[drypenn]

For what it's worth, my AIV FA43 (black) and FA 31 (silver) have been perfectly made mechanically and I cannot fault the images they produce especially the 31.

The MIJ FA77 (black) however, has a slight wobble on the aperture ring, but I always account it as a result of cramming too much pixie dust inside, so I'm never bothered.

[RobA_Oz]

I'm not certain whether my FA77 copy is MIJ or AIV, but I can't detect any difference in the build quality compared with my MIJ FA31, and I can't fault it either. When you think about it, any differences should be simply a matter of sample variation, given that the basic components are actually made in Japan, and put together in Vietnam. Optically, there may be a difference, due to possible differences in fine adjustment during the assembly process, but mechanically the factory tolerancing and quality processes should mean that the variations in build from one lens to another should be much the same, regardless of where they are assembled.

PS - I'm assuming in that, that Pentax lenses aren't hand-matched during assembly, the way low-volume Leitz lenses may be, and the way everyone used to do it before the Mass Production revolution.

[stevebrot]

The MIJ FA77 (black) however, has a slight wobble on the aperture ring,

I can confirm that my black MIJ FA 77/1.8 also has a wiggly aperture ring.

I'm not certain whether my FA77 copy is MIJ or AIV

The MIJ version says so (spelled out) on the side of the built-in lens hood.


Steve

[monochrome]

I've been under the impression the FA Limiteds are more hand-matched with fewer machine operations and lower volumes than DA Limiteds.

[drypenn]

I can confirm that my black MIJ FA 77/1.8 also has a wiggly aperture ring.
Steve

Thanks, it's nice to know that my FA77 is not "alone".

[a5m]

The MIJ version says so (spelled out) on the side of the built-in lens hood.
Steve

That's correct. On the FA 43 and 77 if they're AIV it will be written on the body near the mount; on the 31 it will be written on the mount.

[gofour3]

The older low s/n MIJ FA Ltds had "coloured" lens pouches, so they are a bit more special! (FA31 Red, FA43 Brown, FA77 Green)

Phil.

[RobA_Oz]

The MIJ version says so (spelled out) on the side of the built-in lens hood.


Steve

Yes, I just can't remember, and I can't check until I get home.

[H. Sapiens]

+ mind what a5m has mentioned above.

I also read a few people had problems with their 77mm (literally fell apart). I do not remember what versions they were, but having a guarantee would be a nice thing in that case.

Happened to my MiD 77mm.

[ChatMechant]

My MIJ 77 has a distinct purple reflection on the glass that I don't recall my AIV 31 having, at least not as obviously. Always wondered about that.

[Kozlok]

I have seen this topic come up several times. In each and every case, people who have tested the same lens, side by side report either no difference, or that the MIJ is better optically. For example, see Sandy Hancock's post. I haven't seen one single instance where the AIV was considered superior.

There are also always many people who have only had one, who either claim it does or does not make a difference, or claim whichever they have is superior, but with no basis in fact. As for me, I went with a low serial number 43 (mine is in the 600's). Just added a low # 77 to the collection just to be the same. Is it better? I don't know, but I did what I did because I can.

My FA43 has a very early serial number (in the 2000's),

Sandy, some of us wouldn't consider 2k to be a "very low" serial number! (LOL)

[Sandy Hancock]

Sandy, some of us wouldn't consider 2k to be a "very low" serial number! (LOL)

Show off

[drypenn]

Show off

Show offs!

[drypenn]

There's a silver FA77 with SN# 0000098 in eBay right now. Too bad it doesn't have its original pouch.

It's in my "watch" list.