31Limited MIJ and AIV comparasion Part 1

JohsonChou · 12-03-2016, 07:46 PM - **1 Like**

Rented a AIV version 31limited and bought a MIJ version. Before sending the AIV version back, here is a comparison
First thing first:
Yep, they have different lens coating, and MIJ has less hood wobble than AIV (Left AIV, right MIJ):
Name: IMG_0461.jpg
Views: 1013
Size: 157.7 KB

Name: IMG_0461.jpg
Views: 1013
Size: 157.7 KB

Name: IMG_0462.jpg
Views: 997
Size: 141.3 KB

All shots taken with CDAF focusing on the text right below Ricoh logo on the K-1 box. It looks like MIJ is focusing a bit further than AIV, which might contribute to the difference.
"Good" light condition
AIV:
Name: AIV1.jpg
Views: 1012
Size: 136.7 KB

Name: AIV1.jpg
Views: 1012
Size: 136.7 KB

MIJ:

Name: MIJ1.jpg
Views: 997
Size: 136.6 KB

100%, TOP AIV, BOTTOM MIJ
Name: 1-1.jpg
Views: 991
Size: 189.7 KB

"BAD" light condition
AIV:
Name: AIV2.jpg
Views: 1042
Size: 113.9 KB

MIJ:

Name: MIJ2.jpg
Views: 982
Size: 112.0 KB

100%, TOP AIV, BOTTOM MIJ
Name: 2-1.jpg
Views: 991
Size: 185.6 KB

Fullsize download link:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/AIV1.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/AIV2.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/MIJ1.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/MIJ2.jpg

Bokeh Blind Test at #7 Answer: A is AIV, B is MIJ

Last edited by JohsonChou; 12-06-2016 at 01:53 PM.

blan01 · 12-03-2016, 08:26 PM

Hmmmm, to me the focus of the AIV version is slightly off.

lightbox · 12-03-2016, 09:02 PM

He's using contrast detect AF (live view?) so it shouldn't be a lens calibration issue, right?

JohsonChou · 12-03-2016, 09:04 PM

Originally posted by lightbox

He's using contrast detect AF (live view?) so it shouldn't be a lens calibration issue, right?

Yeah, it was CDAF.
I did say that they are focusing differently.

noelpolar · 12-03-2016, 10:44 PM - **1 Like**

Sorry to say.... sample group of one is, for the most part meaningless..... sorry.....also, assuming some change in coatings is associated with MIJ or MIV is not necessarily factual either.... coatings could have change part way through either production run.... if at all.

JohsonChou · 12-03-2016, 11:02 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by noelpolar

Sorry to say.... sample group of one is, for the most part meaningless..... sorry.....also, assuming some change in coatings is associated with MIJ or MIV is not necessarily factual either.... coatings could have change part way through either production run.... if at all.

I am not trying to say or prove anything, just having fun here

JohsonChou · 12-03-2016, 11:11 PM

Here is the bokeh test, or pixel dust test, (CDAF)
As always, same settings, same color correction. color difference you see is from the lens.
A:
Name: A.jpg
Views: 871
Size: 186.7 KB

B:

Left A, Right B
Name: 3-1.jpg
Views: 831
Size: 51.3 KB

Full Size:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/A.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/B.jpg

**Digitalis** · 12-03-2016, 11:32 PM - **3 Likes**

It appears you have put a fair amount of effort into this, IMO anyone who tries to compare lenses for "fun" isn't doing it properly or with the required scientific rigor that, what is for many is still considered a controversial topic. Testing lenses like the FA31 isn't easy, the only way you can make any distinction that is statistically significant between these lenses is by testing multiple copies and taking the variables introduced by the camera itself out of the equation entirely. Also the lighting has changed in the "pixie dust test" images - which can introduce bias towards an image, rather than emphasize the qualities of the lenses you are trying to differentiate between....in other words noise is overpowering the signal.

Take this into account: the FA43 one of the first of the FA limited lenses has had its coatings changed three times over its production history*. It is important to note that the optical design has remained consistent in all cases. The early silver versions** of the FA43 had different coatings from the later black versions. The LTM mount FA43 has different coatings and was produced in a limited number: 1000 made for sale in Japan. The differences between the K mount and the LTM version of the FA43 doesn't stop there: the LTM version also has 9 aperture blades compared to the K mount versions of the SMCP-FA43mm f/1.9 which have only 8 bladed apertures.

It isn't far fetched that the FA31 may have gone under some minor revisions over time, the FA77 most likely has too. The important thing is that the optical design has not been changed.

* That I'm aware of.
**the first hundred or so that were put into production.

Driline · 12-04-2016, 09:35 AM - **1 Like**

I always new my MIJ FA 31 was better. Now I finally got proof!

wissink · 12-04-2016, 10:51 AM

In the text image, one seems to have a lot more CA.

**pentaxus** · 12-05-2016, 12:28 AM - **1 Like**

Having done testing on many lenses I can tell you that you could have used two MIJ lenses and one would have been different from the other.

SpecialK · 12-05-2016, 12:51 AM

Quote:

...MIJ has less hood wobble than AIV...

Ignoring everything else, this could simply be because the AIV was used more than a brand-new MIJ version.

**Digitalis** · 12-05-2016, 03:19 AM

Originally posted by Driline

I always new my MIJ FA 31 was better. Now I finally got proof!

Confirmation bias at it's best.

JohsonChou · 12-05-2016, 04:24 PM

Originally posted by SpecialK

Ignoring everything else, this could simply be because the AIV was used more than a brand-new MIJ version.

Well... AIV is new and MIJ is used....

SpecialK · 12-05-2016, 08:23 PM

Originally posted by JohsonChou

Well... AIV is new and MIJ is used....

Ah, it sounded like the AIV was rented and therefore used, and the MIJ was bought (new). Extreme sample variation, but good luck!

12-03-2016, 07:46 PM - 1 Like	#1
JohsonChou Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: San Luis Obispo Photos: Albums Posts: 146	31Limited MIJ and AIV comparasion Part 1 Rented a AIV version 31limited and bought a MIJ version. Before sending the AIV version back, here is a comparison First thing first: Yep, they have different lens coating, and MIJ has less hood wobble than AIV (Left AIV, right MIJ): All shots taken with CDAF focusing on the text right below Ricoh logo on the K-1 box. It looks like MIJ is focusing a bit further than AIV, which might contribute to the difference. "Good" light condition AIV: MIJ: 100%, TOP AIV, BOTTOM MIJ "BAD" light condition AIV: MIJ: 100%, TOP AIV, BOTTOM MIJ Fullsize download link: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/AIV1.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/AIV2.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/MIJ1.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/MIJ2.jpg Bokeh Blind Test at #7 Answer: A is AIV, B is MIJ Last edited by JohsonChou; 12-06-2016 at 01:53 PM.

12-03-2016, 11:32 PM - 3 Likes	#8
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	It appears you have put a fair amount of effort into this, IMO anyone who tries to compare lenses for "fun" isn't doing it properly or with the required scientific rigor that, what is for many is still considered a controversial topic. Testing lenses like the FA31 isn't easy, the only way you can make any distinction that is statistically significant between these lenses is by testing multiple copies and taking the variables introduced by the camera itself out of the equation entirely. Also the lighting has changed in the "pixie dust test" images - which can introduce bias towards an image, rather than emphasize the qualities of the lenses you are trying to differentiate between....in other words noise is overpowering the signal. Take this into account: the FA43 one of the first of the FA limited lenses has had its coatings changed three times over its production history. It is important to note that the optical design has remained consistent in all cases. The early silver versions* of the FA43 had different coatings from the later black versions. The LTM mount FA43 has different coatings and was produced in a limited number: 1000 made for sale in Japan. The differences between the K mount and the LTM version of the FA43 doesn't stop there: the LTM version also has 9 aperture blades compared to the K mount versions of the SMCP-FA43mm f/1.9 which have only 8 bladed apertures. It isn't far fetched that the FA31 may have gone under some minor revisions over time, the FA77 most likely has too. The important thing is that the optical design has not been changed. * That I'm aware of. *the first hundred or so that were put into production. Last edited by Digitalis; 12-03-2016 at 11:57 PM.*

12-05-2016, 08:23 PM	#15
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	Originally posted by JohsonChou Well... AIV is new and MIJ is used.... Ah, it sounded like the AIV was rented and therefore used, and the MIJ was bought (new). Extreme sample variation, but good luck! Last edited by SpecialK; 12-06-2016 at 01:56 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: selling my limiteds (smc 15, 31 aiv, 77 mij)	wibbly	Sold Items	7	07-23-2015 09:37 AM
FA 77 MIJ vs AIV	Hattifnatt	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	26	02-13-2015 06:21 AM
FA31 MIJ and AIV are Optically Different - Front Element Coating	chesebert	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	02-20-2013 02:34 PM
Is The 560 MIJ or AIV?	tabl10s	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	02-02-2013 05:37 PM
Is AIV really any worse than MIJ?	DanielT74	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	52	10-02-2011 12:09 AM

12-03-2016, 08:26 PM	#2
blan01 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Boston,MA Posts: 258	Hmmmm, to me the focus of the AIV version is slightly off.

12-03-2016, 09:02 PM	#3
lightbox Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 599	He's using contrast detect AF (live view?) so it shouldn't be a lens calibration issue, right?

12-03-2016, 09:04 PM	#4
JohsonChou Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: San Luis Obispo Photos: Albums Posts: 146 Original Poster	Originally posted by lightbox He's using contrast detect AF (live view?) so it shouldn't be a lens calibration issue, right? Yeah, it was CDAF. I did say that they are focusing differently.

12-03-2016, 10:44 PM - 1 Like	#5
noelpolar Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Goolwa, SA Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,310	Sorry to say.... sample group of one is, for the most part meaningless..... sorry.....also, assuming some change in coatings is associated with MIJ or MIV is not necessarily factual either.... coatings could have change part way through either production run.... if at all.

12-03-2016, 11:02 PM - 1 Like	#6
JohsonChou Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: San Luis Obispo Photos: Albums Posts: 146 Original Poster	Originally posted by noelpolar Sorry to say.... sample group of one is, for the most part meaningless..... sorry.....also, assuming some change in coatings is associated with MIJ or MIV is not necessarily factual either.... coatings could have change part way through either production run.... if at all. I am not trying to say or prove anything, just having fun here

12-03-2016, 11:11 PM	#7
JohsonChou Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: San Luis Obispo Photos: Albums Posts: 146 Original Poster	Here is the bokeh test, or pixel dust test, (CDAF) As always, same settings, same color correction. color difference you see is from the lens. A: B: Left A, Right B Full Size: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/A.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3853661/B.jpg

12-04-2016, 09:35 AM - 1 Like	#9
Driline Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,695	I always new my MIJ FA 31 was better. Now I finally got proof!

12-04-2016, 10:51 AM	#10
wissink Veteran Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: S-ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 609	In the text image, one seems to have a lot more CA.

12-05-2016, 12:28 AM - 1 Like	#11
pentaxus Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Central Coast, CA Posts: 1,313	Having done testing on many lenses I can tell you that you could have used two MIJ lenses and one would have been different from the other.

12-05-2016, 12:51 AM	#12
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	Quote: ...MIJ has less hood wobble than AIV... Ignoring everything else, this could simply be because the AIV was used more than a brand-new MIJ version.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-05-2016, 03:19 AM	#13
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by Driline I always new my MIJ FA 31 was better. Now I finally got proof! Confirmation bias at it's best.

12-05-2016, 04:24 PM	#14
JohsonChou Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: San Luis Obispo Photos: Albums Posts: 146 Original Poster	Originally posted by SpecialK Ignoring everything else, this could simply be because the AIV was used more than a brand-new MIJ version. Well... AIV is new and MIJ is used....