Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Are HD coatings worth the premium?
I can see the improvement. It was worth the added cost. 1033.33%
I can see a marginal improvement. It was NOT worth the cost. 1343.33%
I don't see any improvement over SMC. 620.00%
I prefer the SMC over the HD versions. 13.33%
Voters: 30. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-04-2014, 07:44 AM   #16
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Washington Cascades
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,991
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
If you own a pre-HD lens, you are unlikely to want to upgrade just for the HD coating.
Over the years the SMC coating was changed and improved, without much fanfare. I suspect HD is just another version, an incremental improvement and welcome but not enough to dump SMC versions and buy new.

QuoteOriginally posted by kh1234567890 Quote
Being a 'wet' process it is cheaper to apply with fewer rejects.
Do have a link to this? I am curious about the process. I remember some talk a while back about Ricoh investing in new coating equipment but did not pay that much attention. I'm wondering if the SMC process was becoming too outdated, or even running into environmental restrictions. Perhaps HD was just forced due to economic or regulatory concerns rather than being dramatically better.

09-04-2014, 08:45 AM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Northern Michigan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,155
While I don't believe the upgrade in coatings is worth replacing an existing SMC limited with an HD one (the SMC coatings used on the older versions are already exceptional), if it's a choice between buying an SMC and HD version, I'd be inclined to go with the HD version, despite the greater cost of the HD lens. In my book, coatings are as important as the optical formula, and, all else equal, I'll tend to gravitate toward the lens with the better coatings. The exception would be the SMC versions of the DA 15 and DA 21, which have nice starburst effects.
09-04-2014, 01:12 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by mattb123 Quote
I only would if I needed to replace the lens anyway. Except for the 15 which I would try to replace with the SMC again for the starbursts.
i did buy my DA15 SMC new, and here in France at least, it is more expensive than the HD version. And I did that for the starburst of course.
09-04-2014, 02:07 PM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
While I don't believe the upgrade in coatings is worth replacing an existing SMC limited with an HD one (the SMC coatings used on the older versions are already exceptional), if it's a choice between buying an SMC and HD version, I'd be inclined to go with the HD version, despite the greater cost of the HD lens. In my book, coatings are as important as the optical formula, and, all else equal, I'll tend to gravitate toward the lens with the better coatings. The exception would be the SMC versions of the DA 15 and DA 21, which have nice starburst effects.
So you are saying that the difference is worth it?

Most companies don't advertise the coating changes. When has Canon announced updated coatings?

"Carl Zeiss T* multi-layer coating. Behind it, however, there is no specific formula for building up the layers. Instead, it is a technology that is constantly adjusted to suit new glass materials and requirements, which varies from lens to lens" Zeiss just keeps improving coatings and never says a word about it.

I get the impression the Pentax is just using HD for marketing hype.

09-04-2014, 02:53 PM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,309
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
The new HD DA Limited lenses have been out in the wild for many months now and I know some people have upgraded to versions with the new HD coatings. The question is for the people who have upgraded.
Well, I can't answer, then, as there was no SMC version of my new HD DA Limited (20-40).

(Unless you'd count the FA 20-35, which I never got to own.)
09-04-2014, 06:40 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
So you are saying that the difference is worth it?

Most companies don't advertise the coating changes. When has Canon announced updated coatings?

"Carl Zeiss T* multi-layer coating. Behind it, however, there is no specific formula for building up the layers. Instead, it is a technology that is constantly adjusted to suit new glass materials and requirements, which varies from lens to lens" Zeiss just keeps improving coatings and never says a word about it.

I get the impression the Pentax is just using HD for marketing hype.

The tests in general show some improvement with HD coating compared to previous SMC coating. A little more contrast, a little less flare.

That's subtle. But it is really here. It may not be worse to upgrade (I wouldn't) or even to pay more for the better HD coating but still, it is here.

Pentax/Ricoh decided to release a new coating and name it HD. They also decided to release new version of their lenses with the new coating and also new rounded apperture blade and in some case even WR support (like for latest 55-300 version).

Of course there marketing behind it but they could have simply kept the old coating on existing lenses and keep the old apperture blades. Except maybe for DA15, this is a great improvement.

As for what other makers do, that not clear in the end. Car Zeiss say "we improve continously" but that marketing blabla. They could have new coating on all lenses every few years or may haven't changed it since 15 years... Or just use the latest coating on the new lenses and never upgrade it on already release models.

Canon that the same. They don't really speak of it, so you have to check.

Really, this isn't a bad move from Pentax.
09-04-2014, 06:45 PM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
The tests in general show some improvement with HD coating compared to previous SMC coating. A little more contrast, a little less flare.

That's subtle. But it is really here. It may not be worse to upgrade (I wouldn't) or even to pay more for the better HD coating but still, it is here.

Pentax/Ricoh decided to release a new coating and name it HD. They also decided to release new version of their lenses with the new coating and also new rounded apperture blade and in some case even WR support (like for latest 55-300 version).

Of course there marketing behind it but they could have simply kept the old coating on existing lenses and keep the old apperture blades. Except maybe for DA15, this is a great improvement.

As for what other makers do, that not clear in the end. Car Zeiss say "we improve continously" but that marketing blabla. They could have new coating on all lenses every few years or may haven't changed it since 15 years... Or just use the latest coating on the new lenses and never upgrade it on already release models.

Canon that the same. They don't really speak of it, so you have to check.

Really, this isn't a bad move from Pentax.
Which of the HD DA Limited lenses do you have experience with?

09-04-2014, 07:01 PM   #23
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,309
Here's the SMC/HD comparison from the Ricoh website:

09-04-2014, 07:47 PM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
Here's the SMC/HD comparison from the Ricoh website:
Why didn't Pentax say SMC instead of "Conventional Multi-Coating" for the chart?
09-04-2014, 07:58 PM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Which of the HD DA Limited lenses do you have experience with?
I do not spend my time cross shooting the same image and comparing. Look for reviews here or elsewhere. They are some complaining on the apperture blade for DA15, but other than that there is no drawback and a few improvements. The same shoots get less flares and a bit more contrast.

It likely do not mater to buy the new version if you have the old one, well except if you are anti flare fanatic, but there no reason to dismiss the new coating or even to explain it provide nothing. Objectively there difference. Small but it is here.

Is it important? Well likely not but that's another thing.

Please note that I didn't vote... I mean who own 2 version of the same lens? That happen but that's unlikely. But if you don't own yourself 2 version of the same lens your claim at marketing hype is no better, no worse!


Many buy 2X, 3X more for edge performance wide open while it doesn't matter to most shoots. Nobody would say it is just marketing hype even through for practical purpose it is most of time useless. But yeah you can crop the extreme border to convince yourself.

On the right shoot, better flare resistance would be clearly visible at web size pictures but it is just blob and lack on contrast that ruin the image. There no number associated to it... Must not count !

Last edited by Nicolas06; 09-04-2014 at 08:15 PM.
09-04-2014, 08:06 PM   #26
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,182
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
I get the impression the Pentax is just using HD for marketing hype.
I reckon that's more than an impression. AOC used their lens coating that way right from the beginning of the SMC era, although admittedly it was more of a breakthrough then, than the change from SMC to HD recently. The Japanese have always felt the urge to shout about things (you may remember that Toyota utilities - pickups to some - always had the company name taking up most of the tailgate space) than the Europeans, less so now than previously. Even now, Japanese performance cars have to have every real or pseudo-technical feature included somewhere in their nomenclature. My little Citroën DS3 DSport doesn't even display a badge to distinguish it from its less sporty siblings. It's a cultural thing, in large part.
09-04-2014, 08:36 PM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
But if you don't own yourself 2 version of the same lens your claim at marketing hype is no better, no worse!
I'm not claiming that it's marketing hype. I said that "I get the impression the Pentax is just using HD for marketing hype." That's why I'm asking now that these lenses have been on the market for several months.
09-05-2014, 02:49 AM   #28
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,603
You all did see the comparison that was posted her on Pentax Forums after the HD DA limited lenses were released? There was a difference, but to me, it wasn't huge. Review: HD vs. SMC Pentax Limited Primes - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews
09-05-2014, 04:44 AM   #29
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,309
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Why didn't Pentax say SMC instead of "Conventional Multi-Coating" for the chart?
As much as we complain about Pentax marketing,
would you expect them to explicitly suggest that one of their current products is no longer the best?
09-05-2014, 05:43 AM   #30
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 1,129
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Why didn't Pentax say SMC instead of "Conventional Multi-Coating" for the chart?
Maybe because it's not SMC that the non-HD line represents. I've taken that chart with a large grain of salt since its release. It's clearly a marketing thing, not a technical white paper type of publication.

This is not to say it definitely isn't SMC on the chart, just that there's no way to tell. If it is, that would be quite a turnaround to call SMC "conventional" after 50 years of singing its praises!

I've seen the same type of claims made for various pieces of astronomical gear... They'll compare their mirror's reflectance to a purported "standard" type of coating which isn't even in use anymore. So yeah, I'm skeptical! But whatever, I could be wrong.
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!
change, coatings, da, dc, drive, ff, gear, hd, k-mount, lenses, motor, pentax, pentax hd coatings, pentax lens, people, production, slr lens, smc, versions
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax SDM lenses, how much they are really worth or are they worth it? Pentaxor Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 20 01-17-2015 11:32 PM
My first impressions, for what they are worth. wizofoz Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 24 08-15-2014 12:56 PM
Sto-Fen Omnibounce: Are they worth it? a.seki Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 41 09-27-2012 04:11 AM
For what they are worth: Used Cameras a.seki Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 05-02-2011 02:08 PM
500 MM Mirror lens-are they worth it ? lesmore49 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 22 03-18-2010 10:22 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:45 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