Fa35/2 ca?

butangmucat · 01-23-2017, 03:48 AM

So I took my FA35/2 for some photo shoot the past weekend, and found some serious CA problems.

Here is an image shot with K-S2 and FA35/2

And here is another image in the same place with NEX-6, FA43 and Mitakon Lens Turbo II

However FA35/2 and Lens Turbo combo seems to perform better, here is a shot taken earlier with NEX-6, FA35/2, and Lens Turbo II

Is this normal for a FA35/2? I wounder because the user reviews seem to give this lens a rather high rating in terms of aberration control and sharpness.

**clackers** · 01-23-2017, 04:03 AM

Just remove it in Lightroom, Butangmacat.

I often put the purple slider to about 4 pixels.

butangmucat · 01-23-2017, 04:08 AM

Originally posted by clackers

Just remove it in Lightroom, Butangmacat.

I often put the purple slider to about 4 pixels.

I have ditched Adobe CC so I no longer use Lr. I ran them through Affinity Photo's CA tool and defringe tool. There were some improvements, but not much. These photos were the result of Affinity's CA tool and defringe tool.

**clackers** · 01-23-2017, 04:12 AM - **1 Like**

Okay, then the tool's not good enough, or your correct usage of it isn't enough.

I find I have to treat almost every FA lens (including the FA31 and FA77) in high contrast situations.

You need to do green correction in your second pic - look at the wires.

**clackers** · 01-23-2017, 04:23 AM

Check out in this JPG that I haven't put through Lightroom yet - look at the purple on her lower arm against the dress. This is a Tamron 90mm Macro.

butangmucat · 01-23-2017, 04:26 AM

Originally posted by clackers

Check out in this JPG that I didn't put through Lightroom yet - look at the purple on her lower arm against the dress. This is a Tamron 90mm Macro.

May I ask which lens did you use? It was not in the EXIF. FA77?

**clackers** · 01-23-2017, 04:37 AM

Originally posted by butangmucat

May I ask which lens did you use? It was not in the EXIF. FA77?

"Tamron 90mm Macro".

Like the FA35, it's a sharp lens.

butangmucat · 01-23-2017, 04:40 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by clackers

"Tamron 90mm Macro".

Like the FA35, it's a sharp lens.

The Adaptall-2 version? I do have a copy of that, nothing bad to say about it.

**clackers** · 01-23-2017, 04:47 AM

BTW, in your shot on the NEX-6, if you look at your larger Flickr picture you can see green in the bridge column edges at the left, and red at the sides of the electrical overhead contacts.

**clackers** · 01-23-2017, 04:48 AM

Originally posted by butangmucat

The Adaptall-2 version? I do have a copy of that, nothing bad to say about it.

No, K-mount.

stevebrot · 01-23-2017, 04:54 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by clackers

Okay, then the tool's not good enough, or your correct usage of it isn't enough.

Agreed. My experience has been that the Lightroom correction for LaCA is very effective. Adobe got that feature right.

As for the example images...

I spent some time looking at #1 and while there is slight LaCA, it is exacerbated by overall softness. Whether that is caused by missed focus, air quality, or something in post-processing (noise reduction?) is not clear.

For #2 and #3, the LaCA is obvious, but I would be hard put to place the blame on the primary lens. I would like to see the same scene without the auxiliary optic. Again, Lightroom would probably clean up both with a general increase in contrast/sharpness overall.

Steve

butangmucat · 01-23-2017, 05:03 AM

Originally posted by stevebrot

Agreed. My experience has been that the Lightroom correction for LaCA is very effective. Adobe got that feature right.

As for the example images...

I spent some time looking at #1 and while there is slight LaCA, it is exacerbated by overall softness. Whether that is caused by missed focus, air quality, or something in post-processing (noise reduction?) is not clear.

For #2 and #3, the LaCA is obvious, but I would be hard put to place the blame on the primary lens. I would like to see the same scene without the auxiliary optic. Again, Lightroom would probably clean up both with a general increase in contrast/sharpness overall.

Steve

I did find that I can't completely trust the SAFOX X autofocus system of my K-S2 when used with my film-era lenses (FA35/2, FA43Ltd). This was one of the images from that day which the camera did not nail focus but was good enough for it to be a keeper for documentary purpose or small enlargements. The NR I did on the image (as it was shot at ISO 1250) was slightly aggressive, which might worsened the softness. But the AF is a completely different topic. The two other images were taken with MF and prefocus, which I leveraged the red peaking and zooming of my NEX-6.

It was hard to find a opportunity to shot these scenes again as I was travelling there. However I did find my FA43 to be the better one in terms of CA of my FA lenses (FA35, FA43). The FA35 is definitely a big improvement over my Super-Takumar 35/2 in resolution, but it seems that CA control did not have that much improvement, especially in challenging scene where there are overhead wires against a clear blue sky.

**clackers** · 01-23-2017, 05:10 AM

Originally posted by butangmucat

I did find that I can't completely trust the SAFOX X autofocus system of my K-S2 when used with my film-era lenses (FA35/2, FA43Ltd).

I have no problem with my K-S2 and the FA20-35, FA31, FA35, FA-J18-35, FA77 or Quantaray 28-90.

Did you do your microadjustments when you first brought it home?

butangmucat · 01-23-2017, 05:11 AM

Originally posted by clackers

Okay, then the tool's not good enough, or your correct usage of it isn't enough.

I find I have to treat almost every FA lens (including the FA31 and FA77) in high contrast situations.

You need to do green correction in your second pic - look at the wires.

Then I guess that's another topic related to the recent On1 and Affinity buzz. "Is there something that Adobe had done right that makes ditching Photoshop impossible?"

---------- Post added 01-23-17 at 05:15 AM ----------

Originally posted by clackers

I have no problem with my K-S2 and the FA20-35, FA31, FA35, FA-J18-35, FA77 or Quantaray 28-90.

Did you do your microadjustments when you first brought it home?

I did microadjust my FA35 and FA43. They are good at stationary subjects. However for moving subjects, they seem to have some hard time keeping up: I found AF-A and stopping down more reliable than AF-C, but I still get quite some of the images not nailing focus, but are still in a reasonable DOF for small enlargements.

stevebrot · 01-23-2017, 05:22 AM

Originally posted by butangmucat

I did find that I can't completely trust the SAFOX X autofocus system of my K-S2 when used with my film-era lenses (FA35/2, FA43Ltd). This was one of the images from that day which the camera did not nail focus but was good enough for it to be a keeper for documentary purpose or small enlargements.

#1 has sharpest focus on the wires at top and nearest track at bottom and is degraded as the wire runs towards the train. Not knowing your technique or AF point used, it is hard to say why. FWIW, I use my copy of the FA 35/2 with no AF fine adjustments on my K-3 (SAFOX XI).

Steve

01-23-2017, 04:23 AM	#5
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Check out in this JPG that I haven't put through Lightroom yet - look at the purple on her lower arm against the dress. This is a Tamron 90mm Macro. Last edited by clackers; 01-23-2017 at 04:55 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax FA35/2, Kiron 105/2.8 (US/CAN)	FotoPete	Sold Items	4	03-16-2011 06:37 AM
DA35/2.4 is better than FA35/2 in serious tests	ogl	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	03-03-2011 02:02 PM
For Sale - Sold: [EU] Pentax K10Dkit, FA35/2, A50/1.7, A35-105/3.5, M28/2.8, 50-250/4-5,6, 85/2	shakkei	Sold Items	20	01-29-2009 08:13 PM

01-23-2017, 03:48 AM	#1
butangmucat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2016 Posts: 709	Fa35/2 ca? So I took my FA35/2 for some photo shoot the past weekend, and found some serious CA problems. Here is an image shot with K-S2 and FA35/2 And here is another image in the same place with NEX-6, FA43 and Mitakon Lens Turbo II However FA35/2 and Lens Turbo combo seems to perform better, here is a shot taken earlier with NEX-6, FA35/2, and Lens Turbo II Is this normal for a FA35/2? I wounder because the user reviews seem to give this lens a rather high rating in terms of aberration control and sharpness.

01-23-2017, 04:03 AM	#2
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Just remove it in Lightroom, Butangmacat. I often put the purple slider to about 4 pixels.

01-23-2017, 04:08 AM	#3
butangmucat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2016 Posts: 709 Original Poster	Originally posted by clackers Just remove it in Lightroom, Butangmacat. I often put the purple slider to about 4 pixels. I have ditched Adobe CC so I no longer use Lr. I ran them through Affinity Photo's CA tool and defringe tool. There were some improvements, but not much. These photos were the result of Affinity's CA tool and defringe tool.

01-23-2017, 04:12 AM - 1 Like	#4
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Okay, then the tool's not good enough, or your correct usage of it isn't enough. I find I have to treat almost every FA lens (including the FA31 and FA77) in high contrast situations. You need to do green correction in your second pic - look at the wires.

01-23-2017, 04:26 AM	#6
butangmucat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2016 Posts: 709 Original Poster	Originally posted by clackers Check out in this JPG that I didn't put through Lightroom yet - look at the purple on her lower arm against the dress. This is a Tamron 90mm Macro. May I ask which lens did you use? It was not in the EXIF. FA77?

01-23-2017, 04:37 AM	#7
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by butangmucat May I ask which lens did you use? It was not in the EXIF. FA77? "Tamron 90mm Macro". Like the FA35, it's a sharp lens.

01-23-2017, 04:40 AM - 1 Like	#8
butangmucat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2016 Posts: 709 Original Poster	Originally posted by clackers "Tamron 90mm Macro". Like the FA35, it's a sharp lens. The Adaptall-2 version? I do have a copy of that, nothing bad to say about it.

01-23-2017, 04:47 AM	#9
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	BTW, in your shot on the NEX-6, if you look at your larger Flickr picture you can see green in the bridge column edges at the left, and red at the sides of the electrical overhead contacts.

01-23-2017, 04:48 AM	#10
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by butangmucat The Adaptall-2 version? I do have a copy of that, nothing bad to say about it. No, K-mount.

01-23-2017, 04:54 AM - 1 Like	#11
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by clackers Okay, then the tool's not good enough, or your correct usage of it isn't enough. Agreed. My experience has been that the Lightroom correction for LaCA is very effective. Adobe got that feature right. As for the example images... I spent some time looking at #1 and while there is slight LaCA, it is exacerbated by overall softness. Whether that is caused by missed focus, air quality, or something in post-processing (noise reduction?) is not clear. For #2 and #3, the LaCA is obvious, but I would be hard put to place the blame on the primary lens. I would like to see the same scene without the auxiliary optic. Again, Lightroom would probably clean up both with a general increase in contrast/sharpness overall. Steve

01-23-2017, 05:03 AM	#12
butangmucat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2016 Posts: 709 Original Poster	Originally posted by stevebrot Agreed. My experience has been that the Lightroom correction for LaCA is very effective. Adobe got that feature right. As for the example images... I spent some time looking at #1 and while there is slight LaCA, it is exacerbated by overall softness. Whether that is caused by missed focus, air quality, or something in post-processing (noise reduction?) is not clear. For #2 and #3, the LaCA is obvious, but I would be hard put to place the blame on the primary lens. I would like to see the same scene without the auxiliary optic. Again, Lightroom would probably clean up both with a general increase in contrast/sharpness overall. Steve I did find that I can't completely trust the SAFOX X autofocus system of my K-S2 when used with my film-era lenses (FA35/2, FA43Ltd). This was one of the images from that day which the camera did not nail focus but was good enough for it to be a keeper for documentary purpose or small enlargements. The NR I did on the image (as it was shot at ISO 1250) was slightly aggressive, which might worsened the softness. But the AF is a completely different topic. The two other images were taken with MF and prefocus, which I leveraged the red peaking and zooming of my NEX-6. It was hard to find a opportunity to shot these scenes again as I was travelling there. However I did find my FA43 to be the better one in terms of CA of my FA lenses (FA35, FA43). The FA35 is definitely a big improvement over my Super-Takumar 35/2 in resolution, but it seems that CA control did not have that much improvement, especially in challenging scene where there are overhead wires against a clear blue sky.

01-23-2017, 05:10 AM	#13
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by butangmucat I did find that I can't completely trust the SAFOX X autofocus system of my K-S2 when used with my film-era lenses (FA35/2, FA43Ltd). I have no problem with my K-S2 and the FA20-35, FA31, FA35, FA-J18-35, FA77 or Quantaray 28-90. Did you do your microadjustments when you first brought it home?

01-23-2017, 05:11 AM	#14
butangmucat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2016 Posts: 709 Original Poster	Originally posted by clackers Okay, then the tool's not good enough, or your correct usage of it isn't enough. I find I have to treat almost every FA lens (including the FA31 and FA77) in high contrast situations. You need to do green correction in your second pic - look at the wires. Then I guess that's another topic related to the recent On1 and Affinity buzz. "Is there something that Adobe had done right that makes ditching Photoshop impossible?" ---------- Post added 01-23-17 at 05:15 AM ---------- Originally posted by clackers I have no problem with my K-S2 and the FA20-35, FA31, FA35, FA-J18-35, FA77 or Quantaray 28-90. Did you do your microadjustments when you first brought it home? I did microadjust my FA35 and FA43. They are good at stationary subjects. However for moving subjects, they seem to have some hard time keeping up: I found AF-A and stopping down more reliable than AF-C, but I still get quite some of the images not nailing focus, but are still in a reasonable DOF for small enlargements.

01-23-2017, 05:22 AM	#15
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by butangmucat I did find that I can't completely trust the SAFOX X autofocus system of my K-S2 when used with my film-era lenses (FA35/2, FA43Ltd). This was one of the images from that day which the camera did not nail focus but was good enough for it to be a keeper for documentary purpose or small enlargements. #1 has sharpest focus on the wires at top and nearest track at bottom and is degraded as the wire runs towards the train. Not knowing your technique or AF point used, it is hard to say why. FWIW, I use my copy of the FA 35/2 with no AF fine adjustments on my K-3 (SAFOX XI). Steve