mikesbike The WR construction is rather unique among macro lenses, being then in the upper league from that standpoint. This can be very useful when shooting closeups under drippy conditions, which can make for some beautiful effects. To be fair, Irix also has a WR macro lens, but the size, weight, metal finish of the Pentax 100mm are indeed unique.