[Winder]

The big show is only 2 weeks away and Pentax is expected to have some new glass and possibly update some of the existing lenses with HD coatings like they did with the DA Limited line of primes. 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. Are the HD coatings worth the premium? Can you tell a difference in the IQ of the lenses? Is it just marketing by Pentax and an excuse to charge 20% more and create the illusion that Pentax is actually doing something?

Pentax has a lens sale on right now with some decent discounts. They could be clearing stock for newer HD versions. Worth the wait?

[jatrax]

I was all set to take the poll, then realized I don't own an HD lens

[Na Horuk]

There was an extensive test done by the forums:
Review: HD vs. SMC Pentax Limited Primes - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

I would say it depends on the camera you are using with them. A lot of people also prefer the SMC DA 15mm, but not because of the coatings. The problem with the HD version are the rounded aperture blades, which prevent starbursts.

Edit: But yes, I don't have the HD lenses to test them. And on my cameras, for my uses, I doubt there would be a big difference anyway. I expect the HD lenses will sink down in prices when the SMC lenses completely disappear from stores. Currently you can still buy new SMC limiteds from various sellers.

[Winder]

180 views and nobody has voted? Did nobody buy any of the new DA Limited HD lenses?

[Pepe Le Pew]

I bought the HD 70 and the HD 55-300 months ago......... The 55-300 was slightly better. The 70 was a home run

[reeftool]

I don't own any of the new HD coated lenses yet.
Will I at some point? Probably because as time goes by, most Pentax lenses will have this coating and I don't think any of us can honestly say, "I have all the lenses I will ever need."
Will I buy a new HD coated lens to replace one of my current SMC lenses. No. At least not unless I loose or damage one beyond repair.
Right now, I am quite happy with my DA 15 and DA 40 Limiteds. The DA 70 is likely to end up in my bag soon. If I buy a new one, the HD version is my only choice. If I buy a used SMC version, it will be due to a considerable price difference, not because I think the older lens will be better. I'm retired now and living off my pension.

As with many polls, none of the listed answers really apply to my current position.

[pacerr]

Note that Pentax's decision to incorporate HD coatings may have as much to do with protection of the glass as for significant or noticeable image quality improvement. Protection wouldn't necessarily be an obvious benefit unless you could compare similar lens damage events -- although I'm sure Pentax did that comparison testing in the lab -- but who wants to do that at home?

HD may simply become the default coating just as various improvements to the SMC coatings historically did over time. Mean while, why not take advantage of the marketing opportunity for new lenses in current production.

As for the rounded aperture, star burst effects can be achieved by axillary filters or PP but smooth bokeh effects must rely on aperture shapes to a great extent.

H2

[mattb123]

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.

[mtux]

I did bought the HD 35mm macro over the SMC just because of rounded apertures. Didn't have the SMC one, can't talk about that.
I bought the HD 55-300 for a friend, and it was slightly sharper than my SMC. but I guess that could be because of sample variation.

[transam879]

I have had both the smc and HD 21 and 40. There is a slight improvement in contrast, slight improvement in sharpness (which may be due to the better contrast) and a little more of an improvement with handling flare with the HD being better but not enough to justify the cost. I picked both the HD 21 and 40 at a great price so it was worth it to me but certainly not if you pay retail price for them. I don't plan on getting the HD 15 to replace my smc 15.

[noelpolar]

I was all set to take the poll, then realized I don't own an HD lens

That wouldn't stop a lot of people......

[RobA_Oz]

That wouldn't stop a lot of people......

Ouch! But a fair call, really...

I have one HD lens, which is the seemingly popular HD Pentax-DA 35mm F2.8 Limited Macro, and I've never used the SMC version. If I was asked whether or not this lens represented good value for money, I'd have to say "yes". Whether or not the SMC version was better value for money, I couldn't say.

[kh1234567890]

Note that Pentax's decision to incorporate HD coatings may have as much to do with protection of the glass as for significant or noticeable image quality improvement.

Being a 'wet' process it is cheaper to apply with fewer rejects. That is the main motivation

[StephenHampshire]

I got a HD WR 55-300 to replace my previous non-HD, non-WR one. It is better in many ways and I would say that contrast has improved slightly - whether it is worth the price difference, well I was paying for the Weather resistance not the HD, and also because I was always underwhelmed by the IQ of my copy of the original....so hard for me to vote on this poll. Seems that not many bought the HD version of the DA's to replace the SMC one, I certainly wouldn't bother to upgrade my DA70.

[Rondec]

If you own a pre-HD lens, you are unlikely to want to upgrade just for the HD coating. Maybe it helps some with flare and contrast and light transmission, but I doubt you would see that much difference. If the whole lens is given an update, like the weather sealing on the 55-300 or, if they would upgrade the FA limiteds to give them quick shift as well, than it would make more sense to consider an upgrade. Hard to say what value to put on the coating itself. Pentax's pre-HD coatings were awfully good already.