[aegisphan]

Ok, correct that: it goes to f/22. I was in Av and the camera did not let me change the f number after f/19 because I was already at 30" shutter speed. I checked it now: f/22 without a problem...

What do you mean with focus stacking, Frank: making various photos with changing minor focus, just to have the right one?

I'm not Frank . Anyway, everyone knows that when you're going past f/8, diffraction occurs. So it's not very advisable to shoot anything at f/22. To remedy the situation, you can use focus stacking: focus in front of the subject, take picture, then focus to the middle, then to the back. With around f/8, you can make do with 3 pictures at different focus planes. Then you use software to stack them on top of each other to gain that huge DOF. There are specialized softwares for this purpose. This is like HDR technique. Of course this is mostly used for still object, or still enough for you to take 3 consecutive shots without moving.

Edit: Here is an example: Wonderful Photos: How to Increase your Depth of Field by Focus Stacking

---

Last edited by aegisphan; 04-12-2008 at 01:35 PM.

[frank]

I'm not Frank . Anyway, everyone knows that when you're going past f/8, diffraction occurs. So it's not very advisable to shoot anything at f/22. To remedy the situation, you can use focus stacking: focus in front of the subject, take picture, then focus to the middle, then to the back. With around f/8, you can make do with 3 pictures at different focus planes. Then you use software to stack them on top of each other to gain that huge DOF. There are specialized softwares for this purpose. This is like HDR technique. Of course this is mostly used for still object, or still enough for you to take 3 consecutive shots without moving.

Edit: Here is an example: Wonderful Photos: How to Increase your Depth of Field by Focus Stacking

I'm Frank But I didn't know this trick (to gain huge DOF). Thanks for the tip, sounds very interesting. I'm gonna give it a try sometime.

[JJJPhoto]

I wish the DA70 was a DA75 so I wouldnt have to make a choice between it and the FA77. While the 7mm isnt enough to warrant owning both, it is enough to make you think which one you want to part the money with to buy. With the FA31 and DA35, for me the DA wins out because the IQ is very close, the macro is HUGE to me, the $$ spoke as well so it was a no brainer. The 70/77 choice will be a harder one I think.

I know the overwhelming majority of people in this forum say the FA 77 is the best choice when debating the 70 vs the 77 ... but I'm in favor of the 70. I've used the 77 on loan from a fellow Pentaxian and I own the 70. The 70 has better "consistent" sharpness across the frame than the 77. You have to stop down the 77 to f/2.8 to get the same center sharpness as the 70 and the edges of the frame on the 77 at f/2.8 are still softer than the 70 wide open at f/2.4.

Bokeh is "a little" better on the 77 compared to the 70, but you would have to take two IDENTICAL images and compare them side by side to tell the difference. These images were both shot with the DA 70 Limited wide open at f/2.4 (NO post processing):





For me, it's the quick-shift manual focus on the DA series and the better edge sharpness that sold me on the 70.

Sure, these short telephoto lengths are best suited for portraits so you don't "need" fantastic edge sharpness ... but I'd rather have too much sharp detail recorded in my image and have to soften it in post. You can't create edge detail that wasn't captured in the first place.

Anyway, back to the DA 35 Limited Macro ... I am so ready to pull the trigger and purchase this lens. I just have to wait on a client to finally send me a check for a job I did last month.

[christinelandon]

I'm Frank But I didn't know this trick (to gain huge DOF). Thanks for the tip, sounds very interesting. I'm gonna give it a try sometime.

Frank, you might like to take a look at several examples of focus stacking using Helicon Focus software that have been posted on Photography Equipment - Photography Tips - Photography Technique | OutdoorPhotographer.com by George Lepp over the past couple of years. Once on their site, search for Helicon Focus and the relevant articles and photos will be listed for you. It's quite a stunning technique, and Lepp has used it in some of his recent books.

[barondla]

Beautiful photos. Beautiful lens. May have to reconsider this one. (does anyone really need 3 macros in the bag)? Have the 31 too.
thanks
barondla

[frank]

Frank, you might like to take a look at several examples of focus stacking using Helicon Focus software that have been posted on Photography Equipment - Photography Tips - Photography Technique | OutdoorPhotographer.com by George Lepp over the past couple of years. Once on their site, search for Helicon Focus and the relevant articles and photos will be listed for you. It's quite a stunning technique, and Lepp has used it in some of his recent books.

Thanks Chris for the info. I'll definitely look it up

[heatherslightbox]

I was perusing Google and I found some examples of what this lens can do:

Weblog -insomnia-: DA 35mmF2.8 Macro Limited: A standard macro lens
PENTAX DA35mm - a set on Flickr

I hope Barry from CameraLensRentals.com - Online Camera Lens Rentals for Canon Cameras gets this one in stock soon, as I'd like to rent it to compare with my 43.

When I got the 43, I figured that it would never leave my bag, but now I'm beginning to wonder. My next major lens purchase was going to be the DFA100 macro, but now I'm wondering if I should get the 35 instead. Most of what I shoot in Macro is flowers. For insects, I can always use a long telephoto and get a similar close-up effect.

I've even thought about selling my 17-70 and picking up a FA28-105/3.2-4.5 IF (]BeachCamera.com). I've taken a look at some sample images on pbase and they look pretty good:
Pentax smc P-FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 AL IF Lens Sample Photos and Specifications
The 28-105 would be a good walk-around lens, as it's lighter than the 17-70 and has decent IQ. If I need wider, I've still got my kit lens. If I need more tele, then the Sigma 100-300 dovetails nicely with it for a good zoom kit.

For primes, I'm thinking 21,35 or 43, and 70.

Man, this LBA is driving my absolutely nuts. Just when I thought it was safe to say that I had my lens roadmap mapped out perfectly, then that wonderful DA35 comes along and throws a monkey wrench into everything.

Heather

---

Last edited by heatherslightbox; 04-12-2008 at 08:02 PM.

[tranq78]

I was perusing Google and I found some examples of what this lens can do:

Weblog -insomnia-: DA 35mmF2.8 Macro Limited: A standard macro lens
PENTAX DA35mm - a set on Flickr

I hope Barry from CameraLensRentals.com - Online Camera Lens Rentals for Canon Cameras gets this one in stock soon, as I'd like to rent it to compare with my 43.

When I got the 43, I figured that it would never leave my bag, but now I'm beginning to wonder. My next major lens purchase was going to be the DFA100 macro, but now I'm wondering if I should get the 35 instead. Most of what I shoot in Macro is flowers. For insects, I can always use a long telephoto and get a similar close-up effect.

I've even thought about selling my 17-70 and picking up a FA28-105/3.2-4.5 IF (]BeachCamera.com). I've taken a look at some sample images on pbase and they look pretty good:
Pentax smc P-FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 AL IF Lens Sample Photos and Specifications
The 28-105 would be a good walk-around lens, as it's lighter than the 17-70 and has decent IQ. If I need wider, I've still got my kit lens. If I need more tele, then the Sigma 100-300 dovetails nicely with it for a good zoom kit.

For primes, I'm thinking 21,35 or 43, and 70.

Man, this LBA is driving my absolutely nuts. Just when I thought it was safe to say that I had my lens roadmap mapped out perfectly, then that wonderful DA35 comes along and throws a monkey wrench into everything.

Heather

Hey, look on the bright side. If the Pentax "*" and Limited lenses sported a Canon/Nikon logo, they would be substantially more pricey. You are getting good value.

Here's my comments on the FA28-105/3.2-4.5 in response to a thread asking about it. You won't go wrong with this little gem. (I also noticed my spelling error - too many "i's" in diminutive).

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/15964-pentax-smcp-...ear#post129010

[Pentaxke]

a no-brainer? Not sure I'd go that far...I find the 77 to be a mgic lens

Don't get me wrong: I have had the 77 ltd, and it is an incredible lens in terms of optical performance, but I missed sth with it and eventually let it go... About a month ago I bought the DA 70, and I can see what I missed on the 77 that the DA 70 had: first of all, it is smaller, so easier to carry (and easier to get rid off ), but it is also sharper at the same aperture, has better bokeh (although that would be sth personal I guess) and the manual focus override really does it for me.
The one thing I wished that Pentax had done better is the shade, which is a screw in type and collapsable; I liked the built in shade of the 77 better. All in all, I'm sure it will be personal preference, but I would go for the DA 70 if I was to choose again...

[Pentaxke]

I'm not Frank .

Sorry, Aegi, I guess I got confused...

Anyway, everyone knows that when you're going past f/8, diffraction occurs. So it's not very advisable to shoot anything at f/22. To remedy the situation, you can use focus stacking: focus in front of the subject, take picture, then focus to the middle, then to the back. With around f/8, you can make do with 3 pictures at different focus planes. Then you use software to stack them on top of each other to gain that huge DOF. There are specialized softwares for this purpose. This is like HDR technique. Of course this is mostly used for still object, or still enough for you to take 3 consecutive shots without moving.

Edit: Here is an example: Wonderful Photos: How to Increase your Depth of Field by Focus Stacking

Now that is a neat trick I have to try! Txs a million!

[Pentaxke]

Beautiful photos. Beautiful lens. May have to reconsider this one. (does anyone really need 3 macros in the bag)? Have the 31 too.
thanks
barondla

Well, look at it this way: I have 3 macro lenses, the vivitar macro adapter (which works beautifully with my A 50 f/1,7, a bellow, two set of extension tubes, the Pentax helicoid extension tubes, some close up lenses (and I may have forgotten a thing or two) and the FA 31 ltd and a K 35 f/2 (which both work good in macro btw), and I still didn't have to think about the DA 35...

That said: I'm considering to let go the 31 ltd (I think I'm not going to use it that much now that I have the DA 35) and already placed the K 35 in the market place...

[Pentaxke]

I was perusing Google and I found some examples of what this lens can do:

Weblog -insomnia-: DA 35mmF2.8 Macro Limited: A standard macro lens
PENTAX DA35mm - a set on Flickr

I hope Barry from CameraLensRentals.com - Online Camera Lens Rentals for Canon Cameras gets this one in stock soon, as I'd like to rent it to compare with my 43.

When I got the 43, I figured that it would never leave my bag, but now I'm beginning to wonder. My next major lens purchase was going to be the DFA100 macro, but now I'm wondering if I should get the 35 instead. Most of what I shoot in Macro is flowers. For insects, I can always use a long telephoto and get a similar close-up effect.

I've even thought about selling my 17-70 and picking up a FA28-105/3.2-4.5 IF (]BeachCamera.com). I've taken a look at some sample images on pbase and they look pretty good:
Pentax smc P-FA 28-105mm F3.2-4.5 AL IF Lens Sample Photos and Specifications
The 28-105 would be a good walk-around lens, as it's lighter than the 17-70 and has decent IQ. If I need wider, I've still got my kit lens. If I need more tele, then the Sigma 100-300 dovetails nicely with it for a good zoom kit.

For primes, I'm thinking 21,35 or 43, and 70.

Man, this LBA is driving my absolutely nuts. Just when I thought it was safe to say that I had my lens roadmap mapped out perfectly, then that wonderful DA35 comes along and throws a monkey wrench into everything.

Heather

Heather,

like others said, if this DA 35 had a Canikon logo on it, it would be sold at a more expensive price. I have paid €339,- for it, and from what I have seen now already, it's worth every cent of it!

From experience I know that if you go out to shoot photos, you won't take both a DA 35 and FA 43 with you, as there is to much overlap; so, if you are considering the DA 35, you could consider to sell the FA 43 to raise the funds...

I think no one can make the decision in your place, but we can always give advice. One thing is for sure: the DA 35 won't disappoint you...

Hope this helps (but I have a faint idea it'll confuse you even more... )

[heatherslightbox]

We'll see...I suppose it wouldn't hurt to have 2 dedicated macros in the bag. I've got at least one other item I could part with that could help raise funds for this baby. I'll put it on Fleabay and see how much I can get for it.

Heather

[Pentaxke]

For the pixelpeepers among you...

I made comparison shots between DA 35 macro, K 35 f/2, FA 31 Ltd and M 40 f/2,8 pancake (this last one especially for Heather, as this is the nearest you can get to her 43 ltd.)
All images are 100% crops that I assembled in one.

Center of image:




In the center of the image and wide open, the 31 ltd doesn't hold much of its' own, especially if you compare it to the 20 years older K 35. The M 40 is surprisingly good wide open, but all in all the DA is the clear winner...
When all four lenses are used @ f/2,8 it all boils down to preference I think, although I would still hand the cup to the DA. Surprisingly the 31 ltd isn't the winner, and I would place him 3rd. It is also the only lens that shows (little) CA.

Left bottom angle of image:




I compared the other three corners, and I couldn't notice any difference, so all four lenses are perfectedly alligned; no cold showers there...
The 31 ltd shows it potence in the angles: even wide open it comes in at a very decent second place (the DA is a little better.) If compared at the same f-stop, then the 31 ltd and the DA 35 make a draw, which is surprissing for the DA 35, given that it is used full open (the 31 ltd has a 1,5 stop advantage.) The M 40 is still very decent (comes to show that it is a very good lens!), while the K is still a little soft in the far corners (but still a very good performance too.)

Conclusion: some are not going to be happy in reading this, but I would place the DA 35 first, with the 31 ltd comming in close second. A little further away, third place would go ex aequo to the K 35 and the M 40...

[barbosas]

Has anyone compared it to the FA35 ?

This thread is making my 35LBA come again... beside the 1:1 macro is there a very big difference in image quality to the FA35?